On “infra-theory” or “infra-language” A Clarification of Actor–Network Theory via Bruno Latour’s Case Studies

The aim of this article is to examine the potential of Actor–Network Theory as a nonhuman social science theory through critical readings of Bruno Latour’s empirical studies. In previous studies on ANT, an important issue has been to categorize it in regard to the type of theory it represents. Follo...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inJournal of Asian sociology Vol. 48; no. 3; pp. 359 - 376
Main Author Kim, Shinhaeng (Nobuyuki)
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Institute for Social Development and Policy Research (ISDPR) 01.09.2019
서울대학교 사회발전연구소
사회발전연구소
Subjects
Special Issue
사회학
infra-theory
sociology of science and technology
Bruno Latour
Actor?Network Theory
empiricism
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:The aim of this article is to examine the potential of Actor–Network Theory as a nonhuman social science theory through critical readings of Bruno Latour’s empirical studies. In previous studies on ANT, an important issue has been to categorize it in regard to the type of theory it represents. Following Latour’s description of ANT as an “infra-theory” or “infra-language,” this article deals with the question of the relationship of those two terms to ANT. To examine these concepts, we will review two of Latour’s case studies: the historical study on Louis Pasteur’s eradication of anthrax and the ethnography on the failure of the automated train operation system of the Paris metro. After exploring these cases, we conclude that ANT is a theory not for causal explanation but for the discovery of hidden factors.
ISSN:2671-4574
2671-8200
DOI:10.21588/dns.2019.48.3.004