image

  • Pasture or Microorganisms War and Peace, as well as “Non-Reduction” - path tool
  • Bruno Latour
  • This book, published in 1984, consists of Part I, “Pasteur or Microbe War and Peace,” which analyzes the social aspects of the microbiological research of Louis Pasteur, the source of inspiration for Latour’s life and thought, and Part II, “Non-Reduction,” in which the idea of “non-reduction,” which is the basis of Latour’s philosophy and thought, is developed. Part II, “Non-Reduction,” develops Latour’s philosophy of “non-reduction,” which can be said to form the basis of his philosophy and thought.

  • Through his work with Pasteur and the Pasteur School, Latour questions the relationship between nature, science, and society, moving away from reducing science to society and away from distinguishing between the two.

  • Nothing is naturally reducible or irreducible to anything else.”

  • The “principle of non-reducibility” defined in this way is the very core of Latour’s actor network (web of actors) theory, which treats people and things symmetrically.

  • A must-read for anyone interested in Latour philosophy and thought.

The first half is in the style of a history book on how pastor’s research on microorganisms spread throughout the world, and the second half is a philosophical description of the same type as Wittgenstein’s.

  • Tolstoy’s “War and Peace” is a relative description of the movements of a soldier who is considered a great man
    • Propagation model: Ideas of scientists spread through society on their own if not interfered with
      • The same kind of idea as “the idea that “if you make something good, it will sell”.
    • translation model
      • Latour is this way.
      • It is necessary for the recipient of an idea to actively incorporate the idea and reinterpret it based on his or her own interests (p. 456).
      • Society is not just a medium, but a network of people acting autonomously

image It’s a vocabulary that didn’t exist when this book was written in 1984, but knowing the venture culture of 2024, I have the vocabulary to describe it.

You can’t claim to be scientifically “right,” Petaille argued, and that’s why he failed.

Peter does not want scientific experiments to be taken away and made miraculous or divine, or expanded as applicable to all diseases without evidence. The scientific method must be on his side. But he is wrong. But he is wrong for a different reason than one might think. He thinks he is fighting a single researcher, but in fact he is fighting someone who is already a giant spokesperson for a social movement, a nominalist, an amplifier, and that social movement fervently wants that person to be right, and thus to be able to “speed” and “develop” all the work in that person’s lab. truly “phenomenal” and “unfolding” of the work. Petaille insists that the king is naked, but the others are in a great hurry to get him dressed. Pétaire fought well, but he was unable to correctly calculate the relationship between the various forces, and thus became a laughingstock. (p.68-69)

  • This is also covered by Plurality’s current situation
    • Plurality is a social movement, and Audrey and Glen are now its spokespeople.
    • Whether they are right or not is no longer an issue, but those who believe that the direction in which the social movement is moving society is the preferred one, seek to grant “rapid” and “astounding developments”
      • This is similar to [network effect
      • Attaching related items increases the value of both attached items, thus creating an incentive to attach.

This page is auto-translated from /nishio/パストゥールあるいは微生物の戦争と平和、ならびに「非還元」 using DeepL. If you looks something interesting but the auto-translated English is not good enough to understand it, feel free to let me know at @nishio_en. I’m very happy to spread my thought to non-Japanese readers.