médialab
a place | un lieu
The vindication of Tarde
Tarde/Durkheim 1904 debate replayed in Paris
“Now, as intimate, as harmonious as a social group may be, never
will we see spurting forth ex abrupto amidst surprised associates a
collective self, real and not simply metaphorical, a marvelous result,
of which they would be the conditions. There is probably always one
associate who represents and personifies the entire group or a
small number of associates (ministers in a state) who, each with a
particular aspect, individualize it within themselves, no less entirely.
But this chief or these chiefs are always also members of the group,
Texte
born from their father and mother and not from their subjects or
those who are collectively administered.”
Monadologie et sociologie, p. 68.
3
Panopticon or oligopticon?
The ‘flat’ society argument
« Flat » model:
« big » means
connected
individual with interaction plus
context
A new experience of navigation
7
The new experience of search
From a clickable dot
To a full C.V. or profile
The more you individualize the
more you collect an extended
network
11
Academic
Hervé C.
Academic
Dominqiue B.
Academic
Paul-André
R. .
And it is fully reversible since every
item is individualized by its network
13
The Key notion of profile
What it is —its substance— is entirely (at least
tentatively) defined by the (almost) complete list of
its attributes. Any given entity A is said to “like” B,
C, D, n., to “dislike” E, F, G, n., to have been at
places P1, P2, P3, n, to have lived through the
events E1, E2, E3, n, to provide the documents D1,
D2, D3, n and so on. Thus an entity is entirely
defined by the open-ended lists in the databases.
The relative novelty of profiles 1: an
actor is its network
C.V. de X:
Is born in city C
Has the diploma D
Has been professor in the university U
Has written the paper P
Has participated in the event E
etc.
The relative novelty of profiles 2: a
network is its actors
What is the city C? – Where is born A, B, n, X, Y, n
What is the diploma D worth? – Given to H, I, N, X,
Y, Z, n…
How good is the university U? —M, O, P, X, n have
been professors there
What is the paper P? — It has been cited by U, V,
X, n
How to define the event E? —has participated in
the event C, D, E, X , n
A new experience of navigating on
screen through datasets
The very possibility of moving from elements to
aggregates and back to different elements and
different aggregates make the two end points of
social theory (the individual and the whole) lose
their privilege
Macro
Discontinuity
Macro??
Two way navigation
Micro??
Micro
3 positions to take into account
One level Standpoint 1-LS Tarde et ANT
Two level Standpoint 2 L-S Macro to micro Micro to
macro, meso
One level Standpoint 1,5 LS STS et ANT
19
We do not claim that digitally available profiles are
so complete and so quickly accessible that they
have entirely dissolved the two levels, but that they
have already redistributed them enough to reveal
that those levels are not the only obvious and
natural way to handle the navigation through
datasets about entities taken severally.
No real difference between individualist
and holistic viewpoints
In both cases there is a dispatcher that plays the
same function – the only difference is in timing:
in individualistic models the dispatcher succeeds
the interactions;
in holistic models, it precedes them;
but both are 2-LS
The idea of a dispatcher
From simple interactions to complex emergent
structures:
a) a first level of individual of atomic individuals—;
b) a few rules of interaction as simple as possible,
c) a second level, that of aggregation, which has
generated enough new properties to deserve to be
called a “structure”
“The whole is more than the sum of its parts”.
Against the fantomatic presence of
a dispatcher...
That remains present in all 2-LS models either
before or after
23
... the notion of monad
T“What is society? From my point of
view, we could define it as reciprocal
possession, in extremely varied forms,
of all by everyone”,
Monadologie et Sociologie,
p. 85
24
The very notion of “interaction” is a consequence of
limited information on the profiles defining the
individuals. If you increase the amount of
information the notion of interaction becomes
disposable.
The alternative is the notion of monad.
A monad is not a part of a whole, but a point of
view on all the other entities taken severally and
not as a totality.
From a clickable dot
To a full C.V. or profile
1-LS does not start with substitutable
individuals but individualize an entity by
deploying its attributes. The farther the
list of items extend, the more precise
becomes the viewpoint of this individual
monad.
26
33.48 - 35.22
27
Monadological principles may apply to
all entities
Every time inquirers have succeeded, through
clever research strategy, to trace individualizing
profiles of agents —baboons, bacteria, ants,
wasps, scientific papers, social networks,
corporations, to take a few examples that have
provided striking results— the weight of the 2-LS
has diminished considerably.
A different definition of modeling
Solution 2-LS
Start from atomic agents endowed with as few
properties as possible
Let them interact with as few rules as possible
Check wheter some robust emergent order ensues
Solution 1-LS
Start from as complex profiles as possible
Let them overlap
Find a way to navigate through overlapping
29
monads
http://medialab.sciences-po.fr/publications/monads/video
30
The mystery of the corporate body
Two definitions of structure:
-what lasts in time although only virtually through
the real but passing agents (2-LS)
-what lasts in time through what passing agents
pass to other agents through inheritance
32
33
Redefining the Tardian notion of
« imitation »
Overlapping monads are defined by the repetition
of attributes that are different in each profile, hence
producing « imitative rays »
There is no difference between individuals, groups,
institutions, etc. except the spread in time and
space of attributes
‘’‘The Whole is Always Smaller Than Its Parts’
A Digital Test of Gabriel Tarde’s Monads
Bruno Latour*, Pablo Jensen¥, Tommaso Venturini*, Sébastian
Grauwin¥ and Dominique Boullier
British Journal of Sociology (in press)*
35