For anyone interested in the growing dialogue between Whiteheadian process philosophy and post-Continental metaphysical realism — a dialogue that, in my view, is at the philosophical cutting edge for ecological thinking — the Claremont conference seems as good as it gets, perhaps even a turning point. The dialogue between hard-core Whiteheadians like Roland Faber and Judith Jones (whose Intensity: An Essay in Whiteheadian Ontology I highly recommend) with Whitehead-inspired cultural/science theorists (Donna Haraway, Isabelle Stengers, Steven Shaviro) and Speculative Realists (Harman, Bryant, Bogost, et al.) is the philosophical equivalent of a rare planetary configuration.
Unfortunately, with a partner going into labor in a matter of weeks, I couldn’t travel this month, so I’m very grateful to Graham Harman for sharing such detailed notes on it: they are all collected on his live-blog from Claremont. A few of these Whitehead conferences have resulted in books, and I hope this one produces something as well. But with all the blogging going on in and around it — thanks largely to the Speculative Realists — books may even to too old-school… too slow a format. We’ll see what happens.
Pinging comments at this new IMMANENCE site to see how it goes: There seem to be performance issues today (maybe weekend maintenance activity?) Is it taking forever to load for anyone else? (each press of my cursor takes about 5 seconds for screen response). On the other hand, this could just be me and my antique machine..
By way of substance, Adrian, I’d like to endorse your “note on Peirce’s triadism vs Hartshorne”s dyadism”. Much as I enjoy the roasting from the PERVERSE EGALITARIANISM crowd, Harman’s live blogging of the Claremont conference is outstanding: I’ve never seen anything more useful! How else would someone like myself ever learn of James Bradley’s Peircean interventions in the Speculative Realism parade?
Like you, I think Hartshorne lost it when he trashed Peirce’s triadic metaphysics for the typical dyadism / quaternalism approach adopted by many at Claremont. Still, as anyone with any insight knows (contra DOOMED PILOT at PE
OK, here’s another critique of the site: There seems to be a time limit on how long one can spend making a comment! If my previous comment went through it was only because I pressed SUBMIT when the site decided that I should have had enough time to finish writing my comment! (or maybe I pressed some weird signaling key ?) To finish the thought, I agree with your critique that Hartshorne “misses a crucial piece of Peirce’s formulation”. I’m intrigued to see James Bradley taking up some of these issues (even if it essentially withdrew from Graham Harman’s intuitional account 😉
Best wishes for you and your partner, Adrian! My niece just gave birth to a new actual entity..
Hi Mark – Yes, the pages do take a little longer to load, and I had been worried that it might frustrate anyone with a slow connection (or old machine). I hope you’re exaggerating with the “5 seconds,” though – if it’s that bad, I will have to look into whether there’s any way to speed it up.
Bradley’s intervention seems quite interesting…
Best wishes to your niece – sounds like a genuine actual occasion!
Every time i am suggesting people to learn more about control panel to use your computer windows 10 control panel so easily while making any changes. Thank you so much.