Ontology Philosophy

Recent developments in Science and Technology Studies (STS) have spawned important new concepts and directions.
The post essentialist agenda has been supplemented by ideas about ambivalence (eg Singleton, Law) - which stresses the contention that the impact, use and interpretation of entities is never certain nor fixed; multiplicity (eg Mol, de Laet and Mol, Quattrone and Hopper, Thompson) - that objects and claims simultaneously exist in many different guises; and deferral (eg Rappert, Lee and Brown) - that the impact, use and interpretation of entities is delayed and/or dispersed through organisational networks, often with the effect of dissipating accountability.
These moves underpin what can be called the turn to relational ontology ie the argument that the essence and existence of entities are best understood as the temporary upshot of interconnecting relations. While this argument applies to "technical things and objects", it also more generally implicates the ontological status of a whole range of "nature" and "natural things". The aim of the meeting is to take stock of these developments and assess what the ontological turn in STS amounts to. Why has the idea of ontology risen to prominence in STS?
What are the key differences between ontology and relational ontology? Is relational ontology anything new? What, if anything, might not be the upshot of relational ontology? In line with the predilection of STS for deflating grandiose theoretical concepts through close empirical study, how is ontology best brought down to earth?
What is involved in examining how ontologies are done in practice?

Sources

Source (www.sbs.ox.ac.uk/events/ontology)

http://stsontology.wordpress.com/

http://209.85.229.132/search?q=cache:MPEyFqwDLjwJ:www.sbs.ox.ac.uk/NR/rdonlyres/9B397CCA-D926-463B-8372-08AF1D0F658D/5133/Provocation.pdf+STS+vs+ontology&cd=3&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk&client=firefox-a

http://stsmixtures.wordpress.com/tag/ontology/

Compiler, 2009, March

obromley@hotmail.com