On Interests and their Transformation: Enrolment and Counter-Enrolment

Social Studies of Science

Volumn 12, Issue 4, 1982, Pages 615-625

  Callon, Michel ^a   Law, John ^b  

^a PSL RESEARCH UNIVERSITY   (France)

^b KEELE UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84973674685     PISSN: 03063127     EISSN: 14603659     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/030631282012004006     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Jon Harwood, Bruno Latour and Rob Williams all contributed, in one way or another, to the writing of this paper. We thank them — and, of course, the long-suffering Chinatown scientists.
2. See Steve Woolgar, ‘ Interests and Explanation in the Social Study of Science ’, Social Studies of Science, Vol. 11 (1981), 365-94;
3. Barry Barnes, ‘On the “Hows” and “Whys” of Cultural Change (Response to Woolgar)’, Social Studies of Science, Vol. 11 (1981), 481-98;
4. Donald MacKenzie, ‘Interests, Positivism and History’, Social Studies of Science, Vol. 11 (1981), 498-504;
5. Woolgar, ‘Critique and Criticism: Two Readings of Ethnomethodology’, Social Studies of Science, Vol. 11 (1981), 505-14.
6. Woolgar, ‘ Interests …’, Social Studies of Science, Vol. 11 (1981), note 1, 371.
7. It is not possible to discuss the notion of ‘networking’ in the present context. For an outline elsewhere see John Law and Rob Williams, ‘ Putting Facts Together: A Study of Scientific Persuasion ’, Social Studies of Science, Vol. 12 (1982), 535-58;
8. and Michel Callon, ‘ L'Agonie d'un Laboratoire Universitaire saisi par le Démon de la Technologie ’ (Paris: CSI, Ecole National Superieure des Mines, 1982).
9. Woolgar, ‘ Interests …’, (Paris: CSI, Ecole National Superieure des Mines, 1982) note 1, 371.
10. Further details of this study are to be found in Rob Williams and John Law, ‘ Beyond the Bounds of Credibility ’, Fundamenta Scientiae, Vol. 1 (1980), 295-315;
11. Law and Williams, ‘ Beyond the Bounds of Credibility ’, Fundamenta Scientiae, Vol. 1 (1980), note 3;
12. and Law, ‘ Luttes autour de la publication d'un article dans un laboratoire de biochimie ’, Social Science Information, forthcoming (1983).
13. For some discussion, though posed in somewhat different terms, see Law and Williams, Tape-recorded interview, 14 December 1978 note 3;
14. and John Law, ‘On Words and their Value’ (discussion paper, University of Keele, 1982).
15. See also Michel Callon, ‘Struggles and Negotiations to Define What is Problematic and What is Not’, in Karin D. Knorr, Roger Krohn and Richard Whitley (eds), The Social Process of Scientific Investigation, Sociology of the Sciences Yearbook, Vol. 4 (1980) (Dordrecht: D. Reidel, 1981), 197-219, especially 206-13.
16. See Bruno Latour, Irréductions: Tractatus Scientifico-Politicus (Paris: STS, Conservatoire National des Arts et Metiers, 1981);
17. and Michel Callon, ‘ Boites Noires et Opérations de Traduction ’, Economie et Humanisme, No. 262 (November-December 1981), 53-59.
18. See Law and Williams, ‘ Boites Noires et Opérations de Traduction ’, Economie et Humanisme, No. 262 (November-December 1981), note 3. This paper includes a reprint of the first paragraph.
19. For a fuller discussion of the notion of translation see Callon, ‘ Boites Noires et Opérations de Traduction ’, Economie et Humanisme, No. 262 (November-December 1981), note 8;
20. Latour, ‘ Boites Noires et Opérations de Traduction ’, Economie et Humanisme, No. 262 (November-December 1981), note 9;
21. and Michel Serres, La Traduction, Hermes III (Paris: Collection Critique, les Editions de Minuit, 1974).
22. Barnes, La Traduction, Hermes III (Paris: Collection Critique, les Editions de Minuit, 1974) note 1, 492.
23. See G. Deleuze and F. Guattari, L'Anti-Oedipe, Capitalisme et Schizophrenie (Paris: les Editions de Minuit, 1972).
24. We qualify this suggestion because the Chinatown team had always doubted that the DIVEMA results would be positive and thus very interesting: see Williams and Law, Tape-recorded interview, 28 January 1981, note 4, 298.
25. See Law and Williams, Tape-recorded interview, 28 January 1981, note 3.
26. See Callon, Tape-recorded interview, 28 January 1981, note 3;
27. and Michel Callon, Jean-Pierre Courtial, William Turner and Serge Bauin, ‘ From Translation to Network: An Introduction to Co-Word Analysis ’, Social Science Information, forthcoming (1983).
28. Bruno Latour, ‘Give Me a Laboratory and I will Raise the World’, in Karin D. Knorr-Cetina and Michael Mulkay (eds), Science Observed (London: SAGE Publications, forthcoming).
29. Though much of his work is important in this respect, see in particular, Andy Pickering, ‘The Role of Interests in High Energy Physics: the Choice between Charm and Colour’, in Knorr et al. (eds), Science Observed (London: SAGE Publications, forthcoming) note 8, 107-38;
30. and also Pickering, ‘Exemplars and Analogies: A Comment on Crane's Study of Kuhnian Paradigms in High Energy Physics’, Social Studies of Science, Vol. 10 (1980), 497-502.
31. For further argument on the irrelevance of the ‘macro’ and the ‘micro’, see Michel Callon and Bruno Latour, ‘Unscrewing the Big Leviathan: How Actors Macro-structure Reality and How Sociologists Help them to Do So’, in Karin D. Knorr and Aaron Cicourel (eds), Advances in Social Theory and Methodology: Toward an Integration of Micro- and Macro-Sociologies (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1981), 277-303.
32. Woolgar, ‘Unscrewing the Big Leviathan: How Actors Macro-structure Reality and How Sociologists Help them to Do So’, in Karin D. Knorr and Aaron Cicourel (eds), Advances in Social Theory and Methodology: Toward an Integration of Micro- and Macro-Sociologies (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1981), note 1, 373.