Sociology after humanism: A lesson from contemporary science studies

The field of science studies is the site of an explicit reflection on the o ntological premises of sociology, with rival approaches defined by distinct ive ways of specifying the basic constituents of reality. This article take s advantage of this debate to compare three types of ontological schemes in terms of their internal coherence and their consequences for sociology. So ciological in terms of their internal coherence and their consequences for sociology. Sociological humanism-represented by proponents of the sociology of scientific knowledge (SSK)-distinguishes between an immanent domain of social relations, a transcendent and meaningless material reality, and an i ntermediate, socially constructed level of knowledge, meaning and culture. Symmetrical humanism-as found in the recent writings of Andrew Pickering-in sists that society too should be placed among the constructions, thereby di squalifying it as a source of explanations of human agency and leaving a de tached and self-moving human agent. The relational ontology-exemplified by the "actor-network" approach of Bruno Latour adn others-make no a priori di stinctions between humans and others, or between trandscendent reality and construction, treating these properties as outcomes. The two humanist appro aches are found to be incoherent as ontological schemes and also, contrary to the antisociological stance of the actor-network approach, it is found t hat the relational ontology provides a consistent basis for sociological ex planations of human practices.