Version of 3/28/07 soc 282: science, technology & medicine studies tuesdays 1: 00 P. M. 4: 00 P. M. Ucsf spring, 2007 April 3 thru June 5 laurel heights campus room 474 except Room 376 on 5/1 & 6/5 faculty: Adele E. Clarke




Yüklə 237.46 Kb.
səhifə1/5
tarix10.04.2016
ölçüsü237.46 Kb.
  1   2   3   4   5
Version of 3/28/07

SOC 282: SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY & MEDICINE STUDIES
TUESDAYS 1:00 P.M.-4:00 P.M.

UCSF---SPRING, 2007---April 3 thru June 5

LAUREL HEIGHTS CAMPUS---ROOM 474 **except Room 376 on 5/1 & 6/5
FACULTY:

Adele E. Clarke, PhD, Professor of Sociology and Adjunct Professor, History of Health Sciences

Department of Social and Behavioral Sciences

Office: LH SUITE 455, 476-0694 (w), 621-4432 (h), Adele.Clarke@ucsf.edu

Office Hours: Usually available after class. For other times please call for appointment



TEACHING ASSISTANT/CO-FACULTY:

Jia-shin Chen, MD, MA, Doctoral Candidate in Sociology

Department of Social and Behavioral Sciences

753-3630 (h), jschen1973@hotmail.com

Office Hours: Please email for appointment.


OVERVIEW

4/3 1. Overview of ST&MS: Marx to Latour & Woolgar

4/10   2. Mapping ST&MS From Merton to the Present

4/17  3. Science as Knowledge I: Community and the Production of Knowledges in Fleck and Kuhn

4/24  4. Science as Knowledge II: (Im)Modesty and the Production of Knowledges in Shapin,

Shaffer, Haraway, Potter

5/1      5. Social Studies of Laboratories and Practices & Representations and Visualizations



5/8    6. Actor-Network, Social Worlds/Arenas, and Assemblage Theories: Constructing Facts/

Constructing Doable Problems

5/15  7. Life Itself/Vital Politics/Biocapital



5/22     8. Genetics, Genomics, Cloning, Biotechnologies, and the Problem of Species Boundaries

5/29   9. Postcolonial Technoscience Studies

6/5   10. Technology & Medical Technology Studies: From Design to Consumption
UNITS: Course is open to doctoral students from all programs with some background in social theory and with the consent of the instructors. It is offered for 2-4 units as Sociology 282. Course may be taken for 2 units only on a pass/fail basis; at 3 units either as pass/fail or letter grade. Students desiring 4 units must take course for a letter grade and the required paper should be 20 pages minimum. See below for details and BE SURE TO FILL OUT YOUR REGISTRATION FORM PROPERLY.
DESCRIPTION: Doctoral level course reviews early Marxist and functionalist theories of science; takes up Kuhn's work as the temporal watershed in the development of contemporary science studies through its assertion---based on Fleck---of the significance of social factors in scientific work and in the construction/production of scientific knowledge. It then focuses intently on social constructionist, actor network, ethnomethodological, ethnographic and interactionist science studies as these diverse perspectives have attempted to open up the "black boxes" of sciences and technologies, including laboratories, practice/skills/tools, representations and related studies. Technology studies theorizing is examined from social construction of technology (production) to user studies (the consumption junction). Focused sessions on STS theorization of “life itself;” new issues in genetics, cloning and species boundaries; and postcolonial technoscience studies. Emphasis is primarily on the life sciences and medicine; includes attention to anthropology, history, sociology and philosophy of science. Goals are 1) to map ST&MS and the fundamental questions addressed (e.g., the nature of knowledge(s) and debates in the field; 2) to read and grasp the classics/canonic works and their critiques; 3) to read some of what is currently at the cutting edge of ST&MS; 4) to grasp the basics for teaching ST&MS (your next course may be your own!); 5) if possible, to read a book that had a past life as a dissertation.
COURSE GOALS AND REQUIREMENTS:

Course may be taken on a pass/fail basis or for a letter grade (see units above for further distinctions). The different requirements are detailed below. Those students lacking serious preparation in social theory are very strongly encouraged to take the course pass/fail (2 or 3 units). All students are expected to attend class and to participate in class discussions.


PASS/FAIL REQUIREMENTS: The intensive focus of the course is on the readings. To simply pass the course for 2-3 units, a "Critique Form" for specified required readings must be turned into the instructor and be deemed satisfactory. A list of required readings for critiques will be distributed. Critique sheets will be DUE MAY 8th AND JUNE 5th (for the readings through those dates). The sheets for readings for each week should be stapled together with your name on each page. A cover page should note your name and what weeks you have handed in readings for. Critique sheets may be in outline form. Be as elaborate or as simple as you wish.
LETTER GRADE REQUIREMENTS: In addition to handing in the critique forms noted above, for a letter grade at 3 units a short (10-15 page minimum) paper or book review is required. For 4 units (letter grade only), you need to turn in critique sheets and 1) two book reviews or 2) a paper (20+ pages). Typed proposals for papers (a brief sketch of what you intend to do and a preliminary bibliography) are DUE APRIL 24th. FINAL PAPERS ARE DUE JUNE 12th (earlier is better).
POSSIBLE PAPER FORMATS:

The paper may be any of the following:



  1. a research paper on a topic of your own choosing related to the course. You can use any theme or topic of the course as a starting point. Alternatively, you might wish to pursue science/technology aspects of a problem you are already involved with studying and researching.

  2. a literature review, fairly ambitious and well focused . Possibly you might select to do an in-depth analysis of one of the perspectives we will be studying, or go into more depth on a particular problem.

  3. a book review, about 5-10 typed pages or in outline format.

  4. an alternative you develop and I approve.

While I will obviously be concerned with the actual content of your papers, I also want you to answer the questions: What kind of sociological work is this? How does it fit within its theoretical tradition? What were the author's goals and intentions? Where do I stand in relation to it?
[NOTE: Phantom sessions on other topics (which will not actually occur) may be found at the end of the electronic version of the syllabus.]
TEXTS AND OTHER READINGS:

Required Readings: There will be a xeroxed set of papers you may copy that “live” in the student cubicle in LH455. If you need a copy card for use at Laurel Heights, please see Cynthia Mercado-Scott in Suite 455.

Required texts available in Millberry Bookstore.

Biagioli, Mario (Ed.) 1999. The Science Studies Reader. NY: Routledge.

Fleck, Ludwik. [1935] 1979. Genesis and Development of a Scientific Fact. U. of Chicago Press.

Kuhn, Thomas. [1962] 1996. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. 3rd ed. U. of Chicago Press.


RECOMMENDED BOOKS: (not ordered from bookstore)

ABOUT STS: These are aimed largely at undergraduates, with the exception of the Handbook. The most sophisticated is Hess, but also now a decade old.

Bauschspies, Wenda, Jennifer Croissant, and Sal Restivo. 2005. Science, Technology and Society: A Sociological Approach. Malden, MA: Blackwell.

Hess, David. 1997. Science Studies: An Advanced Introduction. NY: NYU Press.

Jasanoff, Sheila, G. Markle, J. Petersen, and T. Pinch (Eds.) 1995. Handbook of Science and Technology Studies. Thousand Oaks, Ca: Sage. NOTE: there is a 2001 updated paperback. A completely new edition is due out in 2008: Olga Amsterdamska, Mike Lynch, Ed Hackett, Judy Wajcman (Eds.) 2008. The New Handbook of Science and Technology Studies. Cambridge MA: MIT Press. I would not buy old one unless used.

Sismondo, Sergio. 2004. An Introduction to Science and Technology Studies. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
KEY MONOGRAPHS:

Bijker, Wiebe E. and Law, John (Editors). 1992. Shaping Technology/Building Society. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

Haraway, Donna. 1997. Modest_Witness@Second_Millenium: Feminism and Technoscience. NY: Routledge.

Haraway, Donna. 2003. The companion species manifesto: dogs, people, and significant otherness. Chicago: Prickly Paradigm/ Bristol, UK: University Presses Marketing.

Latour, Bruno. 1987. Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers Through Society. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Latour, Bruno. 1993. We Have Never Been Modern. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Latour, Bruno. 2005. Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Latour, Bruno and Steve Woolgar. [1979] 1987. Laboratory Life: The Social Construction of Scientific Facts. Princeton U. Press.

Pickering, Andrew (Editor). 1992. Science as Practice and Culture. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Rose, Nikolas. 2007. The Politics of Life Itself: Biomedicine, Subjectivity and Power in the Twenty-first Century. Princeton: Princeton University Press.


ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY BIBLIOGRAPHY

Recommended readings through 1994 only are in this Bib. It will be sent to you electronically only. These will permit you to further examine these domains and serve as resources. None of these lists is intended to be exhaustive. Be sure you see the bibliographies in the major review papers as well.

Supplementary Bib has the following topics.

Major Review Books and Papers

Sociology of Science

Sociology of Technology

Gender, Science and Technology (and ask for my syllabus and supp. Bib. for S245)

History of Life Sciences

Major Journals in Science and Technology Studies

Major Professional Societies in Science and Technology Studies



S282 SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY AND MEDICINE STUDIES

SYLLABUS

SPRING 2003
4/3 WEEK 1 OVERVIEW OF ST&MS: MARX TO LATOUR & WOOLGAR
Major overview lecture based largely on the articles listed under reviews in supplemental bibliography. Second Session focuses on overviews and recent "classics" in STS which, by and large, provide accounts of scientists and scientific work.
REQUIRED READINGS:

We know everyone may not be able to do these before class. Don’t worry about it, but do catch up ASAP.

Biagioli, Mario. 1999. “Introduction.” Pp. xi-xvi in his (Ed.) The Science Studies Reader. NY: Routledge.

Thompson, Charis Cussins. 2000. Primate Suspect: Some Varieties of Science Studies. Pp. 329-357 in Shirley Strum and Linda Marie Fedigan (Eds.) Primate Encounters: Models of Science, Gender and Society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Hess, David. 1997. “If You're Thinking About Living in STS...” Pp. 143-64 in Gary Downey and Joe Dumit (Eds.) Cyborgs and Citadels: Anthropological Interventions in Emerging Sciences and Technologies. Santa Fe, MN: School of American Research Press.

Sismondo, Sergio. 2004. An Introduction to Science and Technology Studies. Malden, MA: Blackwell. Pp. 1-12.



START Reading Fleck and Kuhn books for week 3.
RECOMMENDED READINGS: OVERVIEWS OF STS SINCE 1994

Bauschspies, Wenda, Jennifer Croissant, and Sal Restivo. 2005. Science, Technology and Society: A Sociological Approach. Malden, MA: Blackwell.

Best, Steven and Douglas Kellner. 2001. The Postmodern Adventure: Science, Technology, and Cultural Studies at the Third Millennium. New York/London: The Guilford Press.

Biagioli, Mario, Reid, Roddey, and Sharon Traweek (Eds.). 1994. "Located Knowledges: Intersections between Cultural, Gender, and Science Studies." Configurations 2(1). Special issue.

Collins, Harry and Pinch, Trevor. 1993. "The Golem: What Everyone Should Know About Science."

Downey, Gary and Joe Dumit (Eds.) 1997. Introduction. Pp. 3-30 in their Cyborgs and Citadels: Anthropological Interventions in Emerging Sciences and Technologies. Santa Fe, MN: School of American Research Press. PO Box 2188 Santa Fe, NM 87504-2188.

Downey, Gary, Joe Dumit and Sharon Traweek. 1997. Corridor Talk. Pp. 245-263 in Cyborgs and Citadels Anthropological Interventions in Emerging Sciences and Technologies. Santa Fe, MN: School of American Research Press.

Elston, Mary Ann (Ed.) 1997. Sociology of Medical Science and Technology. Boston: Blackwell.

Fisher, Michael M.J. 2000. "Calling the Future(s) with Ethnographic and Historiographic Legacy Disciplines." Pp. 275-322 in Doing Science and Culture. Edited by Roddy Reid and Sharon Traweek. New York: Routledge.

Golinski, Jan. 1998. Making Natural Knowledge: Constructivism and the History of Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Pp. 1-46.

Hess, David J. 1997. Science Studies: An Advanced Introduction. NYU Press. Read Chapter 1; skim chapters 2-3 noting some of the major concepts (and use these as reference resource when those concepts appear again); read all of chapters 4-6.

Hess, David. 2001. Ethnography and the Development of Science and Technology Studies. Pp. 234-245 in Atkinson, Paul, Amanda Coffey, Sara Delamont, John Lofland, and Lyn Lofland (Eds.) Handbook of Ethnography. London: Sage.

Hesse, Mary. 1980. The Strong Thesis of the Sociology of Knowledge. Pp. 29-60 in her Reconstructions in the Philosophy of Science. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

Jacob, Margaret C. 1999. "Science Studies after Social Construction" in Bonnell, Victoria and Lynda Hunt (eds.) Beyond the Cultural Turn: New Directions in the Study of Society & Culture. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Jasanoff, Sheila. 2000. "Reconstructing the Past, Constructing the Present: Can Science Studies and the History of Science Live Happily Ever After?" Social Studies of Science 30(4):621-31.

Knorr-Cetina, Karen and Michael Mulkay (Eds.). 1983. Science Observed: Perspectives on the Social Study of Science. Sage, pp. 1-17.

Kumar, David D. and Daryl E. Chubin (Eds.) 2000. Science, technology, and society : a sourcebook on research and practice. New York: Kluwer. [Undergrad text]

Markley, Robert. 1999. Foucault, Modernity and the Cultural Study of Science. Configurations 7:153-73.

Pels, Dick. 1996. Karl Mannheim and the Sociology of Scientific Knowledge: Toward a New Agenda. Sociological Theory 14(1):30-48.

Reid, Roddey, and Sharon Traweek. 2000. “Introduction: Researching Researchers.” Pp. 1-18 in their (Eds.) Doing Science & Culture. New York: Routledge. Copy for xeroxing in SBS, Suite 455, look in mailbox for Clarke.

Star, Susan Leigh. 1995. "Introduction" to Ecologies of Knowledge: Work and Politics in Science and Technology. Albany, NY: SUNY Press, 1-35.

Star, S. Leigh. 1995. "Epilogue: Work and Practice in Social Studies of Science, Medicine and Technology." Science, Technology and Human Values 20(4):501-7.

Stengers, Isabelle. 1997. Of Paradigms and Puzzles. Pp. 109-122 in her Power And Invention: Situating Science. Minneapolis: U. of Minnesota Press.

4/10   WEEK 2 MAPPING ST&MS FROM ZILSEL AND MERTON TO PRESENT
Session goal is to continue “drawing” an overview map of the canonic works in ST&Ms, this week since c1940. We begin with early Marxist and functionalist readings and move through the sociology of scientific knowledge (Edinborough School), the early Bath School, Par-Ex (Paris-Exeter---precursor to ANT, linking Latour and Callon with Law), constructionist and interactionist contributions, etc.
REQUIRED READINGS ON EARLY MARXIST SOCIOLOGY OF SCIENCE:

Zilsel, Edgar. [1942] 2000. “The Sociological Roots of Science.” Social Studies of Science 30(6): 935-949.


REQUIRED READINGS ON MERTONIAN/FUNCTIONALIST SOCIOLOGY OF SCIENCE:

Merton, Robert K. [1942] 1973. “The Normative Structure of Science.” Pp. 267-278 in Norman W. Storer (ed.) Robert K. Merton--The Sociology of Science: Theoretical and Empirical Investigations. Chicago: U. of Chicago Press.

Mendelsohn, Everett. 1989. "Robert K. Merton: The Celebration and Defense of Science." Science in Context 3(1):269-289.

Knorr-Cetina, Karen. 1991. Merton’s Sociology of Science: The First and the Last Sociology of Science? Contemporary Sociology 20(4):522-526.


REQUIRED READINGS ON MAPPING:

Latour, Bruno. [1983] 1999. “Give me a Laboratory and I Will Raise the World.” Pp. 258-275 in Biagioli, Mario (Ed.) The Science Studies Reader. NY: Routledge.

Shapin, Steven. 1995. Here and Everywhere: Sociology of Scientific Knowledge. Annual Review of Sociology 21:289-321.

Casper, Monica J. and Marc Berg. 1995. "Introduction to Special Issue on Constructivist Perspectives on Medical Work: Medical Practices in Science and Technology Studies." Science, Technology and Human Values 20(4):395-407.


RECOMMENDED READINGS:

Neo-Marxist Approaches

Ravetz, Jerome R. 1971. Scientific Knowledge and its Social Problems. Oxford: Clarenden Press.


On Mertonian Approaches

Cohen, I. Bernard; Duffin, K.E.; and Strickland, Stuart, eds. 1990. "Puritanism and the Rise of Modern Science: The Merton Thesis." New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

Shapin, Steven. 1993. "Mertonian Concessions." Science, Vol. 259, pp. 839-841.

Thomas, Keith. 1998. God in the Computer: Review of David Noble’s The Religion of Technology. The New York Review of Books 12/17.

***Zuckerman, Harriet. 1989. The Sociology of Science. Pp. 511-574 in Neil Smelser (ed.) Handbook of Sociology. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

On Merton, see 2004 Special Issue on Merton of Social Studies of Science volume 34 number 6.



For Recommended Readings on Marxist and other Classics: see supplemental bib. Sociology of Science section.
4/17 WEEK 3 THE ‘KNOWLEDGE QUESTION’ IN SCIENCE AND SCIENCE STUDIES I: FLECK AND KUHN: Community and the production of knowledge
The question of the nature of the production of knowledge has been at the heart of what we think of as STS since the outset, with positions ranging from “great brilliant [white] men” (basic history of science and technology) to “great institutions in supportive nation states” (Ben-David) to “thought collectives” (Fleck) transformed into “paradigms” (by Kuhn). These issues still echo quite loudly through the field today.
REQUIRED READINGS:

Fleck, Ludwik. [1935] 1979. Genesis and Development of a Scientific Fact. University of Chicago Press.

Kuhn, Thomas. [1962] 3rd ed. 1996.The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago. **Esp. Chapters 3,4,5, and 6; then 9 and 10 (1 and 2 as needed for background)

Lowy, Ilana. 1988. Ludwik Fleck on the Social Construction of Medical Knowledge.” Sociology of Health and Illness 10(2):133-155.

White, Kevin. 2002. “The Sociology Of Medical Knowledge.” Pp. 23-31 in his An Introduction to the Sociology of Health and Illness. London: Sage. [Originally published in 1991 as “Ludwik Fleck and the Sociology of Medical Thought. Pp. 58-70 in his “The Sociology of Health and Illness.” [A major overview with STS orientation] Current Sociology 39:1-115.]

Jacobs, Struhan. 1987. Scientific Community: Formulations and Critique of a Sociological Motif. British Journal of Sociology 38(2):266-276.


RECOMMENDED READINGS:

Bonah, Christian. 2003. “’Experimental Rage’: The Development of Medical Ethics and the Genesis of Scientific Facts.” Social History of Medicine 15(2):187-207.

Fleck, Ludvik. 1986. “To look, to see, to know.” Pp. 129-151 in R.S. Cohen and T. Schnelle Eds.) Cognition and Fact--Materials on Ludwik Fleck,  Netherlands: D. Reidel.

Fuller, Steve. 2000. Thomas Kuhn: A Philosophical History of Our Time. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Gonzalez, Roberto J., Laura Nader and C. Jay Ou. 1995. "Between two Poles: Bronislaw Malinowski, Ludwik Fleck, and the Anthropology of Science." [JSTOR] Current Anthropology 36(5): 866-869.

Hacking, Ian. 1992. “Style” for Historians and Philosophers. Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science 23(1):1-20.

Kuhn, Thomas. 2000. The Road Since Structure: Philosophical Essays, 1970-1993., with an autobiographical interview. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Lowy, Ilana. 1990. The Polish school of philosophy of medicine: From Tytus Chalubinski (1820-1889) to Ludwik Fleck (1896-1961). Dordrecht ; Boston : Kluwer Academic.

Rochel de Camargo Jr., Kenneth. 2002. "The Thought Style of Physicians: Strategies for Keeping Up with Medical Knowledge." in Social Studies of Science, 32(5-6): 827-855.

Wittich, Dieter. 1981. "Ludwik Fleck, a review essay." Science and Nature 4.



4/24  WEEK 4 THE ‘KNOWLEDGE QUESTION’ IN SCIENCE AND SCIENCE STUDIES II:

SHAPIN, SCHAFFER, HARAWAY, POTTER: Witnessing, (Im)Modesty and the Production of Knowledge(s)

The flip side of the question of how science is produced (embedded in the question of the “scientific community” discussed last time) is the question of who can produce (legitimate) science? We take this question up in general terms in this session (focusing especially on the gendered nature of scientific knowledge production historically in the West), and return to it in the session on postcolonial technoscience studies (wherein geopolitical and funding issues are writ large along with epistemological relativism, epistemological diversity, etc., in terms of “what counts” as science, to whom, etc).



REQUIRED READINGS:

Shapin, Steven and Simon Schaffer. 1985. Leviathan and the Air-Pump: Hobbes, Boyle and the Experimental Life. Princeton University Press. Pp. 3-79 and 332-344.

Shapin, Steven. [1988] “The House of Experiment in 17th Century England.” Pp. 479-504 in Biagioli, Mario (Ed.) 1999. The Science Studies Reader. NY: Routledge.

Gieryn, Thomas. 1995. “Boundaries of Science.” Pp. 393-424 (excerpt only) in Jasanoff, Sheila, G. Markle, J. Petersen, and T. Pinch (Eds.) 1995. Handbook of science and technology studies. Thousand Oaks, Ca: Sage.

Latour, Bruno. 1993. We Have Never Been Modern. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, pp. 1-13 + diagrams.

Haraway, Donna. [1988] 1999. “Situated Knowledges: The Science Question in Feminist and the Privilege of Partial Perspective.” Pp. 172-188 in Biagioli, Mario (Ed.) The Science Studies Reader. NY: Routledge.

Haraway, Donna. 1997. Modest_Witness@Second_Millenium. NY: Routledge. Chapter 2. [also published as 1996. “Modest Witness: Feminist Diffractions in Science Studies.” Pp. 428-442 in Galison, Peter and David J. Stump. (Eds.) The Disunity of Science: Boundaries, Contexts and Power. Stanford University Press.

Potter, Libby. 2001. Gender and Boyle’s Law of Gases. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Read pp. ix-xiii and 180-185.

Barad, Karen. [1998] “Agential Realism: Feminist Interventions in Understanding Scientific Practices.” Pp. 1-11 in Biagioli, Mario (Ed.) 1999. The Science Studies Reader. NY: Routledge.

Sivin, N. 1995. “Why the Scientific Revolution Did Not Take Place in China --Or Didn't It?” Chapter VII in his Science in Ancient China, (Aldershot, Hants: Variorum, 1995).



http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/~nsivin/scirev.html
RECOMMENDED READINGS:

Fujimura, Joan H. 1998. “Authorizing Knowledge in Science and Anthropology.” American Anthropologist 100(2):???.

Longino, Helen. 1990. Science as Social Knowledge. Princeton Univ. Press.

Mialet, Helene. 1999. "Do Angels Have Bodies?: Two Stories about Subjectivity in Science." Social Studies of Science 29(4): 551-581.

Nyhart, Lynn K. and Thomas H. Broman. (Eds.) 2002. Special Issue on Science and Civil Society. OSIRIS 17: whole issue.

Shapin, Steven. 1994. A Social History of Truth: Civility and Science in Seventeenth-Century England. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Shapin, Steven. 1996. The Scientific Revolution. Chicago/London: The University of Chicago Press.
5/1  WEEK 5 KNOWLEDGE PRODUCTION PROCESSES IN SCIENCE: STUDIES OF

LABORATORIES, PRACTICES AND REPRESENTATIONS IN SCIENTIFIC WORK
This session visits the classic “STS” studies of scientific laboratories and actual practices, including the production and consumption of representations and the work they do. Again, the classic works are routinely referenced and they constitute the cannon of assumptions about scientific work qua work.
REQUIRED READINGS: LABS AND PRACTICES

Latour, Bruno and Steve Woolgar. [1979] 1987. Laboratory Life: The Social Construction of Scientific Facts. Princeton U. Press. Pp. 15-51 and 167.

Knorr Cetina, Karin. 1995. "Laboratory studies: The cultural approach to the study of science." Pp. 140-166 in Handbook of science and technology studies, edited by S. Jasanoff, G. Markle, J. Petersen, and T. Pinch. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage Publications.

Clarke, Adele and Joan Fujimura. 1992. "Introduction: What Tools? Which Jobs? Why Right?" Pp. 3-46 in their (Eds.) The Right Tools for the Job: At Work in Twentieth Century Life Sciences. Princeton: Princeton University Press. [1996. French translation: La Materialite des Sciences: Savoir-faire et Instruments dans les Sciences de la Vie. Paris: Synthelabo Groupe.]

Pickering, Andrew. [1993] 1999. “The Mangle of Practice: Agency and Emergence in the Sociology of Science.” Pp. 372-393 in Biagioli, Mario (Ed.) The Science Studies Reader. NY: Routledge. [1993. American Journal of Sociology 99(3):559-89.]

Star, S. Leigh. 1995. "Epilogue: Work and Practice in Social Studies of Science, Medicine and Technology." Science, Technology and Human Values 20(4):501-7.

Knorr Cetina, Karin. 1999. Epistemic Cultures: How the Sciences make Knowledge. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Read pp. 1-45.
REQUIRED READINGS: REPRESENTATIONS IN SCIENTIFIC WORK

Lynch, M. and S. Woolgar. 1988. "Introduction: Sociological Orientations to Representational Practice in Science." Human Studies 11(2-3):99-116. [Became a book from MIT Press]



Scan Lynch, Michael and John Law. [1988] 1999. “Pictures, Texts, and Objects: The Literary Language Game of Bird-Watching.” Pp. 317-341 in Biagioli, Mario (Ed.) The Science Studies Reader. NY: Routledge.

Latour, Bruno. 1990. "Drawing Things Together." Pp. 19-67 in Michael Lynch and Steve Woolgar (Eds.) Representation in scientific practice. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Daston, Lorraine. [1992] 1999. " Objectivity and the Escape from Perspective." Pp. 110-123 in Biagioli, Mario (Ed.) The Science Studies Reader. NY: Routledge.
RECOMMENDED READINGS: LABS AND PRACTICES

Borell, Merriley. 1987. "Instrumentation and the Rise of Physiology." Science and Technology Studies 5(2)1987:53-62.

Bowker, Geoffrey C. 1994. Science on the Run. Information Management and Industrial Geophysics at Schlumberger, 1920-1940. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. Introduction.

Callon, Michael and Bruno Latour. 1992. "Don't Throw the Baby Out with the Bath School!" In Science as Practice and Culture. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, pp. 343-368.

Cambrosio, Alberto and Peter Keating. 1988. "'Going Monoclonal': Art, Science and Magic in the Day-to-Day Use of Hybridoma Technology." Social Problems 35(3)1988:244-260.

Cetina, Karin Knorr. 1992. "The Couch, the Cathedral, and the Laboratory: On the Relationship between Experiment and Laboratory in Science." In Science as Practice and Culture. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, pp. 113-138.

Clarke, Adele. 1987. Research Materials and Reproductive Science in the United States, 1910-1940. In Gerald L. Geison (Ed.) Physiology in the American Context, 1850-1940. Bethesda: American Physiological Society.323-50. Reprinted in 1995, with "Epilogue: Research Materials (Re)Visited," Pp. 220-225 in Susan Leigh Star (Ed.) Ecologies of Knowledge: New Directions in Sociology of Science and Technology. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.

Collins, H. M. and Steven Yearley. 1992. "Epistemological Chicken." In Science as Practice and Culture. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, pp. 301-326.

Delamont, Sara and Paul Atkinson. 2001. Doctoring Uncertainty: Mastering Craft Knowledge. Social Studies of Science 31(1):87-107.

Fujimura, Joan H. 1992. "Crafting Science: Standardized Packages, Boundary Objects, and 'Translations'" in Science as Practice and Culture (Andrew Pickering, ed.). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Galison, Peter and David J. Stump. 1996. “Introduction: The Contexts of Disunity.” Pp. 1-36 in their (Eds.) The Disunity of Science: Boundaries, Contexts and Power. Stanford University Press.

Gooding, David. 1990. "Mapping Experiment as a Learning Process: How the First Electromagnetic Motor Was Invented." Science, Technology and Human Values 15(2):165-201.

Hacking, Ian. 1988. "The Participant Irrealist At Large in the Laboratory." British Journal of Philosophy of Science 39:277-94.

Hacking, Ian. 1992. "The Self-Vindication of the Laboratory Sciences.” In Andrew Pickering (Ed.) Science as Practice and Culture. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, pp. 29-64.

Jordan, Kathleen and Michael Lynch. 1992. "The Sociology of a Genetic Engineering Technique: Ritual and Rationality in the Performance of the 'Plasmid' Prep." In The Right Tools for the Job. At Work in the Twentieth-Century Life Sciences (Adele E. Clarke and Joan H. Fujimura, eds.). Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, pp. 77-114.

Knorr-Cetina, Karen. 1981. The Manufacture of Knowledge: An Essay on the Constructivist and Contextual Nature of Science. Oxford: Pergamon Press, ch. 1 and conclusions, pp. 152-3.

Kohler, Robert E. 1994. Lords of the fly : Drosophila genetics and the experimental life. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

—. 2002. Landscapes & labscapes : exploring the lab-field border in biology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Kuklick, Henrika and Robert E. Kohler. 1996. Science in the field. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Latour, Bruno. 1986. “Visualization and cognition: thinking with eyes and hands,” in Knowledge and Society: Studies in the Sociology of Culture Past and Present, eds. Henrika Kuklick and Elizabeth Long 6 (1986): 1-40.

Law, John. 1986. "Laboratories and Texts." Pp. 35-50 in Michel Callon, John Law, and Arie Rip (eds.) Mapping the Dynamics of Science and Technology. London: Macmillan.

Lynch, Michael. 1985. Art and Artifact in Laboratory Science: A Study of Shop Work and Shop Talk in a Research Laboratory. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

Mitman, Gregg and Anne Fausto-Sterling. 1992. "Whatever Happened to Planaria? C. M. Child and the Physiology of Inheritance." In The Right Tools for the Job. At Work in the Twentieth-Century Life Sciences (Adele E. Clarke and Joan H. Fujimura, eds.). Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, pp. 172-197.

Oudshoorn, Nelly. 1990. "On the Making of Sex Hormones: Research Materials and the Production of Knowledge." Social Studies of Science 20(1):5-34.

Pickering, Andrew. 1992. "From Science as Knowledge to Science as Practice." In Science As Practice and Culture. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Rheinberger, Hans-Jorg. [1994] 1999. “Experimental Systems, Historicality, Narration, and Deconstruction.” Pp. 417-429 in Biagioli, Mario (Ed.) 1999. The Science Studies Reader. NY: Routledge.

Rheinberger, Hans-Jorg. 1997. Toward a History of Epistemic Things: Synthesizing Proteins in the Test Tube. Stanford University Press, pp. 1-37.

Schatzki, Theodore R. 2001. Introduction: Practice Theory. Pp. 1-14 in The Practice Turn in Contemporary Theory, ed. Schatzki, Theodore R., Karin Knorr Cetina and Eike von Savigny. London: Routledge.

Star, Susan Leigh. 1989. Regions of the Mind: Brain Research and the Quest for Scientific Certainty. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

Star, Susan Leigh. 1992. "Craft vs. Commodity, Mess vs. Transcendence: How the Right Tools Became the Wrong One in the Case of Taxidermy and Natural History." In The Right Tools for the Job. At Work in the Twentieth-Century Life Sciences (Adele E. Clarke and Joan H. Fujimura, eds.). Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, pp. 257-286.

Stewart, John. 1982. "Facts As Commodities?" [Review of Latour and Woolgar, Laboratory Life.] Radical Science Journal 12:129-140.

Woolgar, Steve. 1992. "Some Remarks About Positionism: A Reply to Collins and Yearley. In Science as Practice and Culture. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, pp. 327-342.

NOTE: See also bibliographies in Pickering and in Clarke and Fujimura introductory essays.
RECOMMENDED READING: REPRESENTATIONS

Amman, Klaus and Karen Knorr-Cetina. 1990. The Fixation of (Visual) Evidence. In Michael Lynch and Steve Woolgar (Eds.) Special Issue: Representation in scientific practice. Human Studies 11(2-3):133-70.

Armstrong, Isobel. “Transparency: towards a poetics of glass in the nineteenth century,” in Cultural Babbage: Technology, Time and Invention, eds. Francis Spufford and Jenny Uglow (London: Faber and Faber, 1996), pp. 123-48.

Becker, Howard S. Art Worlds (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1982).

Bennett, Tony. 1998. Pedagogic Objects, Clean Eyes, and Popular Instruction: On Sensory Regimes and Museum Didactics. Configurations 6:345-371.

Bennett, Tony. 1995. The Birth of the Museum: History, Theory, Politics. London & NY: Routledge. Pp. ix-58.

Blum, Ann Shelby. 1993. Picturing Nature: American Nineteenth Century Zoological Illustration. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Cambrosio, Alberto, Daniel Jacobi and Peter Keating. 1993. Ehrlich's "Beautiful Pictures" and the Controversial Beginnings of Immunological Imagery. Isis 84:662-699.

Cartwright, Lisa. 1992. "`Experiments of Destruction': Cinematic Inscriptions of Physiology." Representations 40:129-52.

Crary, Jonathan. 1990. Techniques of the observer: on vision and modernity in the nineteenth century. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Daston, Lorraine and Peter Galison. 1992. The Image of Objectivity. Representations 40:81-128.

Fyfe, Gordon and John Law. 1988. Editors' Introduction: On the Invisibility of the Visual. Pp. 1-14 in Gordon Fyfe and John Law (Eds.) Picturing Power: Visual Depiction and Social Relations. Sociological Review Monograph 35. New York: Routledge.

Henderson, Kathryn. 1999. On Line and on Paper: Visual Representations, Visual Culture, and Computer Graphics in Design Engineering. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Jay, Martin. Downcast Eyes: The Denigration of Vision in Twentieth-Century French Thought (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1994).

Kevles, Bettyann H. 1997. Naked to the Bone: Medical Imaging in the 20th Century. Rutgers U. Press.

Knorr-Cetina, Karin and Klaus Amann. 1990. "Image Dissection in Natural Scientific Inquriy." Science, Technology, & Human Values 15(3):259-283

Latour, Bruno. 1988. Visualization and Social Reproduction: Opening one eye while closing the other...a note on some religious paintings. Pp. 15-38 in Gordon Fyfe and John Law (eds.) Picturing Power: Visual Depictions and Social Relations. New York: Routledge.

Law, John and John Whittaker. 1988. On the Art of Representation: Notes on the Politics of Visualization. Pp. 160-83 in Gordon Fyfe and John Law (eds.) Picturing Power: Visual Depictions and Social Relations. New York: Routledge.

Lynch, Michael. 1988. The Externalized Retina: Selection and Mathematization in the Visual

Documentation of Objects in the Life Sciences. In Michael Lynch and Steve Woolgar (Eds.) Special Issue: Representation in scientific practice. Human Studies 11(2-3):201-34.

Lynch, Michael. 1991. Science in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction: Moral and Epistemic Relations Between Diagrams and Photographs. Biology and Philosophy 6(2):205-26.

Lynch, Michael. 1994. "Representation is Overrated: Some Critical Remarks about the Use of the Concept of Representation in Science Studies." Configurations, Vol. 2, No. 1, pp. 137-150.

Lynch, Michael. “ Discipline and the material form of images: an analysis of scientific visibility,” Social Studies of Science 15 (1985): 37-66.

Mitchell, William J. 1992. The Reconfigured Eye: Visual Truth in the Post-Photographic Era. (Cambridge, MA: MIT).

Mitchell, W.J.T. 1986. Iconology: Image, Text, Ideology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Mitman, Gregg. 1996. When Nature IS the Zoo: Vision and Power in the Art and Science of Natural History. Osiris, 2nd series 11:117-143.

Mitman, Gregg. 1993. Cinematic Nature, Hollywood Technology, Popular Culture and the American Museum of Natural History. Isis 84(4):637-661.

Myers, Greg. 1988. "Every Picture Tells a Story: Illustrations in E.O. Wilson's Sociobiology. In Michael Lynch and Steve Woolgar (Eds.) Special Issue: Representation in scientific practice. Human Studies 11(2-3):235-270.

Roth, Wolff-Michael, G. Michael Bowen and Domenico Masciotra. 2002. "From Things to Sign and 'Natural Object': Toward a Genetic Phenomenology of Graph Interpretation." in Science, Technology & Human Values, 27(3): 327-356.

Rudwick, Martin. 1976. The Emergence of a Visual Language for Geological Science 1760-1840. History of Science XIV 149-195.

Ruse, Michael and Peter J. Taylor (Eds.) 1991. Special Issue on Pictorial Representation in Biology. Biology and Philosophy 6(2):125-294.

Star, Susan Leigh. 1995. “The politics of formal representations: wizards, gurus, and organizational complexity,” in Ecologies of Knowledge, ed. Susan Leigh Star (Albany: SUNY Press, 1995), pp. 88-117.

Starobinski, Jean. The Living Eye, trans. Arthur Goldhammer (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1989 [1961]).

Suchman, Lucy. 1988. "Representing Practice in Cognitive Science." Human Studies 11:305-25.

Taylor, Peter & Ann Blum. 1991. Pictoral Representation in Biology. Biology & Philosophy 6(2):125-34.

Waldby, Catherine. 1997. The Body and the Digital Archive: the Visible Human Project and the Computerization of Medicine. Health 1(2):227-43.

Waldby, Cathy. 2000. The Visible Human Project: Informatic Bodies and Posthuman Medicine. London and NY: Routledge.

Yoxen, Edward. 1987. "Seeing with Sound: A Study of the Development of Medical Images." Pp. 281-306 in Bijker, Wiebe E., Thomas P. Hughes, and Trevor Pinch. 1987. The Social Construction of Technological Systems. Cambridge: MIT Press.



5/8    WEEK 6 ACTOR NETWORKS, SOCIAL WORLDS/ARENAS, AND ASSEMBLAGES: CONSTRUCTING FACTS/CONSTRUCTING DOABLE PROBLEMS
While there are many conceptual frameworks used in STS, and many “blends,” this session covers three of the major ones and the critiques of them. In short, each does certain things excellently, and other less well. But an STS scholar should be able to compare and contrast with ease.
REQUIRED READINGS: ANT THEORY

Callon, Michel. [197? in French;1985 English] 1999. "Some elements of a sociology of translation: Domestication of the scallops and the fishermen of St. Brieuc Bay." Pp. 67-83 in The science studies reader, edited by M. Biagioli. New York: Routledge.



ReviewLatour, Bruno and Steve Woolgar. [1979]1987. Laboratory Life: The Social Construction of Scientific Facts. Princeton U. Press, pp. 15-53 and 167 from earlier session.

Latour, Bruno. 1987. Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers Through Society. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, pp. 1-17.

Latour, Bruno. 2005. Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Pp. 1-17.
NOTE: For debate between David Bloor, founder of the “Strong Programme” and Latourian “ANT” see:

Bloor, David. 1999. "Anti-Latour." Studies in History and Philosophy of Sciences 30:81-112.

Latour, Bruno. 1999. "For David Bloor. and Beyond: A Reply to David Bloor's 'Anti-Latour'." Studies in History and Philosophy of Sciences 30:113-129.

Bloor, David. 1999. "Reply to Bruno Latour." Studies in History and Philosophy of Sciences 30:131-136.


REQUIRED READINGS: SOCIAL WORLDS/ARENAS THEORY

Clarke, Adele E. and Susan Leigh Star. “The Social Worlds/Arenas/Discourse Framework as a Theory-Methods Package.” To appear in Michael Lynch, Olga Amsterdamska, and Ed Hackett (Eds.) The New Handbook of Science and Technology Studies. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Will be distributed as a PDF.

Star, Susan Leigh and James Griesemer. [1989] 1999. "Institutional Ecology, "Translations," and Boundary Objects: Amateurs and Professionals in Berkeley's Museum of Verterbrate Zoology, 1907-39." Pp. 505-524 in The Science Studies Reader, edited by M. Biagioli. New York: Routledge. [orig. Social Studies of Science 19:387-420.]

Fujimura, Joan H. 1996. Crafting Science: A Sociohistory of the Quest for the Genetics of Cancer. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, pp. 205-236.

Garrety, Karin. 1997. Social Worlds, Actor-Networks and Controversy: The Case of Cholesterol, Dietary Fat and Heart Disease. Social Studies of Science 27(5):727-773.
REQUIRED READINGS: ASSEMBLAGES

Marcus, George E. and Erkan Saka. 2006. Assemblage. Theory, Culture and Society 23(2-3):101-109.

Venn, Couze. 2006. A Note on Assemblage. Theory, Culture and Society 23(2-3):107-8.

Phillips, John. 2006. Agencement/Assemblage. Theory, Culture and Society 23(2-3):108-9.

Collier, Stephan J. 2006. Global Assemblages. Theory, Culture and Society 23(2-3):399-401.

Collier, Stephan J. and Ong, Aihwa. 2005. “Global Assemblages, Anthropological Problems.” Pp. 3-21 in Ong and Collier (Eds.) Global Assemblages: Technology, Politics, and Ethics as Anthropological Problems. Malden MA: Blackwell.


RECOMMENDED READINGS ANT:

Austrin, Terry and John Farnsworth. Hybrid Genres: Fieldwork, detection and the method of Bruno Latour. Qualitative Research 5(2):147-65.

Callon, Michel. 1986. The Sociology of an Actor-Network: The Case of the Electric Vehicle. Pp. 19-34 and pp. xvi-xvii in Michel Callon, John Law and Ari Rip (Eds.) Mapping the Dynamics of Science and Technology. London: Macmillan.

Fujimura, Joan H. 1987. "Constructing Doable Problems in Cancer Research: Articulating Alignment." Social Studies of Science 17:257-93.

Fujimura, Joan H. 1988. "The Molecular Biological Bandwagon in Cancer Research: Where Social Worlds Meet." Social Problems 35:261-283.

Latour, Bruno. 1990. "Postmodern? No, Simply Amodern!: Steps Towards An Anthropology of Science." Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science 21(1):145-171.

Latour, Bruno. [1992] 1999. “One More Turn after the Social Turn.” Pp. 276-289 in Biagioli, Mario (Ed.) The Science Studies Reader. NY: Routledge.

Latour, Bruno. 1999. "On recalling ANT". Pp. 15-25 in Actor network theory and after, edited by J. Law and J. Hassard. Oxford England ; Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers.

Law, John. 1999. "After ANT: complexity, naming and topology." Pp. 256 in Actor network theory and after, edited by J. Law and J. Hassard. Oxford England ; Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers.

Law, John and Annemarie Mol. Eds. 2002. Complexities: Social Studies of Knowledge Practices. Durham/London: Duke University Press.

Law, John. 2002. Aircraft Stories: Decentering the Object in Technoscience. Duke University Press. Durham and London. fd

Law, John. 1986. "On the Methods of Long-Distance Control: Vessels, Navigation and the Portuguese Route to India." Pp. 234-263 in John Law (ed.) Power, Action and Belief. Routledge and Kegan Paul.

Law, John and John Hassard (Eds.) 1999. Actor Network Theory and After. Malden, MA: Blackwell Pubs.

Law, John. 1994. Organizing Modernity. Blackwell Publishing. Oxford, UK and Cambridge USA.

Mol, Annemarie. 1999. "Ontological politics. A word and some questions." Pp. 256- in Actor network theory and after, edited by J. Law and J. Hassard. Oxford England ; Malden, MA: Blackwell/Sociological Review.

Mol, Annemarie. 2002. The Body Multiple: Ontology in Medical Practice. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

Mol, Annemarie and Jessica Messman. 1996. Neonatal Food and the Politics of Theory: Some Questions of Method. Social Studies of Science 26:419-44.

Strathern, Marilyn. 1996. Cutting the Network. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute NS2:517-35.


CRITIQUES:

Bloor, David. 1999. "Anti-Latour" in Stud. Hist. Phil. Sci., 30(1): 81-112. [a copy will end up in recommended folder.]


RECOMMENDED READINGS: SOCIAL WORLDS/ARENAS

Baszanger, Isabelle. 1998. Inventing Pain Medicine: From the Laboratory to the Clinic. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

Casper, Monica J. 1994. "Reframing and Grounding Nonhuman Agency: What Makes a Fetus an Agent?" American Behavioral Scientist, 37:6, 1994, 839-856.

Casper, Monica J. 1998a. The Making of the Unborn Patient: A Social Anatomy of Fetal Surgery. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

Casper, Monica J. 1998b. “Negotiations, Work Objects and the Unborn Patient: The Interactional Scaffolding of Fetal Surgery.” Symbolic Interaction 21(4):379-400

Casper, Monica J. and Adele E. Clarke. 1998. "Making the Pap Smear into the "Right Tool" for the Job: Cervical Cancer Screening, 1940-1995." Social Studies of Science 28(2):255-290.

Casper, Monica J. and Barbara Koenig. 1996. "Introduction: Reconfiguring Nature and Culture: Intersections of Medical Anthropology and Technoscience Studies," Medical Anthropology Quarterly 10:4:523-536.

Christensen, Vivian and Monica J. Casper. 2000. “Hormone Mimics and Disrupted Bodies: A Social Worlds Analysis of a Scientific Controversy.” Sociological Perspectives 43(4): S93-S120.

Clarke, Adele E. 1990a. "A Social Worlds Research Adventure: The Case of Reproductive Science." Pp. 23-50 in Susan Cozzens and Thomas Gieryn (Eds.) Theories of Science in Society. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Reprinted as pp. 63-94 in Anselm L. Strauss and Julie Corbin (Eds.) Grounded Theory in Practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1997.

Clarke, Adele E. 1990b. "Controversy and the Development of American Reproductive Sciences." Social Problems 37(1):18-37. Reprinted in Andrea Tone (Ed.) Controlling Reproduction: An American History. Wilmington, DE: Scholarly Resources Inc., 1997.

Clarke, Adele E. 1991. "Social Worlds Theory as Organization Theory." Pp. 119-158 in David Maines (Ed.) Social Organization and Social Process: Essays in Honor of Anselm Strauss. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine de Gruyter.

Clarke, Adele E. 1998. Disciplining Reproduction: Modernity, American Life Sciences, and 'the Problems of Sex.' Berkeley: University of California Press.

Clarke, Adele E. and Theresa Montini. 1993. The Many Faces of RU 486: Tales of Situated Knowledges and Technological Contestations. Science, Technology and Human Values 18(1):42-78.

Clarke, Adele E. and Monica J. Casper. 1996. "From Simple Technology to Complex Arena: Classification of Pap Smears, 1917-1990." Medical Anthropology Quarterly 10(4):601-623.

Clarke, Adele and Susan Leigh Star. 2003. "Symbolic interactionist science, technology, information and biomedicine studies." Pp. 539-574 in Handbook of Symbolic Interaction, edited by N. Herman and L. Reynolds. Walnut Creek, CA: Alta Mira Press.

Fujimura, Joan H. 1987. "Constructing Doable Problems in Cancer Research: Articulating Alignment," Social Studies of Science 17:257-93 (May 1987).

Fujimura, Joan H. 1988. "The Molecular Biological Bandwagon in Cancer Research: Where Social Worlds Meet," Social Problems 35:261-283. Reprinted in Anselm Strauss and Juliet Corbin (Eds.), Grounded Theory in Practice. Thousand Oaks: Sage, 1997.

Garrety, Karin. 1998. Science, Policy, and Controversy in the Cholesterol Arena. Symbolic Interaction 21(4):401-424.

Karlberg, Kristen. 2000. "The Work of Genetic Care Providers: Managing Uncertainty and Ambiguity." Research in the Sociology of Health Care 17:81-97.

Miall, Charlene and Andrew Miall. 2002. The Exxon Factor: The Roles of Corporate and Academic Science in the Emergence and Legitimation of a New Global Model of Sequence Stratigraphy. The Sociological Quarterly 43(2):307-334.

Moore, Lisa Jean. 1997. "'It's like you use pots and pans to cook. It's the tool': The Technologies of Safer Sex." Science, Technology and Human Values 22(4):434-471.

Star, Susan Leigh. 1989. Regions of the Mind: Brain Research and the Quest for Scientific Certainty. Stanford: Stanford University Press, pp. 1-37.

Star, Susan Leigh. 1991a. “Power, Technologies and the Phenomenology of Conventions: On Being Allergic to Onions.” Pp. 26-56 in John Law (Eds.) A Sociology of Monsters: Essays on Power, Technology and Domination. London: Routledge.

Star, Susan Leigh. 1995. "Epilogue: Work and Practice in Social Studies of Science, Medicine, and Technology." in Science, Technology & Human Values. 20(4): 501-507.

Timmermans, Stefan. 1998. “Mutual Tuning of Multiple Trajectories.” Symbolic Interaction 21(4):225-240.

Timmermans, Stefan. 1999a. Sudden Death and the Myth of CPR. Philadelphia, PA.: Temple University Press.

Timmermans, Stefan.1999b. “Closed-Chest Cardiac Massage: The Emergence of a Discovery Trajectory.” Science, Technology, and Human Values 24(2):213-240.

Wiener, Carolyn. 1991. “Arenas and Careers: The Complex Interweaving of Personal and Organizational Destiny.” Pp.175-188 in David Maines (Ed.) Social Organization and Social Process: Essays in Honor of Anselm Strauss. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine de Gruyter.

Wiener, Carolyn. 2000. The Elusive Quest: Accountability in Hospitals. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine de Gruyter.

5/15  WEEK 7  VITAL POLITICS / LIFE ITSELF / BIOCAPITAL


When Foucault raised the notions of biopolitics and government in the 1970s, he was describing a form of political reason emerging in the 18th century. It was closely associated with the formation of the nation-state and modernity. Biopolitics always works with biopower, which, according to Foucault, is distinct from but coexistent with sovereign power. Remember this is a multidimensional transformation that not only evolved along with the emergence of disciplining of individual bodies (anatomo-politics) but also targeted at the masses as the focus of governmental actions (bio-politics). Specific forms of knowledge were bound up with this end, and so was the governmentality that newly took shape.

Nevertheless, this picture portrayed by Foucault implies the endless extension of government, which seems to be contradictory to the ideals of liberalism that asks for minimal government in the market. But, as Rose indicates, this superficial antagonism has been disappearing in recent years—We now have had a new form of governmentality in which the state has been shrinking and devolving the responsibilities, once held by welfare states as ultimate virtues, to their citizens. This is usually termed as effects of neoliberalism, which has sided with biopolitics especially in this globalizing world.

How do we (or does Foucault) conceptualize the contradictions between government and liberalism? This configuration of advanced liberal capitalism is the socio-political background where politics of life itself and biocapital become salient. Therefore we will start from understanding the interweaving relationships of liberalism and government and then proceed to the contemporary configurations of politics of life itself and biomedicalization, respectively. At last we read Kaushik Sunder Rajan’s introduction to his inspiring work, Biocapital, in which he attempts to make a theoretical dialogue between Marx and Foucault by empirically studying genomics-related industries.
REQUIRED READINGS:

Foucault, Michel. 1976/1978. The History of Sexuality: An Introduction, Volume I. Trans. by Robert Hurley. New York: Vintage. Pp. 135-147. (for sociology students this is a reread from S207)

Rabinow, Paul and Nikolas Rose. 2006. Biopower today. Biosocieties 1: 195-217. (For sociology students REREAD from S207/S212C) [URL link: http://journals.cambridge.org/download.php?file=%2FBIO%2FBIO1_02%2FS1745855206040014a.pdf&code=e576df82e6641f11417e3dfa463249ff ]

Foucault, Michel. 2003. “Lecture Eleven (17 March, 1976)” Pp. 239-263 in Society Must Be Defended: Lectures at the College de France, 1975-1976. New York: Picador.

Foucault, Michel. 1997. "The Birth of Biopolitics." Pp. 73-80 in Ethics: Subjectivity and Truth, edited by P. Rabinow. New York: The New Press. (for sociology students this is a reread

Barry, Andrew, Thomas Osborne, and Nikolas Rose. 1996. "Introduction." Pp. 1-17 in Foucault and Political Reason: Liberalism, Neo-liberalism and Rationalities of Government, edited by A. Barry, T. Osborne, and N. Rose. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Franklin, Sarah. 2000. “Life Itself.” Pp. 188-198 and 215-227 (excerpt). In Sarah Franklin, Celia Lurie and Jackie Stacey. Global Nature/Global Culture. London: Sage.

Franklin, Sarah and Margaret Lock. 2003. “Animation and Cessation: The Remaking of Life and Death.” [Intro essay] Pp. 3-22 in their (Eds.) Remaking of Life and Death: Towards an Anthrop[ology of the Biosciences. Santa Fe: School of American Research Press.

Rose, Nikolas. 2007. “Chapter 1: Biopolitics in the Twenty-First Century”, Pp. 9-40; “Chapter 2 Politics and Life”, Pp. 41-76 in The Politics of Life Itself: Biomedicine, Power and Subjectivities in the Twenty-First Century. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Sunder Rajan, Kaushik. 2006. “Introduction”, Pp. 1-36, in Biocapital: The Constitution of Postgenomic Life. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. (Especially Pp. 1-30).

Waldby, Catherine and Robert Mitchell. 2006. Chapter 5 “Commodity Communities and Corporate Commons.” Tissue Economies: Blood, Organs and Cell Lines in Late Capitalism. Durham NC: Duke University Press.
[optional --- electronic distribution only ] Clarke, Adele E., Janet Shim, Laura Mamo, Jennifer Fosket, and Jennifer Fishman. 2007. "Biomedicalization: A Theoretical and Substantive Introduction." Pp. 1-63. (Especially 1-34; 40-43)
RECOMMENDED READINGS:

Franklin, Sarah. 2001. Culturing biology: Cell lines for the second millennium. Health, 5 (3), 335-354.

Franklin, Sarah. 2003. Ethical biocapital: New strategies of cell culture. In S. Franklin & M. Lock (Eds.), Remaking life & death: Toward an anthropology of the biosciences (pp. 97-128). Santa Fe, NM: School of American Research Advanced Seminar Series.

Franklin, Sarah. 2005. Stem Cells R Us: Emergent Life Forms and the Global Biological. Pp. 59-78 in Global Assemblages: Technology, Politics and Ethics as Anthropological Problems, edited by Aihwa Ong, and Stephen Collier. Malden MA: Blackwell.

Franklin, Sarah. 2006a. Mapping biocapital: new frontiers of bioprospecting. Cultural Geographies 13(2):301-4.

Franklin, Sarah. 2006b. Embryonic Economies: The Double Reproductive Value of Stem Cells. BioSocieties 1(1):71-90.

Franklin, Sarah & M. Lock. (2003). Animation and Cessation: The Remaking of Life and Death. In S. Franklin & M. Lock (Eds.), Remaking life & death: Toward an Anthropology of the Biosciences (pp. 3-22). Santa Fe, NM: School of American Research Advanced Seminar Series.

Franklin, Sarah and Celia Roberts. 2006. Born and Made: An Ethnography of Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis. Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press.

Ganchoff, C. (2004). Regenerating movements: embryonic stem cells and the politics of potentiality. Sociology of Health and Illness, 26, 757-774.

Rose, Nikolas. 2001. The politics of life itself. Theory, Culture & Society 18(6): 1-30. (For sociology students--REREAD from S207)


5/22     WEEK 8 GENETICS, GENOMICS, CLONING, BIOTECHNOLOGIES, AND THE

PROBLEM OF SPECIES BOUNDARIES
One of the key domains of vital politics past /present/future is heredity today framed in genetic/omic terms. Session provides some historical background and then examines genetics based biosociality, pharmacogenomics, toxicogenomics, and race. One of the key elements of genetic knowledge is the significance of species boundaries, violated via chimeras both in nature (marmosets) and via cloning. Haraway’s about-to-be published work (shared with you electronically by permission) criss crosses the human/nonhuman “divide” and finds it rather blurry and in need of serious attention.
REQUIRED READINGS:

Kay, Lily E. [1998] 1999. “In the Beginning was the Word: The Genetic Code and the Book of Life.” Pp. 224-233 in Biagioli, Mario (Ed.) The Science Studies Reader. NY: Routledge.

Waldby, Catherine. 2001. "Code Unknown: Histories of the Gene [Review of Kay and Keller books]" Social Studies of Science, 31(5): 779-91.

  1   2   3   4   5


Verilənlər bazası müəlliflik hüququ ilə müdafiə olunur ©azrefs.org 2016
rəhbərliyinə müraciət

    Ana səhifə