Sociologists always try to make the most sense of interaction, but they have gone too far with Actor-Network Theory. Actor-Network Theory is a unique sociological view that connects humans and non-humans (including objects) into a massive network of what influences what. However, Actor-Network Theory (ANT) is much criticized and likened to an actual ant, because it fails to explain why relations are and simplifies complex relationships down to just the direct influences.
When analyzing the environment with Actor-Network Theory, trees and humans would have an unclear relationship. Someone utilizing Actor-Network Theory could tell that trees and humans interact, but ANT does not account for the numerous ways in which they influence each other. Without more context, one might believe that trees victimize humans, that trees and humans lead a balanced, peaceful existence or that trees are reliant on humans. However none of these accurately portray their relationship and this is what Actor-Network Theory misses. In the aptly-named article, On the Use of Actor-Network Theory for Developing Web Services Dedicated to Communities of Practice, an actor is described as “characterized first hand by its capability to act and interact, its influence.” Trees do not do much direct influencing on their own; even when trees are influenced themselves, such as by humans, the cause for interaction is not important to ANT.
Actor-Network Theory would acknowledge that 17th century Portuguese sailors interacted with Dodo birds and used them for food, but not tell us that the sailors and their animals hunted Dodos to extinction. Knowing that a relationship exists is practically useless without knowing its nature. Alone, the fact that Portuguese sailors ate Dodo birds is insignificant; what is more important is the long-term biological implications on Earth’s biodiversity.
What’s worse, ANT misses another facet of interaction: power. An Actor-Network Theory analysis would not distinguish between the capabilities of trees and people. ANT might tell us that we rely on trees for our existence but would miss how humans exhibit power over trees by destroying them. That seems pretty important, that the relationship may extinguish or change its members, but ANT does not value that information.
Actor-Network Theory is even less effective in the Environment-Human network because roles are constantly changing. The position of humans relative to the environment, and vice versa, are always adapting. The ideas people hold about nature (yet another “actor”) also change and that influences the relation humans and the environment have.
- The Tragedy of the Dodo, http://www.davidreilly.com/dodo/
- Actor-Network Theory, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actor-network_theory
- On the Use of Actor-Network Theory for Developing Web Services Dedicated to Communities of Practice, http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.86.8144&rep=rep1&type=pdf
No comments:
Post a Comment