Latour

Latour, Bruno. (2004). The Politics of Nature. U of Harvard P.

In this book, sociologist of science, Bruno Latour tackles the question of how nature and people interrelate. Responding to past critics, Latour argues that Western ideologies of "the social" have relied on a division from nature (viz., Rorty's critique that Philosophy has tried to reflect nature as a mirror reflects light). However, this leaves "the social" divorced from and alien to "the natural." Yet we know humans (and anything else for that matter) can never exceed or transcend nature. We are always already part of it.

So what does this mean? First, Latour defines "political ecology" as those areas of inquiry that try to formulate policies, understandings, and judgements on human relations with the natural as well as those inquiries that see human politics as ecological in their own natures. It is a dually-defined term. And then he says that such things need to "let go of nature," because "nature" is a very problematic term no matter how you cut it.

In Western thinking (ala Rorty, Kuhn, et al), science has always been able to converse with nature and discover its truths. However, it was like a priestly caste that has special, arcane and esoteric prescriptions by which only those initiated to the caste could speak on nature's behalf to the Assembly Hall of human society. All else was left out... and that is a lot, as our readings demonstrate!

So, let's look at Rachel Carson's Silent Spring in this light.

• How do you see the reactions against Ms. Carson adhering to Latour's critique? 
• How do you see the prose of Ms. Carson adding to the Discourse of science?
• Are there points of tension or incompatibility between Carson's descriptions and the "truths" of science?
• If Latour is right, then what is both promised and risked in opening the conversation to those who have little or no understanding of (let alone interest in) science?

Feel free to take a close reading of a passage to answer one or more of these questions and formulate a response.