Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Science, Religion, and the Human Experience$
Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content.

James D. Proctor

Print publication date: 2005

Print ISBN-13: 9780195175325

Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: February 2006

DOI: 10.1093/0195175328.001.0001

Show Summary Details
Page of

PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2018. All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use (for details see www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy).date: 22 September 2018

“Thou Shall Not Freeze-Frame,” or, How Not to Misunderstand the Science and Religion Debate

“Thou Shall Not Freeze-Frame,” or, How Not to Misunderstand the Science and Religion Debate

Chapter:
(p.27) 2 “Thou Shall Not Freeze-Frame,” or, How Not to Misunderstand the Science and Religion Debate
Source:
Science, Religion, and the Human Experience
Author(s):

Bruno Latour

Publisher:
Oxford University Press
DOI:10.1093/0195175328.003.0003

This essay aims to subvert typical assumptions about science and religion as a necessary preface to rethinking their relationship. Latour likens religion to love as a performative (vs. merely referential) manner of speech that brings immediacy, not the distant God as is generally assumed. He similarly flips science on the head of general assumptions, arguing that it is concerned not with the immediate stuff of life, but with largely invisible worlds (the supposed domain of religion). He then addresses representation in science and religion, suggesting how science is not the simplistic matter of corresponding words to world, but an unending process of cascading chains of transformation by which matter becomes form. Latour also critiques the traditional notion of religious images as pointing toward the invisible and not being sacred in themselves. Rather, he argues that religious images work to distort and confuse general notions of direct apprehension of the distant and invisible, thus placing re-emphasis on the immediate, a (literal) re-presentation. In both cases, Latour argues for a dynamic notion of truth, cautioning against “freeze-framing” truth as a static world of scientific reference or a static incarnation of the sacred in historical time.

Keywords:   freeze-framing, immediacy, religion, representation, science, truth

Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.

Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.

If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs , and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us .