Agency between humanism and posthumanism: Latour and his opponents

Two articles in the special section on knot-work in this journal (HAU 2014, volume 4, issue 3) take issue with the "posthumanism" of Bruno Latour's Actor Network Theory (ANT). Arguing that Latour's conception of agency undermines critical attitudes toward capitalism, they insist...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:HAU journal of ethnographic theory 2015-09, Vol.5 (2), p.43-58
Main Author: Kipnis, Andrew B.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Capitalism
Ethnography
Humanism
Latour, Bruno
Citations: Items that this one cites
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Two articles in the special section on knot-work in this journal (HAU 2014, volume 4, issue 3) take issue with the "posthumanism" of Bruno Latour's Actor Network Theory (ANT). Arguing that Latour's conception of agency undermines critical attitudes toward capitalism, they insist on an all-or-nothing, accept or reject attitude toward Latour's work. In this article, I sketch an alternative vantage on questions of nonhuman agency and Latour's oeuvre, which, though critical, is much less polemic. While proposing an intermediate stance for framing a theorization of agency, I conclude that it is not ANT's theorization of agency that inhibits critical ethnographers of capitalism but rather habits in its application that derive, in part, from ANT's insistence on painstaking ethnographic research.
ISSN:2575-1433
2049-1115
DOI:10.14318/hau5.2.004