{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02216624685138539, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 4.7398843930635834, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The Politics of Explanation and Strategy of Description of Bruno Latour: How to Write Infra-reflexive Texts

The article is an attempt to interpret Bruno Latour’s Actor-Network Theory (ANT) as a recording device or, in other words, as a way of translating the world into a textual form. In directly posing the question of what ANT is and what it means to be an actor-network theorist, the author shows that this, first of all, means writing specific texts. If we accept such a version of what ANT is, then the question is how Latour proposes to write texts. His strategy of description is based on a certain politics of explanation. Like any other politics, the politics of explanation is based on certain principles or credo; in this case, these principles are related to the influence of the semiotics, ethnomethodology, and results of what Latour called the anthropology of the modern. This text, on the one hand, analyzes how Latour selectively borrows elements of semiotics and ethnomethodology in developing his policy of explanation. On the other hand, the author shows how this politics of explanation is implemented in practice in a specific description strategy. The author concludes that Latour’s politics of explanation and the subsequent description strategy presupposes an average path between two extremes. The first extreme is the output to the meta level, and the second is the use of only the explanations of the actors themselves. This middle path consists of the development of certain principles of description that would not lead either to the replacement of the language of actors by the language of a sociologist, or to a simple repetition of the language of actors. The ANT infra-language does not say anything meaningful about the world, but, in a certain way, organizes a description of the world as it is as an empty template which must be re-applied each time. It is for this reason that it is possible for historical, ethnographic, and mixed ANT-research.