This paper sets out a new interpretation of the agency of scientific instruments in the field. It uses Actor Network Theory as a conceptual framework, which invokes the concept of non-human agency, meaning that scientific instruments can affect outcomes and processes. It argues that the instruments taken on expeditions by travellers on behalf of the Royal Geographical Society (RGS) had agency in knowledge creation simply by being present. Having bequeathed the instruments, the RGS had sanctioned the expedition, and knowledge had to result regardless of whether the instruments had been utilized as intended. The paper builds on the work of historians on the morality of precision, but, by engaging in a detailed comparison of rhetoric and action in two case studies, it suggests a different approach. Observing the strategies of the RGS for knowledge creation in varying circumstances, it argues that the instruments had agency owing to their embedded resource rather than their tangible numerical outputs. The instruments did not always work as mediators between humans and natural phenomena, as the human actants were not able to exploit them as such. Nevertheless, they had agency in knowledge creation as their presence ensured success. The paper is based on published and unpublished material, the latter in the RGS–Institute of British Geographers archives.

本文对该领域的科学仪器机构进行了新的解释。它使用演员网络理论作为概念框架，它调用了非人类代理的概念，这意味着科学仪器可以影响结果和过程。它认为，代表皇家地理学会 (RGS) 的旅行者在探险中携带的仪器仅通过在场就可以在知识创造中发挥作用。遗赠仪器后，RGS 批准了这次探险，无论仪器是否按预期使用，知识都必须产生。该论文以历史学家关于精确道德的工作为基础，但通过对两个案例研究中的言辞和行动进行详细比较，它提出了一种不同的方法。观察 RGS 在不同情况下的知识创造策略，它认为这些工具具有代理性是因为它们的嵌入资源而不是它们的有形数字输出。这些仪器并不总是作为人类与自然现象之间的中介发挥作用，因为人类行为者无法这样利用它们。尽管如此，他们在知识创造方面具有代理权，因为他们的存在确保了成功。该论文基于已发表和未发表的材料，后者在 RGS-英国地理学家协会档案中。因为人类行为者无法像这样利用它们。尽管如此，他们在知识创造方面具有代理权，因为他们的存在确保了成功。该论文基于已发表和未发表的材料，后者在 RGS-英国地理学家协会档案中。因为人类行为者无法像这样利用它们。尽管如此，他们在知识创造方面具有代理权，因为他们的存在确保了成功。该论文基于已发表和未发表的材料，后者在 RGS-英国地理学家协会档案中。