Steve,
No fight at all. I totally agree with you. It's the obvious reference and it
should be the normal starting point. No matter if your agree with Latour
(and Woolgar). I just assumed that Steindor was new to the subject. Best
wishes,
Daniele
----- Original Message -----
From: "Fuller, Steve" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2009 4:38 PM
Subject: FW: Laboratory studies
It would be fascinating to learn if Cozzoli's reference IS indeed news to
some people on this list -- and if it is not news, whether it is still
considered 'unorthodox', as Cozzoli himself suggests.
My own view is that the Latour (and Woolgar!) reference should be obvious --
perhaps even taken for granted -- and his take on laboratory studies is the
normal starting point, even if there are various disagreements down the
line. In saying this, I don't mean to be endorsing the Latour-Woolgar line,
simply its presumptive significance in the field.
To me, Steindor's question sounds like something that could have been asked
in earnestness maybe 25 years ago -- but now?!
Surely, Google could get to Latour-Woolgar in a flash!
I am not trying to pick a fight here, but I raise this more as a reality
check about the historical self-consciousness of history of science as a
field.
Steve
Steve Fuller
Professor of Sociology
University of Warwick
Coventry CV4 7AL
United Kingdom
Phone +44 2476 523 940
http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/sociology/staff/academicstaff/sfuller/fullers_index
http://www.warwick.ac.uk/~sysdt/Index.html
BLOG: 'Making the University Safe for Intellectual Life in the 21st Century'
http://blogs.warwick.ac.uk/swfuller/
NEW BOOK (Autumn 2009): The Sociology of Intellectual Life -- The Career of
the Mind In and Around the Academy (Sage). Save 50% order online at
www.sagepub.co.uk quoting promo code UK09AF024. E-book also available at
£24.95 (ISBN 978-1-84920-523-8)
-----Original Message-----
From: Promoting discussion in the science studies community
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Daniele Cozzoli
Sent: 22 September 2009 15:09
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Laboratory studies
You probably already know Latour's un-orthodox view:
Bruno Latour, Laboratory Life. The Construction of Scientific Facts,
Princeton University Press, 1986
----- Original Message -----
From: "Viviane Quirke" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2009 10:45 AM
Subject: Re: Laboratory studies
As this may be of interest to all, can I suggest that thE replies are sent
to Mersenne as well?
Off the top of my head, in the history of medicine a classic and still
very useful book, which should be widely available although it is not the
journal or review article you request:
A. Cunningham & Perry Wiilliams (eds), The Laboratory Revolution in
Medicine (Cambridge: CUP, 1992).
Viviane
Dr Viviane Quirke
RCUK Academic Fellow in 20th-century Biomedicine
Centre for Health, Medicine and Society
Oxford Brookes University
> Hi
>
> Can anyone direct me towards the relevant literature on laboratory
> studies? As I am pressed for time I would prefer journal papers or
> review articles that I can easily access. Please reply to me
> personally: [log in to unmask]
>
> Regards,
> Steindór
> --
> Steindór J. Erlingsson
> vísindasagnfræðingur/historian of science
> http://www.raunvis.hi.is/~steindor/
>
> "My own view is that most psychiatric diagnoses are about as
> scientifically meaningful as star signs ..." (Richard Bentall,
> Doctoring the Mind, 2009: 110)
>
|