Objections to ANT

The idea for this page is to develop into a resource on critiques of actor-network theory. Please submit any suggestions using the comments feature below (I won’t publish the comments, I’ll just record the reference). Thanks.


Kochan, J. (2010). “Latour’s Heidegger.” Social Studies of Science: 0306312709360263.


Turnbull, N. and N. Antalffy (2009). “Bourdieu’s Distinction between Philosophical and Sociological Approaches to Science Studies.” Sociological Review 57(4): 547-566.


Ingold, T. (2008). When ANT Meets SPIDER: Social Theory for Arthropods. Material Agency. C. Knappett and L. Malafouris (Eds.). Springer US: 209-215.

Mirowski, P. and E. Nik-Khah (2008). “Command Performance: Exploring What STS Thinks It Takes to Build a Market.” Living in a Material World: Economic Sociology Meets Science and Technology Studies. T. J. Pinch and R. Swedberg. Cambridge, Mass.; London, MIT: 89-128.

Riis, S. (2008). “The Symmetry between Bruno Latour and Martin Heidegger: The Technique of Turning a Police Officer into a Speed Bump.” Social Studies of Science 38(2): 285-301.

Whittle, A. and A. Spicer (2008). “Is Actor Network Theory Critique?Organization Studies 29(4): 611-629.


Fuller, S. (2007). New Frontiers in Science and Technology Studies. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Mirowski, P. and E. Nik-Khah (2007). “Markets Made Flesh: Performativity, and a Problem in Science Studies, Augmented with Consideration of the FCC Auctions.” Do Economists Make Markets? On the Performativity of Economics. D. MacKenzie, F. Muniesa and L. Siu. Princeton, New Jersey, Princeton University Press: 190-224.


Fuller, S. (2006). The Philosophy of Science and Technology Studies. New York, Routledge.

Kaptelinin, V., & Nardi, B. (2006). Acting with Technology: Activity Theory and Interaction Design. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Kochan, J. (2006). “Rescuing the Gorgias from Latour.” Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 36 (4): 395-422.


Ihde, D. (2002). “Failure of the Nonhumans: A Science Studies Tale.” Bodies in Technology. Minneapolis, University of Minnesota Press: 88-100.

Ihde, D. (2002). “You Can’t Have It Both Ways: Situated or Symmetrical.” Bodies in Technology. Minneapolis, University of Minnesota Press: 67-87.

Kusch, M. (2002). “Metaphysical Deja Vu: Hacking and Latour on Science Studies and Metaphysics.” Studies In History and Philosophy of Science, Part A, 33 (3): 639-647.

Vandenberghe, F. (2002). “Reconstructing Humants: A Humanist Critique of Actant-Network Theory.” Theory, Culture & Society 19(5): 51-67.


Fuller, S. (2000). “Why Science Studies Has Never Been Critical of Science: Some Recent Lessons on How to Be a Helpful Nuisance and a Harmless Radical.” Philosophy of the Social Sciences 30(1): 5-32.


Bloor, D. (1999). “Anti-Latour.” Studies In History and Philosophy of Science Part A 30(1): 81-112.

Bloor, D. (1999). “Discussion: Reply to Bruno Latour.” Studies In History and Philosophy of Science Part A 30(1): 131-136.


Pels, D. (1996). “The Politics of Symmetry.” Social Studies of Science, 26 (2): 277-304.


Winner, L. (1993). “Upon Opening the Black Box and Finding It Empty: Social Constructivism and the Philosophy of Technology.” Science, Technology, & Human Values, 18 (3): 362-378.


Collins, H. M. and S. Yearley (1992). “Epistemological Chicken.” Science as Practice and Culture. A. Pickering. Chicago, University of Chicago Press: 301-326.

Collins, H. M., & Yearley, S. (1992). Journey Into Space. In A. Pickering (Ed.), Science as Practice and Culture (pp. 369-389). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

%d bloggers like this: