Bruno Latour Ordre des livres (chronologique)

In this book Bruno Latour calls upon Christians to join the struggle to avert a climate catastrophe. First and foremost, Christians need to overcome their lack of interest in ‘earthly things’ and pay attention to the Earth at a time when it is being neglected. He also urges Christians to renew their understanding of their faith in the context of the new image of the world that has emerged from Earth system science – that of a world in which the myriad of beings that inhabit the world are interdependent and living in close proximity on a slender, fragile membrane on the surface of the planet. This new image of the world cannot fail to have an impact on the sciences, on politics and on religion, just as, in earlier centuries, the cosmology of Copernicus and Galileo upset the old order. Latour sees the ecological crisis, and the cosmological mutation that it entails, as an opportunity to convey anew, to the largest possible audience, the tradition of Christianity as it has never been appreciated before, by bringing to bear the lessons of eschatology on the great crisis that looms before us all.

Rozhovory shrnuté pod názvem Vyjasňování spolu vedli Michel Serres (1930–2019) a Bruno Latour (1947–2022) na začátku 90. let. O generaci mladší Latour se v nich staršího filosofa s respektem dotazuje na pozadí jeho díla i života a zároveň se neústupně dožaduje vyjasnění jeho rozsáhlého a složitého myšlenkového světa. Vznikl tak napínavý dialog, který od počátečního kroužení kolem východisek Serresova myšlení a jeho vztahu k epistemologii a dobovým filosofickým proudům dochází k pronikavému pohledu na současný svět, dotýká se otázky zla a morálky a dodnes neztrácí svou živost a aktuálnost. Michel Serres představuje zvláštní postavu francouzského myšlení, která stála stranou ústředních tendencí a diskuzí. Rozhovor poprvé vyšel v roce 1992, poté co Michel Serres vydal dvě ze svých ústředních knih – Přirozenou smlouvu (1990) a Poučeného třetího (1991). V první z nich se objevným způsobem věnuje ekologické problematice a v mnohém předznamenává pozdější ekologické myšlení, ve druhé zdůrazňuje důležitost všestranného vzdělání, které neopomíjí exaktní ani humanitní obory a staví na jejich propojení. Dílo Bruna Latoura v mnohém navazuje na tyto Serresovy podněty.

In a series of televised interviews in spring 2022, Bruno Latour explained, in clear and straightforward terms, how humans have changed the planet and why environmental disasters are an intrinsic part of modern life. We have now come to realize that all life depends on a thin skin of our planet that is only few kilometres thick - what scientists call the 'critical zone'. Our capacity to continue to live on a planet we are transforming is now at risk and if we wish to survive as a species, we must put an end to the mechanisms of destruction, rethink our connection to living beings and face head-on the confrontation between the extractivists who are exploiting the Earth's resources and the ecologists. This poignant reflection on the greatest challenge of our time is also an opportunity for Latour to explain the underlying thread that guided his work throughout his career, from his pathbreaking research on the social construction of scientific knowledge to his last writings on the Anthropocene.

Żyjemy na cienkiej warstwie patyny, nazywanej strefą krytyczną, która pokrywa Ziemię. Zamiast oddalać się od niej, powinniśmy osiedlić się na tej pokrywie, aby zachować warunki do życia. Bruno Latour określa tę pokrywę jako Gaję, nawiązując do hipotezy Lovelocka oraz starożytnego mitu o bogini matce. W serii wywiadów, przeprowadzonych w jego paryskim mieszkaniu, Latour wyrażał prostotę, radość i moc, które pojawiają się, gdy życie, szczególnie umysłowe, wchodzi w fazę kondensacji. Uspokojenie towarzyszyło mu w obliczu ograniczonego czasu; immanencja splatała się z poczuciem nieuchronności i koniecznością podsumowania wszystkiego. Latour dbał o klarowność, czerpał przyjemność z rozmowy i sztuki obrazowania. W obliczu nadchodzącego końca wszystko stawało się jasne. Bruno Latour zmarł 9 października 2022 roku w wieku siedemdziesięciu pięciu lat. Był jednym z najwybitniejszych francuskich intelektualistów swojego pokolenia, a jego prace były zarówno sławne, jak i niezrozumiane.

Za jakých podmínek by mohla ekologie organizovat celkovou politiku a stát se více než jen okrajovým protestním hnutím? Může se postavit vedle liberalismu, socialismu, neoliberalismu a vzrůstajících neliberálních či neofašistických stran? Bruno Latour a Nikolaj Schultz ve svém textu, složeném ze sedmdesáti šesti bodů, argumentují, že environmentální hnutí musí získat ideologickou konzistenci a autonomii tím, že nabídne politický narativ, který uznává a efektivně představuje jeho projekt v kontextu sociálního konfliktu. Politická ekologie se musí smířit s nevyhnutelným rozdělením a poskytnout přesvědčivou kartografii konfliktů, které vytváří, aby definovala společný horizont kolektivního jednání. Latour a Schultz navrhují znovu použít termíny „třída“ a „třídní boj“, přičemž jim dávají nový význam v souladu s ekologickými zájmy současného klimatického režimu. Prosazují myšlenku nové ekologické třídy, která se sjednocuje na základě kolektivních zájmů v boji proti produktivismu a za ochranu obyvatelných podmínek planety. Kladou otázku, jak může vzniknout hrdá a sebevědomá ekologická třída, která podnikne účinné kroky k utváření naší společné budoucnosti?

Under what conditions could ecology organize politics around a cohesive agenda and beliefs? Can it define the political horizon like liberalism, socialism, and conservatism have at different times? What insights can ecology gain from history about the emergence of new political movements and their ability to win ideological battles before forming parties? In this text, Bruno Latour and Nikolaj Schultz argue that for the ecological movement to achieve ideological consistency and autonomy, it must present a political narrative that acknowledges and represents its project in terms of social conflict. Political ecology must recognize that it inherently brings division and must provide a clear mapping of the conflicts it generates, aiming to establish a common horizon for collective action. To articulate these conflicts, they suggest reinterpreting traditional notions of 'class' and 'class struggle' in the context of ecological concerns within our New Climate Regime. They propose the idea of a new ecological class, united by shared interests in combating production logic and preserving the planet's habitability. The authors challenge us to consider how a self-aware ecological class can emerge and effectively influence our collective future.

Under what conditions could ecology organize politics around a cohesive agenda and set of beliefs? Can it define the political horizon like liberalism, socialism, and conservatism have? This text presents seventy-six talking points by Bruno Latour and Nikolaj Schultz, exploring how the ecological movement can achieve ideological consistency and autonomy. They argue that political ecology must acknowledge and embrace social conflict, offering a narrative that effectively represents its goals. It must recognize the divisions it creates and provide a clear mapping of these conflicts to define a common horizon for collective action. To articulate and address these conflicts, the authors suggest reinterpreting traditional concepts of 'class' and 'class struggle' in light of ecological concerns within our New Climate Regime. They propose the idea of a new ecological class, united by shared interests in combating destructive production practices and preserving the planet's habitability. The authors challenge us to consider how this self-aware ecological class can emerge and take meaningful action to shape our collective future.

"Depuis la terrible expérience du confinement, les États comme les individus cherchent tous comment se déconfiner, en espérant revenir aussi vite que possible au "monde d'avant" grâce à une "reprise" aussi rapide que possible. Mais il y a une autre façon de tirer les leçons de cette épreuve, en tout cas pour le bénéfice de ceux que l'on pourrait appeler les terrestres. Ceux-là se doutent qu'ils ne se déconfineront pas, d'autant que la crise sanitaire s'encastre dans une autre crise bien plus grave, celle imposée par le Nouveau Régime Climatique. Si nous en étions capables, l'apprentissage du confinement serait une chance à saisir : celle de comprendre enfin où nous habitons, dans quelle terre nous allons pouvoir enfin nous envelopper - à défaut de nous développer à l'ancienne! Où suis-je? fait assez logiquement suite au livre précédent, Où atterrir? Comment s'orienter en politique. Après avoir atterri, parfois violemment, il faut bien que les terrestres explorent le sol où ils vont désormais habiter et retrouvent le goût de la liberté et de l'émancipation mais autrement situées. Tel est l'objet de cet essai sous forme de courts chapitres dont chacun explore une figure possible de cette métaphysique du déconfinement à laquelle nous oblige l'étrange époque où nous vivons."-- Page 4 de la couverture

Focusing on the intersection of technology and architecture, this volume explores the implications of computational images in modern architectural thought and practice. By rigorously examining the technical foundations and concepts of architecture, it offers a philosophical perspective on the discipline in the context of imaging. Rather than presenting a theory of architectural images, it provides a concise reflection on how these elements influence contemporary architectural discourse and design.

The present ecological mutation has organized the whole political landscape for the last thirty years. This could explain the deadly cocktail of exploding inequalities, massive deregulation, and conversion of the dream of globalization into a nightmare for most people. What holds these three phenomena together is the conviction, shared by some powerful people, that the ecological threat is real and that the only way for them to survive is to abandon any pretense at sharing a common future with the rest of the world. Hence their flight offshore and their massive investment in climate change denial. The Left has been slow to turn its attention to this new situation. It is still organized along an axis that goes from investment in local values to the hope of globalization and just at the time when, everywhere, people dissatisfied with the ideal of modernity are turning back to the protection of national or even ethnic borders. This is why it is urgent to shift sideways and to define politics as what leads toward the Earth and not toward the global or the national. Belonging to a territory is the phenomenon most in need of rethinking and careful redescription; learning new ways to inhabit the Earth is our biggest challenge. Bringing us down to earth is the task of politics today.

The emergence of modern sciences in the seventeenth century profoundly renewed our understanding of nature. For the last three centuries new ideas of nature have been continually developed by theology, politics, economics, and science, especially the sciences of the material world.

You are about to enter a new genre of scientific fables, which aim to reveal the complexities of understanding animal behavior. Is it acceptable to urinate in front of animals? What does it signify when a monkey throws feces? This book presents twenty-six questions that challenge our assumptions about animal behavior and cognition. Through an engaging abecedarium of chapters, Vinciane Despret explores remarkable and often humorous interactions between animals and humans—researchers, farmers, zookeepers, and handlers. Do animals possess a sense of humor? The stories illustrate that animals often delight in perplexing even the most knowledgeable experts, prompting them to develop new hypotheses that reveal animals' intelligence. These accounts encourage readers to engage with both ethology and philosophy, blending serious scholarship with humor that appeals to all. With a foreword by renowned philosopher Bruno Latour, this work is essential not only for specialists but also for general readers, including dog owners, who will gain a fresh perspective on their canine companions.

Kniha zachycuje myšlení autora v jeho výzkumném záběru od studií vědy a technologií přes analýzu povahy reprezentace v umění a náboženství po nejsoučasnější texty zabývající se globálním oteplováním či vědou a politikou v období antropocénu, kdy se lidstvo stává klíčovým geologickým činitelem na Zemi. Je to právě i tento široký záběr, který činí Bruno Latoura jednou z klíčových postav současných společenských věd a inspirátora uměleckých projektů.

In a new approach to philosophical anthropology, Bruno Latour offers answers to questions raised in We Have Never Been Modern: If not modern, what have we been, and what values should we inherit? An Inquiry into Modes of Existence offers a new basis for diplomatic encounters with other societies at a time of ecological crisis.

Bruno Latour hat ein weiteres Hauptwerk geschrieben. Frank Kelleter, Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung 14.02.2013

Building on his earlier book We Have Never Been Modern, Bruno Latour develops his argument about the Modern fetishization of facts, or the creation of factishes.

Der Wissenschaftsforscher Bruno Latour wendet sich gegen eine um sich greifende antiaufklärerische Haltung der Kritik, der Geisteswissenschaften, die unappetitliche Verwandtschaften hervorbringt. Wie erklärt es sich, dass unter Intellektuellen weithin unhinterfragt Verschwörungstheorien – etwa bezüglich des 11. September – als Wahrheiten ins Feld geführt werden? Bruno Latour macht in einem lange gepflegten, exzessiven Misstrauen in unverrückbare Tatsachen, die allzu leichtfertig als ideologische Vorurteile ausgegeben werden, eine Hauptgefahr für diese beunruhigende (da selbstentmachtende) Bewegung aus. Generiert womöglich die Kritik selbst diese Effekte, hat sie ihre eigenen »kritischen« Werkzeuge nicht mehr im Griff? Ist Kritik ganz und gar zahnlos geworden? Latour fordert, das eigene Rüstzeug einer kritischen Betrachtung zu unterziehen – und, wenn nötig, komplett auszuwechseln: »Ist es etwa zuviel verlangt, von unser aller intellektuellen Existenz zu fordern, wenigstens einmal im Jahrhundert ein paar neue kritische Werkzeuge bereitzustellen? Ist es nicht äußerst demütigend, mitanzusehen, daß Militärs wendiger, wachsamer, innovativer sind als wir?«

Latour is a world famous and widely published French sociologist known for his acclaimed writings on the relationship between people, science, and technology. His views have crystallized as 'Actor-Network-Theory' (ANT). This book is the first concise account Latour has written about ANT, with which he has come to be so closely associated with.

„Glaubst du an die Wirklichkeit?“ Diese Frage eines Kollegen verwunderte Bruno Latour. In diesem Buch liefert er seine detaillierte Antwort. Anhand verschiedener Fallstudien - eine bodenkundliche Expedition im Regenwald des Amazonas, die französische Atomforschung kurz vor der Okkupation, die Entdeckung des Milchsäureferments durch Pasteur - nimmt Latour die vieldiskutierte Frage auf, ob die im Labor gewonnen Tatsachen „konstruiert“ oder „wirklich“ sind. Doch bereits diese Frage soll vor allem eine polemische Form des wissenschaftlichen „Objekts“ begründen und ist Teil der gegenwärtigen „Science Wars“, die er bis in die Antike verfolgt. Bei aller Instrumentalisierung der Wissenschaften zum Zweck der Bevormundung, ist Latour dennoch kein Wissenschaftsgegner, sondern für die Forschung in ihrem offenen Experimentieren.

A significant work by a leading thinker, this text establishes the conceptual framework for political ecology by reimagining ecological terms within a new philosophical context. The author provocatively states that political ecology has no relation to nature, which he views as a construct used to organize political order without proper process. He argues for the dissolution of the traditional divide between nature and society, advocating for a collective that includes both humans and nonhumans, grounded in real scientific practices. Challenging the fact-value distinction, the author critiques the political philosophy that emerges from this division, arguing it undermines democracy and scientific progress. He moves beyond modernist concepts of "mononaturalism" and "multiculturalism" to propose "multinaturalism," a dynamic collective shaped not by absolute expert reasoning but by adaptable "diplomats" open to experimentation. The text explores the complexities of assembling this collective, addressing the challenges of representation and the interplay between humans and nonhumans. It also discusses the need for new powers of representation and the skills required for collective governance. Ultimately, it questions how political ecology can revitalize public life, emphasizing that politics and nature are inseparable, and calls for a reimagined political landscape unbound by traditional constraints.

A scientist friend asked Bruno Latour point-blank: “Do you believe in reality?” Taken aback by this strange query, Latour offers his meticulous response in Pandora’s Hope. It is a remarkable argument for understanding the reality of science in practical terms.In this book, Latour, identified by Richard Rorty as the new “bête noire of the science worshipers,” gives us his most philosophically informed book since Science in Action. Through case studies of scientists in the Amazon analyzing soil and in Pasteur’s lab studying the fermentation of lactic acid, he shows us the myriad steps by which events in the material world are transformed into items of scientific knowledge. Through many examples in the world of technology, we see how the material and human worlds come together and are reciprocally transformed in this process.Why, Latour asks, did the idea of an independent reality, free of human interaction, emerge in the first place? His answer to this question, harking back to the debates between Might and Right narrated by Plato, points to the real stakes in the so-called science wars: the perplexed submission of ordinary people before the warring forces of claimants to the ultimate truth.

Illuminating conversations with one of France's most respected--and controversial--philosophers

Describes Pasteur's roles in improving health practices in France and identifies the other forces that helped implement his ideas about health care.

Depuis une vingtaine d’années, mes amis et moi, nous étudions ces situations étranges que la culture intellectuelle où nous vivons ne sait pas où ranger. Nous nous appelons, faute de mieux, sociologues, historiens, économistes, politologues, philosophes, anthropologues. Mais à ces disciplines vénérables nous ajoutons à chaque fois le génitif : des sciences et des techniques. “Science studies”, est le mot des Anglais, ou ce vocable trop lourd “Sciences, Techniques, Sociétés”. Quelle que soit l’étiquette, il s’agit toujours de renouer le noeud gordien en traversant, autant de fois qu’il le faudra, la coupure qui sépare les connaissances exactes et l’exercice du pouvoir, disons la nature et la culture. Hybrides nous-mêmes, installés de guingois à l’intérieur des institutions scientifiques, mi-ingénieurs, mi-philosophes, tiers-instruits sans le chercher, nous avons fait le choix de décrire les imbroglios où qu’ils nous mènent. Notre navette, c’est la notion de traduction ou de réseau. Plus souple que la notion de système, plus historique que celle de structure, plus empirique que celle de complexité, le réseau est le fil d’Ariane de ces histoires mélangées.

From weaker to stronger rhetoric : literature - Laboratories - From weak points to strongholds : machines - Insiders out - From short to longer networks : tribunals of reason - Centres of calculation.

Presents laboratory science in a deliberately skeptical way: as an anthropological approach to the culture of the scientist. This book provides an important link between the sociology of modern sciences and laboratory studies in the history of science.