Polity of science

The name of the final chapter of Leviathan and the Air-Pump is “The Polity of Science: Conclusions”. My own understanding of polity has been most influenced by On Justification. I would say both of these works are part of the developing Actor-Network canon — that is, they’re both mentioned in Reassembling the Social, which I’ve taken to be pretty much the Bible of ANT. So I am a little surprised that there appears nobody has yet performed a Boltanski-style analysis of the “Scientific World”. And since this is (with certain ontological adjustments) my own world, it seems that this might be a valuable thing to do. I’m putting this on my list of things I’d like to like to do. Maybe I’ll even make myself do it, or at least do it for the social science polity. Or the UCD polity

*

My interest in On Justification is this: it is clear that at the root of authentic brand is the lifeworld family of concepts (culture, form of life, language game, polity, worldview, perspective, vision, etc.). Authenticity of brand is a function of its faith to the logic of its worldview and the traditions of its lifeworld. I’ve spent a decent amount of effort looking for frameworks that might help define/describe/locate/orient a lifeworld for the purposes of branding. I’d like to see a kind of branding that synthesizes Michael Porter’s activity system approach to strategy, actor-network theory’s approach to people research, and a Nietzschean concrete pluralist ethic/ethos. I want a genodynamic brand strategy to replace the phenodynamic superficiality of conventional brand identity.

 

Leave a Reply