跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(3.231.230.177) 您好!臺灣時間:2021/08/02 10:52
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果 :::

詳目顯示

: 
twitterline
研究生:陳榮泰
研究生(外文):Chen, Rong-Tai
論文名稱:從行動者-網絡到寄食者-客體:對MichelSerres的非策略式詮釋
論文名稱(外文):From Actor-Network to Parasite-Object : A Non-Strategic Interpretation of Michel Serres
指導教授:傅大為傅大為引用關係林文源林文源引用關係
指導教授(外文):Fu, DaiwieLin, Wen-Yuan
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立清華大學
系所名稱:歷史研究所
學門:人文學門
學類:歷史學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2010
畢業學年度:98
語文別:中文
論文頁數:68
中文關鍵詞:瑟爾行動者網絡理論寄食者客體性自然契約
外文關鍵詞:Michel Serresactor-network theoryparasiteobjectivitynatural contract
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:2
  • 點閱點閱:613
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:139
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:2
法國哲學家與科學史家米歇爾.瑟爾關於科技與社會的論題為本文核心。瑟爾從通訊的問題出發,發展出一套關係的哲學,並藉以探索科學與人文之間幽微曲折的通道。此路線的思考對科技研究之一支「行動者網絡理論」頗有影響,本文以行動者網絡理論為參考點,指出瑟爾的哲學不只有助於思考科技與社會的建構過程,他對傳訊者或訊息的載體可能引起系統或社會失能的問題的思考,亦可為科技與社會研究引出道德的向度。
瑟爾構想「寄食者」的角色,目的在於探索傳訊者如何成為訊息的阻礙。相較於行動者網絡理論有時依賴軍事策略的概念說明科技集體的構築過程,本文試圖說明在瑟爾的作品裡,策略與傳訊存在有顯著的差別。成功的策略家未必能導致成功的溝通。由於通訊者引起的失能可能引發出惡的問題,瑟爾構想一種客體的哲學,以契約之客體的概念取代人與其認識物之間策略的關係。本文將討論瑟爾重新提出的科學的客體性,但卻是為了適應當代人類與自然面臨的新關係。

As a French philosopher and historian of sciences, Michel Serres is known for his writings which marvelously bridge diverse topics ordinarily considered distant or even irrelevant. Since 1960s, his philosophical meditation upon communication and mediation had provided a new way of thinking about the sciences and their problems nowadays. For him today the sciences are more about message-transmitting than about commodity-producing, more of relation than of being. Following this line of thinking, Serres also deeply influenced some science and technology students such as Michel Callon and Bruno Latour as well as the now influential “actor-network theory”.
What I am trying to do in this paper is to trace some of his main themes about the relation between science and society. In the era of information, what is the role of science in the course of assembling the collective, and conversely, how can we do sciences collectively? This is a standard question of actor-network theory (ANT). By using ANT as a reference point for comparison, I’d like to point out that whilst ANT is sometimes seen as a mere tool for describing scientific practices and thus may be (unfairly) accused of being amoral, Serres indeed takes the moral dimension seriously. By inventing the character of the parasite (which in some sense is an equivalent of the actor in ANT) and high-lighting the paradoxical situation of messenger, Serres asks how parasites or actors with successful strategies may make their collective malfunction and do something mal (evil). There is an eminent difference between successful militant actions and successful communications.
This problem leads Serres to conceive a philosophy of object. For him object is not only outside but the precondition of the collective. It transcends the collective and is what its “social contract” refers to. No society can do without some object. Science once played the role of referring to this objectivity but the ever-expanding collective had made it worn-out: everything seems inside now. Whereas we inhabitants of the Earth now face the malfunction of our old collective and the crisis of the old objectivity, Serres suggests we conceive a global object and make a contractual rather than strategic relation with it.

第一章 前言 1
一、 為什麼要談Michel Serres? 1
二、 生平與作品介紹 3
三、 問題意識與章節安排 12
第二章 科學/權力的兩個模型與行動者網絡理論 15
一、 前言 15
二、 第歐根尼與亞歷山大:是否有無需中介的科學? 18
三、 行動者網絡理論:一種策略式的詮釋 22
四、 小結 27
第三章 寄食者 28
一、 前言 28
二、 傳訊者的倫理 28
三、 城市老鼠與鄉下老鼠:動物寓言裡的寄食關係 30
四、 噪音與訊息 34
五、 不公平的交易 36
六、 寄食者與宿主:擁有之惡 41
七、 小結 43
第四章 客體 45
一、 前言 45
二、 我們如何生活在一起? 46
三、 客體與不完備定理 51
四、 小結 56
第五章 大尺度的集體與客體(代結論) 58
一、 前言 58
二、 寄食者的擴張及其問題 60
三、 新的客體與自然契約 62
參考書目 65

外文文獻
Assad, L.Maria. (2000). "Language, Nonlinearity, and the Problem of Evil." Configurations (8): 271-283.
Brown, D. Steven. (2002). "Michel Serres: Science, Translation and the Logic of the Parasite." Theory, Culture & Society, 19 (3): 1-27.
Callon, Michel. (1986). "Some Elements of a Sociology of Translation: Domestication of the Scallops and the Fishermen of St Brieuc Bay." In Power, Action and Belief: A New Sociology of Knowledge, ed. John Law, 196-233. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Crawford, Hugh T. (1993). "An Interview with Bruno Latour." Configurations, 1 (2): 247-268.
Goldstein, Rebecca. (2005). Incompleteness: The Proof and Paradox of Kurt Gödel. W. W. Norton & Company.
Ihde, Don & Evan Selinger. (2003). Chasing Technoscience. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
Latour, Bruno. (1988a). The Pasteurization of France. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Latour, Bruno. (1988b). Irreductions. (trans. John Law) Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Latour, Bruno. (1988c). "The Enlightenment Without the Critique: An Introduction to Michel Serres' Philosophy." In Contemporary French Philosophy, ed. J. Griffith,83-98. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Latour, Bruno. (2004). Politics of Nature. (trans. Catherine Porter) Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Latour, Bruno. (2004). "Why Has Critique Run out of Steam? From Matters of Fact to Matters of Concern." Critical Inquiry (30): 225-248.
Law, John. (1991). "Introduction: Monsters, Machines and Sociotechnical Relations." In A Sociology of Monsters? Essays on Power, Technology and Domination, ed. John Law, 1-23. London: Routledge.
Mol, Ann-Marie & John Law. (1994). "Regions, Networks and Fluids: Anaemia and Social Topology." Social Studies of Science (24): 641-71.
Mortley, Raoul. (1991). French Philosophers in Conversation. London: Routledge.
Paulson, William. (2000). "Michel Serres's Utopia of Language." Configurations (8): 215-228.
Prigogine, Ilya & Isabelle Stengers. (1982). "Postface: From Leibniz to Lucretius." In Hermes: Science, Literature, Philosophy, by Michel Serres, 137-155. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
Serres, Michel. (1982a). "Knowledge in the Classical Age: La Fontaine & Descartes." In Hermes: Literature, Science, Philosophy, eds. V. Josué Harari, & BellF.Davi, 15-28. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
Serres, Michel. (1982b). "Mathematics & Philosophy." In Hermes: Literature, Science, Philosophy, eds. V. Josué Harari, & BellF.Davi, 15-28. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
Serres, Michel. (1982c). "Platonic Dialogue." In Hermes: Literature, Science, Philosophy, eds. V. Josué Harari, & BellF.Davi, 15-28. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
Serres, Michel. (1982d). The Origin of Geometry. In Hermes: Literature, Science, Philosophy, eds. V. Josué Harari, & BellF.Davi, 15-28. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
Serres, Michel. (1989[1983]). "Friar: Stakes, Fetishes, Merchandise." In Detachment, trans. James Genevieve & Raymond Federman, 65-97). Athens: Ohio University Press.
Serres, Michel. (1991[1983]). Rome: The Book of Foundations. Trans. Felicia McCarren. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Serres, Michel. (1995[1982]). Genesis. Trans. James Geneviève & James Nielson. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.
Serres, Michel. (1995[1989]). "Paris 1800." In History of Scientific Thought, ed. Michel Serres, 422-454.
Serres, Michel. (1995[1990]). The Natural Contract. Trans. Elizabeth MacArthur& William Paulson. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.
SerresMichel. (1997[1991]). The Troubadour of Knowledge. Trans. Sheila Faria Gloser & Williams Paulson. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Serres, Michel. (2000). Retour au Contrat Naturel. Paris: Bibliothèque nationale de France.
Serres, Michel. (2000[1977]). The Birth of Physics. Trans. Jack Hawkes. Clinamen Press.
Serres, Michel. (2007[1980]). The Parasite. Trans. Schehr R. Lawrence. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Serres, Michel & Bruno Latour. (1995[1994]). Conversations on Science, Culture, and Time. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.
Shannon, E.Claude. (1948). "A Mathematical Theory of Communication." The Bell System Technical Journal, 27: 397-423, 623-656.
Singleton, Vicky. (1995). "Networking Constructions of Gender and Constructing Gender Networks." In The gender-technology relation: contemporary theory and research, eds. Keith Grint & Rosalind Gill, 146-173. London: Taylor & Francis.
Stengers, Isabelle. (2005). "The Cosmopolitical Proposal." In Making Things Public, eds. Bruno Latour $ Peter Weibel, 994-1003. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

中文文獻
拉封登. (1983). 《拉風登寓言》(莫渝 譯) 台北: 志文出版社.
林文源. (2007). 〈論行動者網絡理論的行動本體論〉 《科技、醫療與社會 》(4), 頁 65-108.
Sokal, Alan, & Jean Bricmont. (2001). 知識的騙局. (蔡佩君, 譯者) 台北: 時報.
Latour, Bruno. (2004). 〈直線進步或交引纏繞〉(雷祥麟 譯) 收於吳嘉苓, 傅大為, & 雷祥麟 (編輯), 《科技渴望社會》. 台北: 群學.

線上文獻
Bourdeau, Michel. (2010). “Aguste Comte.” http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/comte/ (Retrieved 2010/6/30)
Connor, Steven. (2009). “Michel Serres: The Hard and the Soft.” http://www.bbk.ac.uk/english/skc/hardsoft/ (Retrieved 2010/6/30)
Kunzru, Hari. (1995). “Michel Serres Interview.” http://www.harikunzru.com/michel-serres-interview-1995. (Retrieved 2010/6/30)
Law, John. (2007). “Actor Network Theory and Material Semiotics.” http://www.heterogeneities.net/publications/Law2007ANTandMaterialSemiotics.pdf (Retrieved 2010/6/30)

連結至畢業學校之論文網頁點我開啟連結
註: 此連結為研究生畢業學校所提供,不一定有電子全文可供下載,若連結有誤,請點選上方之〝勘誤回報〞功能,我們會盡快修正,謝謝!
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top