“random” quotation#2

7 Comments

determining who is the writer of the following should be a little more difficult than for the previous excerpt… obviously the ‘random’ is in the finding, not the posting. i’d kept this quotation on file since i read the book at the end of last century.
for those who enjoy playing, the book from which it is taken was published in 1997. recognise the writer?

The odd balancing act of belief and knowledge that is diagnostic of fetishism, along with the related cascade of mimetic copying practices that accompany fascination with images, is evident in many of the biotechnological artifacts that pepper [this book] — including textbooks, advertisements, editorials, research reports, conference titles, and more. Belief in the self-sufficiency of genes as ‘master molecules’, or as the material basis of life itself, or as the code of codes, not only persists but dominates in libidinal, instrumental-experimental, explanatory, literary, economic, and political behaviour in the face of the knowledge that genes are never alone, are always part of an interactional system. That system at a minimum includes the proteinaceous architecture and enzymes of the cell as the unit of structure and function, and in fact also includes the whole apparatus of knowledge production that concretizes (objectifies) interactions in the historically specific forms of ‘genes’ and ‘genomes’. There is no such thing as disarticulated information – in organisms, computers, phone lines, equations or anywhere else. As the biologist Richard Lewontin put it, ‘First, DNA is not self-reproducing, second, it makes nothing, and third, organisms are not determined by it” (1992:33). This knowledge is entirely orthodox in biology, a fact that makes ‘selfish gene’ or ‘master molecule’ discourse symptomatic of something amiss at a level that might as well be called ‘unconscious.’

7 Comments (+add yours?)

  1. ThE CLOwN
    Sep 13, 2010 @ 10:01:13

    Picturing Science, Producing Art
    Peter Galison, Caroline A. Jones (eds)

    Of the following contributors I’d guess Bruno Latour

    Svetlana Alpers, Jonathan Crary, Arnold Davidson, Carlo Ginzburg, Donna Haraway, Bruno Latour, and Simon Schaffer

    • eldon
      Sep 14, 2010 @ 11:03:22

      well the scattergun approach does have its merits and its acolytes … yes, you nabbed it, but not bruno latour….

      • ThE CLOwN
        Sep 14, 2010 @ 13:01:06

        Simon Schaffer?

        • eldon
          Sep 14, 2010 @ 22:23:29

          modest witness at second millenium female man meets onco-mouse.

          actually, it’s one of my favourite books… or, i certainly enjoyed it last century.

          • ThE CLOwN
            Sep 15, 2010 @ 08:54:26

            I guess this is the same Simon Schaffer who features in BBC documentaries on the history and philosophy of science?

            • eldon
              Sep 17, 2010 @ 12:54:02

              ah ah – you misunderstand me… ‘modest witness’ is the name of the book written by donna haraway. so, here we have… is it a proliferation of assumed meanings or a contraction of elaborated meanings?…the lack of extra explanatory material on my part indicating an assumed affiliation in terms of shared experience of the same reading matter?
              or, would someone argue that it is more a matter of an assumption of equal and reciprocated authority as to ability to divine writer individuation on the basis of their style…but no, that doesn’t work, because i am not claiming the ability to divine the individual writer on the basis of the style or content of one unseen paragraph – i already know who the writer is, so perhaps this is just a role difference, a la the typical teacher stance – in which case, it would be status inequality… no, again, i do not buy it in this case.
              as to value system aka axiology, no mention has been made of that. does that mean i am also assuming that wrt this snippet of pomo criticism of social systems, we are in alignment?

              • eldon
                Sep 19, 2010 @ 14:24:00

                did i hear some-one mention ‘context’ recently? in the context of a request of sorts?
                [cue next post]

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Get Adobe Flash player