Reassembling the Social: An
Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory
(Clarendon Lectures in Management
Studies) by Bruno Latour
A Latour De Force
Reassembling the Social is a fundamental challenge from one of the
worlds leading social theorists to how we understand society and the
social. Bruno Latours contention is that the word social as used by Social
Scientists has become laden with assumptions to the point where it has
become a misnomer. When the adjective is applied to a phenomenon, it is
used to indicate a stabilized state of affairs, a bundle of ties that in due
course may be used to account for another phenomenon. Latour also
finds the word used as if it described a type of material, in a comparable
way to an adjective such as wooden or steely.

Rather than simply indicating what is already assembled together, it is
now used in a way that makes assumptions about the nature of what is
assembled. It has become a word that designates two distinct things: a
process of assembling: and a type of material, distinct from others. Latour
shows why the social cannot be thought of as a kind of material or domain,
and disputes attempts to provide a social explanation of other states of
affairs. While these attempts have been productive (and probably
necessary) in the past, the very success of the social sciences mean that
they are largely no longer so. At the present stage it is no longer possible
to inspect the precise constituents entering the social domain. Latour
returns to the original meaning of the social to redefine the notion and
allow it to trace connections again. It will then be possible to resume the
traditional goal of the social sciences, but using more refined tools.
Drawing on his extensive work examining the assemblages of nature,
Latour finds it necessary to scrutinize thoroughly the exact content of what
is assembled under the umbrella of Society. This approach, a sociology of
associations has become known as Actor-Network-Theory, and this book
is an essential introduction both for those seeking to understand Actor-
Network-Theory, or the ideas of one of its most influential proponents.
Personal Review: Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to
Actor-Network-Theory (Clarendon Lectures in Management
Studies) by Bruno Latour
Given our experiences in late-modernity outrun our pre-developed
concepts especially in innovation Latour claims that sociologists should
themselves be part of innovation experiences. He portrays a new type of
sociology (the one including objects) by which one can describe rather
than prescribe. Latour initiates the difference between ANT and Sociology
of Social(SOS), claiming that the latter chooses its tools from repertoire of
agreed-upon criteria (pre-developed concepts) while in ANT we must
follow the traces left by the actors. What is left we shall name as a society
of actors and works. ANT analyst must himself participate and experinece
the phenomena in a "here-and-now" perceptual sense and then
conceptualize what he has experienced. In Latour's argument all things
including human and non-human are mediators by which action is not
merely transfered but also transformed to a new state. Both the actor and
its associated action undergo a metamorphosis process in each mode of
action. Consequently we have Five sources of Uncertainty:
1.Groups may form and depart for tyrrany of distance and proximity is
removed
2.Action may be done by others and we can not fully anticipate in advance
the nature of agencies and the outcome
3. Things have agency no matter how much man has the power to control
4. In the realm of things matter of fact prevails whereas in the combination
of "things and human" matter of fact trasforms to matter of concern. In
other words in the new relam i.e. "socio-technical realm" matter of scientific
facts combines with the matter of cognitive concern.
5. Writing down experienced accounts

Hence, It's a call of Heraclitus aphorism i.e. "you can not step in the same
river twice" along with Existentialism philosophy. Both you and the river
change during the course of action. But you must expereince this change
to percieve it. It could not be described completely by merely using pre-
developed concepts. Your experience precedes your pre-developed
concepts about the river and your reflection when crossing the river. Latour
sometimes complicate his arguments by using difficult expressions,
terminologies and long Gallic statements, but his words are very insightful,
and his message is invaluable after-the-fact.
One issue which I didn't find in this book was responsibility and
"responsible reflection". In other words Latour doesn't open the question
about self-responsibility of actors that ANT analyst should follow. ANT
analyst is not permitted to give advice to actors. He can only observe and
expereince. This is ironically a matter of concern not a matter of fact that
might be considered in his future arguments, given that Engineers and
Scientists, for example, from ANT perspective are actors which should only
watched not advised responsibly. To sum up ANT is to follow the
"Dislocation of Action" and "opening eyes to see who is acting within any
site; where the consequence of this action may travel; where are the likely
sources that provoke action and actors"; "how sequence and consequence
of sites change the nature of action" and the like. The Network we could
envisage through resolving questions as such shall be mapping out and
named as Society. Hence, late modernity is an entity that must be
reassembled through ANT lens.
For More 5 Star Customer Reviews and Lowest Price:
Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory (Clarendon Lectures
in Management Studies) by Bruno Latour 5 Star Customer Reviews and Lowest Price!