Debate Thursday 5.30pm, June 27th At The University of Hong Kong Motion: "A strong distinction between humans and non-humans is no longer required for research purposes"
For the motion: Professor Bruno Latour	Against the motion: Professor Steve Fuller
Political philosophy has done its best to isolate the sphere of politics from the sphere of material realities by making sure that humans and objects are not mixed up. It just happens that every single issue in politics today - from global warming to warfare, from fish farming to embryo research - implies just that kind of mix up between humans and non-humans. What is the task of the social scientist? To keep the distinction between human and non-human so as to maintain the traditional position of political philosophy -and the definitions of morality, science, economics, etc. that this implies? Or to abandon that distinction to follow the controversies over the imbroglios of humans and non-humans as they happen in the real world, even though this might require us to rethink most of our cherished categories? I will argue for the latter position.	The principal legacy of monotheism to modernity has been the idea that 'humanity' is the name of a project designed to raise members of homo sapiens above the rest of nature. Animals adapt to the environment, whereas humans resist it. Moreover, humans resist the environment most effectively when they act collectively. These persistent forms of organized resistance - a.k.a. 'society' - have historically provided the basis not only for a sharp distinction between the human and the natural sciences, but more importantly for the ultimate subsumption of the natural under the human sciences. This promise has not been realized mainly because the wrong lessons have been drawn from the history of science, and unfortunately contemporary science studies appears to be going down the same path.
Procedure   1 Explanation of procedure of the debate by the Chair (2 mins) 2 Bruno Latour - for (10-15 mins) 3 Steve Fuller - against (10-15 mins) 4 Bruno Latour replies (5 mins) 5 Steve Fuller replies (5 mins) 6 Summary by Laurence Goldstein (2-3 mins) 7 Discussion and questions from the floor (20-30 mins) 8 Steve Fuller sums up (2-3 mins) 9 Bruno Latour sums up (2-3 mins) 10 Closing statement by the Chair