Journal of the Korean Geographical Society (대한지리학회지)

The Korean Geographical Society (대한지리학회)
권호 표지

Re-understanding of Technoscience and Nature through Actor-Network Theory

행위자-연결망 이론을 통한 과학과 자연의 재해석

  • Received : 2010.06.07
  • Accepted : 2010.07.23
  • Published : 2010.08.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Recent environmental issues such as genetically modified organisms, the loss of biodiversity, climate change, and nuclear waste cannot be reduced to a matter of science or society and explained through nature-society dualist approaches because of their complexity and heterogeneity. This paper examines how nature-society dualism has been embedded in science studies and geography and how this dualism can be overcome. Actor-Network Theory as an attempt to overcome this nature-society dualism is appropriate in analysing "strange imbriglio" of biology, politics, technoscience, market, value, ethics and facts that constitute our society by focusing on heterogeneous association, and can contribute to providing a useful framework to solve environmental problems.

생명공학에 의한 유전자 변형 동식물체의 생산, 생물 다양성 감소, 기후변화, 핵 폐기장 문제 등 현대 사회의 복잡 다단한 여러 환경 이슈는 단순히 과학의 문제로, 사회의 문제로 환원시킬 수 없기 때문에 기존의 자연-사회를 바라보는 이분법적 사고만으로는 충분히 설명하기 어렵다. 이러한 문제의식을 갖고 본 논문은 서구 사상에 뿌리깊이 내재된 이분법적 사고가 과학관에 어떻게 투영이 되었고, 또 자연관에는 어떻게 이어져 내려오고, 이것이 최근에는 어떻게 극복되고 있는지, 이러한 대안으로 과학기술 연구에서 발전한 라투르(Latour)의 행위자-연결망 이론이 환경문제를 비롯한 과학-자연-사회 연구에 어떤 의미가 있을지 시론적 수준에서 고찰해 보았다. 행위자-연결망 이론은 인간과 비인간의 이질적 집합체에 초점을 둠으로써 과학뿐만 아니라 우리 사회를 구성하는 생물체, 정치, 기술, 시장, 가치, 윤리, 사실들의"이상한 혼종물"을 종합적으로 이해하는데 적합하고, 현대사회의 복잡한 환경생태 문제에 유용한 새로운 분석틀을 제공할 것으로 보인다.

Keywords

References

  1. Blaikei, P., 1985, The Political Economy of Soil Erosion in Developing Countries, Longman, London.
  2. Blaikei, P. and Brookfeild, H., 1987, Land Degradation and Society, Methuen, New York and London.
  3. Bloor, D., 1996, Idealism and the sociology of scientific knowledge, Social Studies of Science, 26, 839-856. https://doi.org/10.1177/030631296026004005
  4. Braun, B., 2006, Towards a new earth and a new humanity: Nature, ontology, politics, in Harvey, D. (ed.), A Critical Reader, Blackwell, Oxford, 191-222.
  5. Bridge, G., McManus, P., and Marsden, T., 2003, The next new thing? Biotechnology and its discontents, Geoforum, 34(2), 165-174. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0016-7185(02)00087-8
  6. Callon, M., 1989, La Science et Ses Reseaux: Genese et Circulation des Faits Scientifiques, La Decouverte, Paris [Callon, M.(translation), 1989, Science and its networks: Genesis and circulation of scientific facts, The Discovery, Paris].
  7. Castree, N., 1995, The nature of produced nature: Materiality and knowledge construction in Marxism, Antipode, 27(1), 12-48. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8330.1995.tb00260.x
  8. Castree, N., 2002, False antitheses? Marxism, nature and Actor-Networks, Antipode, 34(1), 111-146. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8330.00228
  9. Cockburn, A. and Ridgeway, J., 1979, Political Ecology, New York Times Book Company, NY.
  10. Collins, H., 1981, Stages in the empirical program of relativism, Social Studies of Science, 11, 3-10. https://doi.org/10.1177/030631278101100101
  11. ETC group, 1998, Seed industry consolidation: Who owns whom? ETC group. http://www. etcgroup.org
  12. Goodman, M., 2001, Ontology matters: The relational materiality of nature and agro-food studies, Sociologia Ruralis, 41, 182-200. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9523.00177
  13. Haraway, D. J., 1997, Modest_Witness@Second_ Millennium.FemaleMan_ Meets_OncoMouse, Routledge, New York.
  14. Harvey, D., 1996, Justice, Nature and the Geography of Difference, Blackwell, Cambridge.
  15. Hong, S., 2005, A study into the interactions and interfaces between the history of science and STS, The Journal of the Korean History of Science Society, 27(2), 131-153 (in Korean).
  16. Kang, Y. G., Kim, B. S., and Han, J. G., 2006, Silence and Enthusiasm: The Seven Years' Diary of Hwang Scandal, Humanitas Publishing, Seoul (강양구.김병수.한재각, 2006, 침묵과 열광: 황우석 사태 7년의 기록, 후마니타스, 서울).
  17. Kim, H.-S., 2006a, Two ways of technoscience development, The Hankyoreh Newspaper (in Korean).
  18. Kim, H.-S., 2006b, Key Issues in Sociology of Science, Moonji Publishing, Seoul (김환석, 2006, 과학사 회학의 쟁점들, 문학과지성사, 서울).
  19. Kim, H.-S., 2006c, The causes and social meanings of Hwang scandal, Economy and Society, 71, 237- 255 (in Korean).
  20. Kim, H.-S., 2009, Two cultures, science studies, and relational ontology, Culture/Science, 57, 40-60 (in Korean).
  21. Kim, J.-Y., 2006, Science as multiple social phenomena and Hwang woo Suk as a techno-scientific alliance, Critical Review of History, 74, 82-113 (in Korean).
  22. Kim, K. M., 1994, What is sociology of scientific knowledge?, Scientific Thought, 10, 132-154 (in Korean).
  23. Kim, K. M., 2004, Scientific Knowledge and Social Theory, Hangilsa Publishing, Seoul (김경만, 2004, 과학지식과 사회이론, 한길사, 서울).
  24. Kim, S.-J., 2006, The production of eco-environmental space and its hybridity: The Case of Cheonggyecheon, Journal of the Korean Urban Geographical Society, 9(2), 113-124 (in Korean).
  25. Kim, S.-J., 2009, Vacillating between a neoliberal state and a developmental state: The case of development of biotechnology clusters in South Korea, Journal of the Economic Geographical Society of Korea, 12(3), 235-247. https://doi.org/10.23841/egsk.2009.12.3.235
  26. Kloppenburg, J., 2004, First the Seed: The Political Economy of Plant Biotechnology, 2nd Edition, The University of Wisconsin Press, Madison.
  27. Kuhn, T., 1962, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago and London.
  28. Kwon, J.-W., 2005, Lecture Note for Geogrpahical Thoughts, Hanul, Seoul (권정화, 2005, 지리사상사 강의노트, 한울아카데미, 서울).
  29. Latour, B., 1993, We Have Never Been Modern, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
  30. Latour, B. and Woolgar, S., 1979, Laboratory Life: The Social Construction of Scientific Facts, Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J.
  31. Latour, B., 1987, Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers through Society, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass.
  32. Latour, B., 1988, The Pasteurization of France, Harvard University Press, Cambridge.
  33. Latour, B., 1999, Pandora's Hope: Essays on the Reality of Science Studies, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA and London.
  34. Lee, Y. H., 2002, The politics of technology control: The case of biotechnology, Economy and Society, 55, 194-218 (in Korean).
  35. Marsh, G. P., 1898, The Earth as Modified by Human Action, Charles Scribner's Sons, NY.
  36. Martin, G. J. and James, E. W., 1972, All Possible Worlds: A History of Geographical Idea, Odyssey Press.
  37. Peet, R. and Watts, M., 1996, Liberation ecology: Development, sustainability, and environment in an age of market triumphalism, in Peet, R. and Watts, M. (eds.), Liberation Ecologies: Environment, Development, Social Movement, Routledge, New York and London, 1-45.
  38. Pickering, A., 1992, From science as knowledge to science as practice, in Pickering, A. (ed.), Science as Practice and Culture, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago and London, 1-28.
  39. Porter, P., 1999, Cultural ecology, in Smelser, N. J. and Baltes, P. B. (eds.), International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences, Elsevier, London.
  40. Robbins, P., 2004, Political Ecology: A Criticial Introduction, Blackwell Publishing, Malden.
  41. Schmidt, A., 1971, The Concept of Nature in Marx, NLB, London.
  42. Shapin, S. and Schaffer, S., 1986, Leviathan and the Air- Pump, Princeton University Press, Princeton.
  43. Smith, N., 1996, The production of nature, in Robertson, G., Mash, M., and Tickneretal, L. (eds.), Futurenatural, Routledge, London and New York, 35-54.
  44. Smith, N., 1998, Nature at the Millenium: Production and re-enchantment, in Braun, B. and Castree, N. (eds.), Remaking Reality: Nature at the Millenium, Routledge, London & New York, 271-285.
  45. Suppe, F., 1974, The Structure of Scientific Theories, University of Illinois Press, Urbana.
  46. Swyngedouw, E., 1999, Modernity and hybridity: Nature, regeneracionismo, and the production of the Spanish waterscape, 1890-1930, Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 89(3), 443-465. https://doi.org/10.1111/0004-5608.00157
  47. The Ministry of Science and Technology, 2004, National R&D Program, The Ministry of Science and Technology, Seoul (과학기술부, 2004, 국가 R&D 프로그램 계획, 과학기술부).
  48. Turner, B. L. II, 1999, Nature-Society in Geography, in Smelser, N. J. and Baltes, P. B. (eds.), International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences, Elsevier, London.
  49. Watt, M., 1983, Silent Violence: Food, Famine and Peasantry in Northern Nigeria, University of California Press, Berkeley.
  50. Whatmore, S., 2002, Hybrid Geographies: Natures, Cultures, Spaces, Sage Publications, London.
  51. Wolf, E., 1972, Ownership and political ecology, Anthropological Quarterly, 45, 201-205. https://doi.org/10.2307/3316532
  52. Yoon, J. R., 1994, 'New' sociology of science: Possibility and limit of sociology of scientific knowledge, Socience and Philosoy, 5, Tongnamoo (in Korean).