Modes of Syncretism

Common Knowledge 20 (1):172-192 (2014)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In this contribution to the Common Knowledge symposium “Fuzzy Studies,” the authors, all of whom work in the field of science, technology, and society, begin from the assumption that, as Bruno Latour has put it, “we have never been modern.” They accept the STS thesis that, while modern practices purport to be entirely rational and coherent, on closer inspection they turn out to be as much noncoherent as coherent. This article poses the question of what forms “noncoherences” take and how they are managed. The basic argument is that there is a range of styles of noncoherence or “modes of syncretism.” In small case studies, the authors identify six such modes or styles, which they term denial, domestication, separation, care, conflict, and collapse. Given that consistency and coherence seem less important now than they were once taken to be — and given that the conditions of possibility for purity are, in any case, in decline — this list and its supporting case studies, while not meant to be definitive, are offered as a way of understanding how practices that do not cohere may still function and fit together admirably.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 93,745

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2013-12-12

Downloads
34 (#123,329)

6 months
6 (#1,472,471)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

John Law
University of Guelph

References found in this work

Abstract.[author unknown] - 2011 - Dialogue and Universalism 21 (4):447-449.
Abstract.[author unknown] - 1998 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 29 (2):299-303.
Abstract.[author unknown] - 1998 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 29 (2):319-325.

Add more references