Because this is an ongoing and growing field of inquiry – I will include it here:
I conclude my little contribution to the exploration of Professor Bruno Latour’s work with a mind full of pertinent questions to ponder:
Are Latour, and those to whom he addresses his insights through the Gifford lectures, among others, really somewhat pessimistic? or is it just the scope and gravity of the topics under discussion which makes it appear so?
(Bonnitta went some way to explaining this in the last lecture concall dated 09-06-2013).
– A random musing related to this, does evolution favour optimism?
Do ‘we’ the people, called by the urgency of the times we are living in, have any hope at all of making the kinds of changes deemed necessary, at the required scale, in the apparent time frame being suggested?
Are Latour’s suggested frameworks for the nomos, demos and theos sufficient to the task for which we are heeding the call?
On a more pragmatic note:
What courses of action will likely be most effective in expediting the required shifts in decision making power structures that need to occur for the current concentrations of power, which are, according to scientific observations, corrupting the entire experience of life on earth, to be effectively redistributed?
The project of contoversy mapping [HERE] which I have become aware that Latour is engaged with aims to facilitate widespread public participation in decision making processes, how will this effect the “whole”?
“Technical democracy requires spaces and instruments to facilitate public involvement in technological and scientific issues. Such democratic equipment is yet to be assembled, even though much theoretical research has been done to envision its articulation. At the same time, digital innovations are providing an increasing number of new instruments and forums that can be used to promote public participation.”
What will it take for a planetary scale engagement of multi-disciplinary scientific and academic, as well as philosophical and pragmatic domains to be well enough co-ordinated that the planet can effectively “run itself”?
– Further to this, the planet already “runs itself”, however, there are factors in play which are influencing the way in which it does so, so how much actual resonse-ability we ‘we’ (who ever ‘we’ turn out to be) willing/able to take for the flow-on effects of such influential activities?
Assuming that this is possible, what kind of system/systemic structure would be the most “universally” desirable?
(this question of course will have myriad answers, but there must be some minimum viable requirements we can all agree upon, such as “supports life”, for instance).
I don’t pretend to know where to start answering these questions, but I am a perseverant soul, and these questions need explicitly answering as far as I am concerned. So even though this little crew has finished exploring this territory for now, I will continue to explore, inspired by the mounting pressure of compelling questions arising in me as I flow forward into “what comes next”.