new book on Latour

From Denmark, but now available in English. ANTHEM has the details HERE.

Some dismissals of Latour are based on complete ignorance: “he’s another French postmodernist,” things of that sort.

But other critics actually do have some idea of what he’s up to, even if they’ve not read him in depth. Their reaction against him is often almost visceral, and the reason is generally the same: Latour is deeply anti-reductionist in spirit. If you think the point of philosophy is to smash and destroy things, you’re not going to like Latour much. Fair enough. But I don’t see that the point of philosophy, or of enlightenment more generally, is to smash and destroy things.

Does science really smash and destroy ignorant beliefs? Only in passing. What science actually has done is manufacture more beliefs than have ever existed at any time in human history. Think of all the stars, species, minerals, chemicals, and black holes that we are now expected to believe in, when our ancestors hadn’t the remotest idea of any of these things.

In short, the number of new beliefs we must hurry to acquire by discovering new and unexpected elements of the cosmos vastly outstrips the handful of fetishes and saints and rituals that one feels a need to spit upon while walking by. At the very least, there is a huge quantitative disparity here, and it is my view that intellectual method and attitude ought to reflect this disparity when arranging its priorities.

Thinking should not primarily mean debunking. But we’re in a bit of a debunking era these days, and it will take awhile for the tone to shift. When that happens and the smoke clears, Latour will look very good from the standpoint of philosophers.