Advanced search
Add to list

The Janus head of Bachelard’s phenomenotechnique : from purification to proliferation and back

Author
Organization
Abstract
The work of Gaston Bachelard is known for two crucial concepts, that of the epistemological rupture and that of phenomenotechnique. A crucial question is, however, how these two concepts relate to one another. Are they in fact essentially connected or must they be seen as two separate elements of Bachelard's thinking? This paper aims to analyse the relation between these two Bachelardian moments and the significance of the concept of phenomenotechnique for today. This will be done by examining certain historical uses of the concepts of Bachelard have been used from the 1960s on. From this historical perspective, one gets the impression that these two concepts are relatively independent from each other. The Althusserian school has exclusively focused on the concept of 'epistemological break', while scholars from Science & Technology Studies (STS), such as Bruno Latour, seem to have only taken up the concept of phenomenotechnique. It in fact leads to two different models of how to think about science, namely the model of purification and the model of proliferation. The former starts from the idea that sciences are rational to the extent that they are purified and free from (epistemological) obstacles. Scientific objectivity, within this later model, is not achieved by eradicating all intermediaries, obstacles and distortions, but rather exactly by introducing as many relevant technical mediators as possible. Finally, such a strong distinction will be criticized and the argument will be made that both in Bachelard's and Latour's thought both concepts are combined. This leads to a janus-headed view on science, where both the element of purification (the epistemological break) and the element of proliferation (phenomenotechnique) are combined
Keywords
History and Philosophy of Science, Gaston Bachelard, Bruno Latour, Louis Althusser, Michel Serres, Isabelle Stengers, Phenomenotechnique, Epistemological break, Georges Canguilhem, HISTORICAL EPISTEMOLOGY, PHILOSOPHY, ALTHUSSER, GENEALOGY, SCIENCE

Citation

Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:

MLA
Simons, Massimiliano. “The Janus Head of Bachelard’s Phenomenotechnique : From Purification to Proliferation and Back.” EUROPEAN JOURNAL FOR PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE, vol. 3, 2018, pp. 689–707, doi:10.1007/s13194-018-0206-8.
APA
Simons, M. (2018). The Janus head of Bachelard’s phenomenotechnique : from purification to proliferation and back. EUROPEAN JOURNAL FOR PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE, 3, 689–707. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13194-018-0206-8
Chicago author-date
Simons, Massimiliano. 2018. “The Janus Head of Bachelard’s Phenomenotechnique : From Purification to Proliferation and Back.” EUROPEAN JOURNAL FOR PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE 3: 689–707. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13194-018-0206-8.
Chicago author-date (all authors)
Simons, Massimiliano. 2018. “The Janus Head of Bachelard’s Phenomenotechnique : From Purification to Proliferation and Back.” EUROPEAN JOURNAL FOR PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE 3: 689–707. doi:10.1007/s13194-018-0206-8.
Vancouver
1.
Simons M. The Janus head of Bachelard’s phenomenotechnique : from purification to proliferation and back. EUROPEAN JOURNAL FOR PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE. 2018;3:689–707.
IEEE
[1]
M. Simons, “The Janus head of Bachelard’s phenomenotechnique : from purification to proliferation and back,” EUROPEAN JOURNAL FOR PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE, vol. 3, pp. 689–707, 2018.
@article{8630880,
  abstract     = {{The work of Gaston Bachelard is known for two crucial concepts, that of the epistemological rupture and that of phenomenotechnique. A crucial question is, however, how these two concepts relate to one another. Are they in fact essentially connected or must they be seen as two separate elements of Bachelard's thinking? This paper aims to analyse the relation between these two Bachelardian moments and the significance of the concept of phenomenotechnique for today. This will be done by examining certain historical uses of the concepts of Bachelard have been used from the 1960s on. From this historical perspective, one gets the impression that these two concepts are relatively independent from each other. The Althusserian school has exclusively focused on the concept of 'epistemological break', while scholars from Science & Technology Studies (STS), such as Bruno Latour, seem to have only taken up the concept of phenomenotechnique. It in fact leads to two different models of how to think about science, namely the model of purification and the model of proliferation. The former starts from the idea that sciences are rational to the extent that they are purified and free from (epistemological) obstacles. Scientific objectivity, within this later model, is not achieved by eradicating all intermediaries, obstacles and distortions, but rather exactly by introducing as many relevant technical mediators as possible. Finally, such a strong distinction will be criticized and the argument will be made that both in Bachelard's and Latour's thought both concepts are combined. This leads to a janus-headed view on science, where both the element of purification (the epistemological break) and the element of proliferation (phenomenotechnique) are combined}},
  author       = {{Simons, Massimiliano}},
  issn         = {{1879-4912}},
  journal      = {{EUROPEAN JOURNAL FOR PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE}},
  keywords     = {{History and Philosophy of Science,Gaston Bachelard,Bruno Latour,Louis Althusser,Michel Serres,Isabelle Stengers,Phenomenotechnique,Epistemological break,Georges Canguilhem,HISTORICAL EPISTEMOLOGY,PHILOSOPHY,ALTHUSSER,GENEALOGY,SCIENCE}},
  language     = {{eng}},
  pages        = {{689--707}},
  title        = {{The Janus head of Bachelard’s phenomenotechnique : from purification to proliferation and back}},
  url          = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13194-018-0206-8}},
  volume       = {{3}},
  year         = {{2018}},
}

Altmetric
View in Altmetric
Web of Science
Times cited: