Theorised by Bruno Latour
“human and non-human actors form shifting networks of relationships that define situations and determine outcomes” (Source)
Flat ontology, everything equal in how things are connected
How is it flat if things constitute each other?
All agents are present on the same level of existence, we cannot exist without then
But are the other objects always agents? They’re only agents when we assign them meaning
Without the cake do you have any direct connection to a farm? Are objects just the intermediaries
Networks within itself, subagents
Its all about the modelling, the framing, and the labels we give to the connections in the graph
Consider the meaning of agency
Non-human agency and bots
Digital entities, environmental actors, material objects
Dependencies across concepts and power nexuses. Dependency graphs, scheduling, time dependency and ordering.
The connections/relations shift over time, time animates the object as much as we animate it and its material properties /forces acting on it do
I commonly feel controlled by networks of material objects as the dependencies seem to be transitive, its hard to route which external factors will have a profound impact on your life. But it is crucial in maintaining empathy to be cognizant of the relations between things, understanding that everything is connected can be somewhat empowering.
I don’t think agency is here clearly enough defined, the concept of flat-ontology works only where the presence of a connection is all that matters, but in reality the meanings we place upon objects is what gives them their agency, the labels on the connections are of differing qualities and often incomparable
This framework is most useful in considering ‘butterfly effects’ and in decentering human experience in the wider ecology, but I don’t think its necessarily always the correct model for considering the harm humans do to each other.
I think it might just all be semantics. Of course we are all semantically connected but functionally we often don’t have that access, either directly or transitively, to other actors in the network
It may also be useful to consider concepts and even time in this way, to give a neutral relation between past and present and future and how each affects the objects and people it connects to. Properties of something as another connection, metadata and timestamps.
“in using networks as a framework to examine our on/offline relationships with all things, we should not conflate agency with power. While I think all things could have equal agency, in practice we see that structures of inequality make it so that agency does NOT equal power. I think in many ways power is more relevant to think about than agency”
I’d consider re-framing my perception of time as more neutral, a flat connection, and considering my own agency in that relationship.
Interesting to think about agency and determinism in considering futures, alternative systems and setting equitable goals. If we can demonstrate any agency at all it can be directed towards goals that benefit the extended network and everyone in it
- they talked about this also on “Our Lost Possessions” Ear Biscuits ep Rhett and Link
- “we’re constantly attaching value to collections of atoms”
- “stone age hardware running modern day software”
- “adaptive value to adding significance to things”
- we’re going to attach a story to the robot and as soon as we do that it is important to us and can hold human value