傳說周文王有四個乳頭，以他的奶哺育天下。如今中國是世界第三大乳製品產國，也將奶行銷世界。不但中國寶寶仰賴中國產的奶粉，中國的乳製品也成為世界食品鏈的一環。不幸最近中國生產的乳製品因含三聚氰胺(melamine)，影響人體健康，而被世界衛生組織(WHO)稱為本世紀最嚴重的食品安全危機。受影響的國家，不但將中國乳製品下架，而且紛紛禁止中國乳製品進口。

本期STM以「科技與展示」為主題來紀念逝世週年的玉豐，瑞麟主編要我為玉豐寫篇紀念文。回想玉豐，看著電腦桌面上玉豐的照片，心頭卻是萬般思緒而久久無法下筆。

已經記不得當年怎麼跟玉豐認識了，是STS？產業遺址保存？產業文化資產清查？檔案管理？庫房建置？只記得當年因為一些機緣而與科工館互動的過程中，逐漸感覺到科工館中有個人的學術品味與我甚近，但其工作上的積極態度、熱情、及自我要求，卻又讓我自嘆弗如，他就是王玉豐。

展示活動是場吸引視覺的角力，展覽因此不是民主的事業。透過策展人總其事，其所欲成就的就是吸引觀眾的目光，從而傳達其所欲灌輸給觀眾的理念。這是一種Bourdieu所謂象徵暴力(symbolic violence)的行使，或是Latour所謂的銘刻操作(inscribing practices)。也因此，科學展示常出現林崇熙所談到的現象：「包裹」或「黑箱化」(black boxing)科技，以合法化科學家的努力及其在社會中的角色。「黑箱化」意謂展示旨在傳達科技的雄偉，而對於科技實踐運作的過程、其中各個角色的協商和對於物品的操弄，都略而不談。呂紹理也在文章中談到，日治時期的展示成為台灣殖民總督府權力操作的一環。在博覽會中，透過用模型，省略製程，使得展品或成為推銷總督府的治績；或淪為日本會社的廣告。

Scientific exhibitions usually aim at presenting the achievements of great scientists, with an assumption of 「exposing the truths of the nature.」. Following the current scientific paradigm, they deliver the so-call standard and accurate knowledge to their audience. By playing the sleigh of hands of 『multi-level imaginations,』 『heterogeneous de-contextualization, and 『mythological archetypes,』 scientific exhibitions in science museums employ the techniques of 「paradigm display,」 「interpretation display,」 and 「power display」 to erase the socio-political aspects of scientific activities, in order to present a pure, clean, and perfect image of science. Through this process of black-boxing, science become a new myth in the name of de-mythologizing nature.

科學展示的目的通常在於展示科學家的成就，遵從著科學典範來傳達單一、標準、「正確」科學知識，並呈現出一種「揭露了大自然真理」的姿態。科學博物館中的展示透過「多層次想像」、「異質綜合性地去脈絡化」、及種種「神話原型」概念，落實於「典範式展示」、「詮釋式展示」、及「權力式展示」等樣態，除掉科學發展中種種人為、利益、政治、文化等因素，才能呈現出科學單純、簡潔、完美的風貌。正是這般的黑箱化（black-boxing），才使科學知識以破除神話之名，形塑自身為新的神話。揭露博物館科學展示的「神話化」歷程，是希望科學博物館能脫離單一性、霸權式的展示方式，從而開展出具前瞻性、「社會良知」和多元辯證意涵的科學展示。

本文討論1910年代台灣「衛生展覽會」的初期發展，釐清殖民地衛生展覽會為何以及如何出現；探討殖民地的衛生展覽會如何透過「視覺化」的方式，促成衛生科技知識的生產及流通。本文主要的發現有三：其一，殖民地衛生展覽會深受當時日本及國際的同類展覽會和日本博物館通俗教育的影響。展覽會以啟蒙近代衛生知識與觀念為目標，是殖民當局對屬民施行身體衛生的規訓，以改善殖民地的公共衛生。其二，殖民當局對於衛生展品的陳列、即衛生「視覺化」的處理，幾經轉折。從早先以機構或單位為中心的展示，轉向加入衛生知識分類的概念；最後，於1917年台中廳教育衛生展覽會，運用「分類式陳列法」，確立以觀覽者為中心的展場規劃，建立衛生展品的邏輯及系統關係，提供觀覽者係統性的衛生認知。

This paper studies the early development of hygiene exhibitions in colonial Taiwan. It focuses on ho exhibitions promoted the production and circulation of knowledge about sanitation, and how the colonial hygiene policy was imposed on viewers through a specific visualizing technique. The author concludes that the hygiene exhibitions of the 1910s were influenced by both European and Japanese examples, particularly the First International Hygiene Exhibition, held in Dresden in 1911. Moreover, the Japanese concept of 「popular education,」 which involved training viewers via their eyes, clearly had a profound impact. The author traces the evolution of the colonial government's 「visualizing technique.」 Early displays followed what one might call institutional logic. But this yielded a certain redundancy, so the colonial government took to framing exhibitions by classifying hygienic knowledge.

本文利用拉圖(Bruno Latour)討論實驗室與實體社會關係所提出的「轉譯」(translation)概念，觀察1935年始政四十週年記念博覽會會場中有關科學及工業的展示手法。實驗室裡將物質重新分解、衡量、重新配置及縮放尺度的方法，在博覽展示活動中亦可得見。在始政四十週年博覽會場中，我們可以看到主辦者將十數萬件的展品分門別類，放置在其所規劃的部品館舍中，並加以評比，此即物質重解、重置與衡量之功；策展者利用各種各樣動態或靜態的模型以演示科學的內容及工業製程或產品，模型的塑造即是一種真實物質在尺度上轉譯的結果。

This paper applies Bruno Latour's concept of translation to the grand exhibition held in colonial Taiwan in 1935.The author draws a series of analogies between the uses and arrangements of models in the exhibition and Latourian models of laboratory practices withinwhich objects are dissolved, modified, rescaled, and staged. Once in theexhibition, the views were as if surrounded by miniatures. The purpose oftranslation was to interest viewers in the message encoded in the exhibition bythe colonial government. While the Japanese authorities achieved a partialsuccess, limits on space and resources rendered the translation incomplete.Moreover, though the semiotics of the translation permitted some viewers tograsp the delivered message, viewers from different backgrounds would have haddifferent understandings of the "inscription." A close study of this attempt attranslation and of its limited success shows that the exhibition was a field ofstruggle for seeing and believing.

再生能源的擁護者，大力鼓吹再生能源的理由，主要有三點：第一、技術面向－再生能源取之不盡、用之不竭；第二、環保面向－再生能源是一種綠色科技，不會破壞美麗的大自然；第三、社會面向－再生能源具有「在地科技」的特性，能夠幫助大家擺脫對高科技的依賴，成為真正獨立自主的自由人。風力發電不但是最具潛力的再生能源技術，更具體展現出上述三項美德，因而成為能源官員、環保人士及社區工作者的最愛。根據筆者的研究，雖然風力發電在技術面向及環保面向的優點，已獲得眾人肯定，但其社會面向的潛能卻長期遭人忽視。不但如此，風力產業近來的發展趨勢，與分散式發電的理念漸行漸遠。風力產業呈現出的雙重面貌，筆者稱之為「技術的二元性」。在本文中，首先筆者會解釋何謂「技術的二元性」。

Renewable energy has been promoted for its inexhaustibility and environmental friendliness. It can also deliver us from the bondage of high-tech equipments. Amongst different forms of renewable energy, wind power is one of the rising stars. As it has the potential to fulfill the three promises listed above, energy officials and environmentalists have been calling for its wide application. The present study shows that, although the inexhaustibility and environmental merits of wind power have long been recognized, the promise of independence from technological control has all too often been neglected. In addition, the recent trend of wind power industry drifts away from the idea of distributed generation of energy. The phenomenon of 'technological duality' in the wind power industry will be discussed. The ways in which the difference in 'scale' leads to 'technological duality' will also be explained.

國際知名科學哲學家哈金(Ian Hacking)於2007年11月應台灣大學哲學系苑舉正教授之邀，到台灣進行為期十九天的學術訪問。在訪台期間，哈金教授作了四場系列演講，題目分別是〈論科學理性的歷史根源〉、〈數學對象來自何處？〉、〈思考與實作的實驗室風格〉、〈實在論與反實在論〉。前二場在台灣大學哲學系舉辦的「第四屆經驗與真理」研討會中發表，第三場在本刊舉辦的工作坊發表，第四場在東吳大學哲學系發表。事後哈金教授修訂講稿，彙整成專書《科學理性》，由台灣大學出版社同時出版英文原本和中文譯本。

Ian Hacking, the distinguished Canadian philosopher of science, visited Taiwan in November 2007 and stayed for 19 days, at the invitation of Professor Yuann Jeu-Jenq at National Taiwan University. During his visit, Professor Hacking delivered a series of four lectures: "On the Historical Roots of Scientific Reason", "Where do Mathematical Objects come from?", "The Laboratory Style of Thinking and Doing", and "Realism and Anti-realism". The first two were keynote speeches given at the Fourth International Conference on Experiences and Truth, which was held at Department of Philosophy in NTU. The third lecture was delivered at the Hacking Workshop organized by STM, and the last one was addressed to Department of Philosophy at Soochow University.

In Canadian Journal of Sociology 2004, Steve Fuller had reviewed Hacking's Historical Ontology (2002), and he wrote: 「Hacking is unique as a synthesist of the best of recent Anglo-American and French thought, which is probably the most natural role for a Canadian to occupy in the global intellectual conversation.」 Surely I agree that Professor Hacking is a great synthesist and more, but I don't understand why it would take a canadian to achieve that. For me, Hacking is a unique philosopher originated from the world of analytic philosophy and mathematics, who can excel both in analytic philosophy and French thought in the age of Cold War, and he is also someone who can serve as a much needed bridge between historistic philosophy of science and social constuctivistism in the age of Science War.

It is my pleasure and also pressure, to present my short and premature review of Professor Hacking's book Rewriting the Soul: Multiple Personality and the Science of Memory. (Hacking, 1995). As a long-term admirer of Professor Hacking, I found it difficult for me to jump out of Professor Hacking's frame to analyze the issues regarding memory, history, and truth as presented in his book. In my angst to find out a good enough question to address in reviewing the book, I encountered a 40-year-old patient Lin, who was brought to me by her family. The patient insisted that the woman M, who lived with her for thirty more years and claimed to be her mother, was actually not her mother. The other family members said the patient was absolutely deluded. The patient said the truth came to her all of a sudden with strong emotions during her cult meditation. To her, it was like all pieces of puzzle finally were put together in her mind.

It is always difficult to review something which is broad in concept and rich in contents. Historical Ontology is certainly one of these. Therefore, what I am going to do in this review is both selective and deductive. I first select what according to me the most essential parts of the book, then deduce some ideas which appear to be in sequence to the parts I select. They of course do not form a systematic structure, but a very limited reflection on a book which is characterized by a collection of papers manifesting nonetheless an essential part of Hacking's philosophy.

1. Hacking's entity realism

I. Introduction

The main concern of our paper is this: Will the account of science fostered by Professor Hacking's recent explanatory model of the development of various 「styles of scientific thinking」 (SSTs) be acceptable to social constructivists and scientific realists (the two extremes in the debate of science)? Or, will the account be preferred by only one side? More specifically, will the account of science fostered by Hacking's new approach be more like an internal explanation of the development of science, an external explanation, or a hybrid explanation?

By 「external」 explanation,」 we mean the explanation uses social, psychological, and other non-evidential factors to explain the stable development of science. An 「internal」 explanation, however, applies evidence-based factors. Social constructivists prefer the former explanation; scientific realists favor the latter one.

相較於台灣社會學其他次領域，對醫療社會學有興趣的學生應該是最幸福了。近十年來出版的針對台灣社會醫療議題、自成一格、各有所長的中文教科書已有三本,分別是張苙雲的《醫療與社會：醫療社會學的探索》（台北：巨流，1998），劉仲冬的《女性醫療社會學》（台北：女書文化，1998）和胡幼慧的《新醫療社會學：批判與另類的視角》（台北：心理出版社，2001）。再加上2008年甫出版的這本由成令方主編、傅大為與林宜平協編的讀本《醫療與社會共舞》（以下以《共舞》簡稱），我覺得我們所閱讀的並不只是一本中文教科書或讀本，而是一個社群裡的學者辛勤地鑽研文獻資料、勤跑田野訪談與民族誌觀察、用自己的身心智勞動來豐富本土研究的成果。

2008年五月中旬，台大智慧家庭科技創新與整合中心舉辦了一場「工程創新、再生能源與台灣的適當科技」工作坊中，呈現了台灣一些STS學者們這幾年與科學家或工程研究者合作的初步成果，試圖透過案例報告和圓桌對話，激盪出了不同研究社群之間的火花。更有趣的是，這場工作坊也呈現了ST研究者、科學家、工程師、設計師等自身投入適當科技的經驗。因此這場討論，不只是學術思潮的交流，更難得的是呈現了實踐歷程的反思。

《科技、醫療與社會》第六期出刊至今，台灣STS學界有許多的發展與活動。其中最值得記錄者，便是籌備許久的「台灣科技與社會研究學會」終於在2008年6月10日於台灣大學社會系召開成立大會。雖然STS領域在台灣已有相當的發展，但正式學會的成立仍具有指標性的意義。此外，STM期刊編委會與STS學會理監事分別開會討論後，STM期刊與STS學會之間的關係也已確立。持續由國立科學工藝博物館發行的STM期刊，之後成為STS學會的機關刊物，然而STM的編輯事務仍獨立運作。冀望這層合作關係的建立，期刊與學會兩者皆能更加茁壯。

由於編輯與排版過程發生錯誤，導致本期重印，本人謹代表編輯室向作者與讀者致上最深歉意。學術期刊為一知識生產工具，在生產過程中，人與物的互動已經構成一個非常複雜的系統。本刊使用幾乎全網路的作業方式，在期刊的編輯、排版、校對、轉檔程序中，為了解決每一環節產生的課題，往往導致難以預料的新問題。這次經驗使得本刊編輯室深深體會到期刊生產這個「科技與社會小系統」的風險問題，也使得這次重印事件十分貼切地呼應了本期的專輯。

第六期的《科技、醫療與社會》以「風險與治理」為專號，是由本刊編委周桂田教授策劃的「科技與風險」專輯延伸出的新專輯。邱大昕，吳建昌與江玉林三位分別從不同主題討論兩者間的辯證關係。

政治始終是STM 期刊關懷的課題。政治性、治理性和權力等都是STS 重要的分析概念。雖然STS 強調的重心著落在「微觀的」知識、技術、體制、物質的政治與權力，較無涉於一般人理解的現實選舉政治，但是，兩者殊途同歸、密切相關。STS 對於「微觀政治」的理念，只有體現在科技政策上，並透過選舉政治來落實，才能產生實踐的效果。STM 期刊在謹守學術分際之餘，也不能不面對切身的現實政治。因此，一方面本期專輯內容展示了典型的政治性STS 研究，另方面政策評論將針對當前台灣的選舉政治發言—執筆人將根據自己的科哲與STS 的學養，挖掘此次總統大選的各種重要意義。

Article 23 of the January 24, 1990 amendment to Taiwan's Disabled Person Welfare Law specifies that newly-constructed public facilities, structures, community centers and transportation tools shall install devices and facilities convenient for the movement and usage of the disabled, and that, in the case of non-compliance, construction permits shall not be issued. In the 10 years following this amendment, billions of NT dollars have been spent in installing these devices and facilities for the disabled. Unfortunately, this public investment appears largely to have been in vain. Most of the new facilities and construction work have not helped the disabled to move about freely; rather, the result has been, for instance, new barriers on sidewalks. How did the implementation of "barrierfree" policy go so wrong? To answer this question, this paper applies actor network theory (ANT) to analyze the process of constructing barrier-free environments.

1990 年1 月24 日「殘障福利法」修正公佈實施，該法23 條規定各項新建公共設施、建築物、活動場所及交通工具，應設置便於身心障礙者使用之設備與設施；未符合規定者，不得核發建築執照。此後十餘年間，各級政府投入數十億新台幣興建這些供身心障礙者使用的設備設施。不幸地，這些公共投資最後不僅未能保障身心障礙者的行動自主，反而成為阻礙行動的「殘障設施」。為什麼無障礙環境政策實施的結果會是如此？為了回答這個問題，本文採用行動者網絡理論(actor-network theory) 的觀點，來分析無障礙環境的建構過程。