《Epistemic Cultures》 Chapter 2 (Main text)

Chapter 2 〈What Is a Laboratory?〉

因為目前我正進行一些實驗室田野工作，所以這一章讀來格外具有啟發性。透過對於這一章的簡述，可能可以思考一個問題，以實驗室為對象的研究，對實驗室之外的其他社會有什麼意義？(當然，前一個問題是，需要有意義嗎？)

Knorr在文章一開始就說明這一章的主題，how the notion of the laboratory … has emerged historically as a set of differentiated social and technical forms, carrying systematic weight in our understanding of science。進一步，她認為「實驗室」這個概念link to the reconfiguration of both the natural and social order。(P.26)透過底下的描述可以更清楚她的想法。

她的討論分成兩個部份，第一部份，她先闡明實驗室和自然秩序與社會秩序的關係分別為何；接著第二部份，她透過三種比喻，說明三種不同的實驗室及其與實驗的關係。

許多實驗室研究都已經指出，the malleability of natural objects是自然秩序與社會秩序得以重新配置的關鍵。就自然秩序而言，Knorr指出，it should be clear that not having to confront objects from their natural orders is epistemically advantageous for the pursuit of science; laboratory practice entails the detachment of objects from their natural environment and their installation in a new phenomenal field defined by social agents。(P.27)這也就是她舉天文學的例子要說明的。[這是我感興趣的例子。]

天文學從原先調查自然現象的科學，轉變成處理這些自然現象的影像的科學，再藉由數位科技─CCD晶片的出現，影像被數位化，可以透過電腦處理，天文學因此從觀察的科學轉變成影像處理的實驗室科學。這當然牽涉許多轉變，最重要的一個，原先由自然秩序規定的行星和恆星的時間尺度(什麼時候可以觀測…等)，轉變成社會秩序規定的時間尺度(透過數位化和網路)。(P.27,28 refer to Edge&Mulkay 1976, Smith&Tatarewicz 1985)因此，laboratories allow natural processes to be “brought home” and to be made subject only to the conditions of the local social order。(P.28)

關於社會秩序，Knorr指出，雖然過去Merton等人已經研究科學的社會系統，從SSK以降的傳統也指出科學利益和社會、政治因素交纏的情況，但是他們都沒有說明，how features of the social world, and more generally of everyday life, are played upon and turned into epistemic devices in the production of knowledge。也就是說生活世界的特徵如何被重新配置而成為知識生產的儀器。Knorr以科學家為例提出她的看法，她認為不僅僅「物」被重新配置到實驗室的環境中(brought home)，laboratories also install reconfigured scientists who become workable (feasible) in relation to those objects。[P.29 Merleau-Ponty ”self-other-things” 不懂！]

接下來她舉了Jewson談醫學史發展的著作，並以醫生為例[略]。(P.29-31)比較有趣的是，醫生在醫學發展的過程中，從單一一個人變成一個集體(collective)，在醫院中以集體的姿態面對病人。(P.31)

在這個部份最後，Knorr總結，we are confronted with a newly emerging order that is neither social nor natural─an order whose components have mixed genealogies and continue to change shapes as laboratory work continues。(P.32)

這一章的第二部份，Knorr主要想指出分子生物學和高能物理關於實驗(experient)和實驗室(laboratory)的具體差異。她指出實驗和實驗室的三種關係：a technology of correspondence, a technology of treatments and interventions, a technology of representation。(P.33)

technology of correspondence	technology of treatments and interventions	technology of representation
objects are real-world phenomena	objects are processed partial versions of these phenomena	objects are signatures of the events of interest to science
War game, computer simulation (Hut&Sussman 1987)	The medieval cathedral builders	Psychoanalysis
stage the action / carefully design experimental reality and thoroughly separate objects and researchers’s action, interests, … (ex. double-blind)	Subject specimens to procedural manipulations / natural objects are treated as processing materials and as transitory object-states corresponding to a temporary pause in a series of transformations & ingredients for processing programs. / experiments have little unity, dissolve into experimental work	Attach signs to underlying causal events. / order of signs / experiments start with processes focusing upon signs /
non-intervention	Intervention
The laboratory is a storage room for stage props / co-extensive with experiments (? P.35)	Laboratories are objects of work and attention over and above experiments / scientists are not only researchers but also caretakers of the laboratory / laboratory belong to head. / collective unit(? P.38-39)	Laboratories are technically, organizationally, and socially divorced from the conduct of the experiment. / researchers--experimenters
Social science	Molecular biology	High energy physics