1. What is the difference between the ready-made product-- science and
technology-- and the intermediate process in action-- technoscience?
2. Why is it critical to break the boundary dividing the "internal"
and the "external" sides of a technoscience?
3. Why is it important not to take the outcome of science and
technology to be an objective fact, truth in nature, or a product
independent of the process it is produced?
4. What does Latour mean by "machine"?
5. What does Latour mean by "translation"?
1. Latour uses a "network" model to describe the ways scientific and
technological activities work. How does a "network" function? In what
sense does he refer to the following constitutive elements of a
network: node, link, resource, and ally? How does Latour use this
metaphor to understand concrete case histories?
2. To Latour, studying histories of science and technology means to
find answers to a number of important questions. What are those
3. Why is it the case that the more scientists and engineers devote to
esoteric work apparently unrelated to the general public, the more
social their activities actually are?
4. Why cannot we use the conventional category of "knowledge" and
"opinion" to divide a technoscience from other cognitive patterns
(e.g. the belief system of an aboriginal tribe)?
5. If the Great Divide between knowledge and opinion is not a
legitimate one, then how does it come to the shape as it appears to
be? Is there a significant difference between a technoscience and
other cognitive patterns? If so, what is this difference?