Originally posted on AIME Research Group:
Title: Habitual Care: The Mode of Existence of Habit and its Politics
Author: John W. Wright. Point Loma Nazarene University.
Chapter 10, “Respecting the Appearances,” engages “the question of essence” (p. 264). Why does it arise? Latour argues that the question of essence gestures toward another “mode of existence.” This mode of existence, later in the chapter named “habit,” accounts “for the apparent continuity of action” amid a world characterized by fissures, gaps, and heterogeneities – in other words, a net. Latour calls “habit” the “most indispensable” mode of existence: “the one that takes up 99 percent of our lives, the one without which we could not exist” (AIME, p. 264). As Latour works through the chapter, he clarifies his overall ontology and the deeper ethical/political concerns that fuel the plasma that circulates unseen underneath his ontology.
View original 1,691 more words
pt 2 on Ontology
Originally posted on Qualitative Political Communication Research:
Rod Benson (NYU) served as a respondent at our conference on Qualitative Political Communication Research in May at ICA in Seattle.
His response created quite a stir (it has become known in some circles as his “ANT-takedown”) and was clearly aimed at more than the four particular papers on the panel.
We are happy he has agreed to share the text of his talk, posted below. It’s very good, provocative, and we hope it will spur debate.
“Challenging the ‘New Descriptivism’: Restoring Explanation, Evaluation, and Theoretical Dialogue to Communication Research.”
Remarks at the Qualitative Political Communication Pre-Conference,
International Communication Association
Seattle, May 22, 2014
Given time constraints, I will cut to the chase. I’ve been asked to stir things up a bit, so I’ll see what I can do.
We’ve just heard two excellent ANT (actor-network theory) papers (Joshua Braun; Burcu Baykurt) and two excellent systems/institutional theory papers…
View original 2,179 more words
India’s identity project is the the world’s largest biometric database — currently consisting of almost 600 million enrolled. By locating this techno-utopian vision within the larger surveillance state that a unique identifier facilitates, Malavika Jayaram — lawyer, Berkman Fellow, and Fellow at the Centre for Internet and Society, Bangalore — describes the ‘welfare industrial complex’ that imagines the poor as the next emerging market. She highlights the risks of the body as password, of implementing e-governance in a legal vacuum, and of digitization reinforcing existing inequalities. By offering a perspective that is somewhat different from the traditional western focus of privacy, she hopes to generate a more inclusive discourse about what it means to be autonomous and empowered in the face of paternalistic development projects.