"Where Is East Asia in STS?" contributes to the ongoing conversation about the distinctiveness of East Asian STS (see also, e.g., Anderson 2009; Chen 2012; Fan 2007 2012; Fu 2007; Tsukahara 2009). The authors, Wen-yuan Lin and John Law, observe that consideration of this issue has an inherently reflexive dimension, since thinking about East Asian STS as a field is entangled with how the field is able to imagine its objects of study and its own knowledge practices as well as those it studies. Specifically, they suggest that studies committed to a universalistic understanding of science will also enact a universalizing STS, while studies oriented to differences will also enact differences in their own practices. They proceed to characterize several types of approaches: diffusion, distortion, circulation, localizing, translation, and softening. The latter half, they argue, are more adequately attuned to difference.
