| dc.description.abstract | This thesis presents an ethnographic study of the repertoires, sets of social and material
practices, that scientists adopt to practice and promote the search for life in the universe,
commonly known today under the disciplinary label of astrobiology. In particular, I take
the expression “life as-we-don’t-know-it” as an entry point to look into the role of non-knowledge
as a cultural resource in the opening of new spheres of inquiry.
Throughout this thesis, I investigate the tensions and negotiations related to the
definition of life, a central issue in astrobiology, and the way scientists are successfully
shifting the boundaries of what is considered legitimate science to include the study of
extra-terrestrial lifeforms. Unlike most previous work on the definition of life, this thesis
does not formulate or support any definition and does not take a position on the question
of to which disciplinary domain “life” legitimately belongs – on the contrary, it takes
definitions and disciplines as social institutions with flexible boundaries.
To explore these issues, I engaged in a multi-sited ethnographic study that brought
me to the different locations in which astrobiologists’ activities take place, from
conference venues to astronomical observatories, laboratories and field sites (such as
underground caves and Icelandic volcanoes), following the lines of research that today
form, at their intersections, the field of astrobiology.
Life “as-we-don’t-know-it” soon emerged as a central theme in contemporary
astrobiology. A commonly used phrase for extra-terrestrial and alien life, it summarizes
and stands for the uncertainties and unknowns surrounding the definition of life and the
design of life-detection experiments. These unknowns about life are not simply a void to
be filled, but the result of a process of social construction, a collective achievement. This
empirical account complements and challenges existing literature about scientific
change and knowledge production by focusing on the construction of a collective
agreement about not-knowing and its deployment as a specific research repertoire. The
concept of repertoire is a useful thinking tool for the sociologist looking into astrobiology
and its social dynamics because it does not describe change as fundamentally caused and
shaped by theoretical developments. On the contrary, it both takes account of the
material and institutional changes that accompany, ground or undermine the emergence
of a research field and calls for consideration of the performative aspects of science.
I conclude by arguing that the agreement on what constitutes life – familiar and alien,
Earthly or otherworldly – is an ongoing negotiation between astrobiologists’ epistemic
practices and what counts as a meaningful present and future for space exploration. This
opens up a space for sociological inquiry about the particular social processes through
which the emergence of astrobiology as a discipline requires collaborations to be
established, allows for new interactions, and evokes previously unforeseen associations,
thus constantly unsettling present imaginaries about the future. | en |
