Graham Harman has written a post about me in which he says that I was trying to “refute” OOO in my “2 cheers” post, and that I “claim[ed] quite frankly that OOO is wrong.” I thought it worth pointing out that nowhere in that post did I mention OOO, or Graham’s philosophy under any other name. […]
Archive for the ‘Philosophy’ Category
Reply to Harman
Posted in Philosophy, tagged Harman on January 14, 2011 | 9 Comments »
Puzzles
Posted in Philosophy on January 13, 2011 | Leave a Comment »
Graham is “puzzled that Ivakhiv thinks OOO can be refuted by the fact that objects have histories.” I’m puzzled why Graham would think that I think that. I’m also puzzled why my brief comment (on Tim’s blog) about stability and instability, and about stability as an achievement rather than a default mode, should have set […]
2 cheers for lava lamps & Lego blocks
Posted in Music & soundscape, Philosophy, tagged lava lamps, minimalism, music, Ontology, epistemology on January 11, 2011 | 6 Comments »
Tim Morton seems not to have liked my comment suggesting that reality is a mix of stability and instability, and that stability is an achievement rather than a default position. The universe, I would say, is an achievement as well. His much-loved (?) lava lamps are achievements, as are Graham Harman‘s Lego blocks. They don’t […]
On animism, multinaturalism, & cosmopolitics
Posted in Philosophy, Spirit matter, tagged animism, anthropomorphism, biosemiotics, cosmopolitics, Descola, Latour, panpsychism, Peirce, Stengers, Whitehead on January 10, 2011 | 15 Comments »
Since there isn’t much available in English about Philippe Descola’s writings on animism, I thought I would share a piece of the cosmopolitics argument I mentioned in my last post. It will appear, in modified form, in the concluding chapter of the SAR Press volume mentioned there. Most of the volume will consist of ethnographic […]
Planes of immanence
Posted in Philosophy, Visual culture on January 3, 2011 | 1 Comment »
“Concepts are like multiple waves, rising and falling, but the plane of immanence is the single wave that rolls them up and unrolls them. … Concepts are the archipelago or skeletal frame, a spinal column rather than a skull, whereas the plane is the breath that suffuses the separate parts.” “it is a [the?] plane […]
…& beginnings (a toast to this moment)
Posted in Philosophy, Spirit matter on December 31, 2010 | 5 Comments »
A process-relational buddhontology sees every moment as a moment of grasping, or prehension, that begins with an open, spacious cognizance, gathers/feels/responds to what has arisen before it, and ends in the satisfaction of its own concrescence. When the object of that satisfaction is unrecognized as what it is — as the immanent flow of desiring-production, […]
On anthropomorphism: making humans, pencils, & souls
Posted in Philosophy, Process-relational thought, tagged animism, anthropomorphism, Jung, Latour, object-oriented philosophy, Whitehead on December 29, 2010 | 8 Comments »
Tim Morton has recently been suggesting that just as humans anthropomorph (that’s a verb), so pencils pencilmorph. I love this idea, though I’m not sure about its implications, which I want to think through here. Anthropomorphism #1 (traditional, & its extensions) The traditional definition of anthropomorphism is something like “the attribution of human characteristics to […]
Agreements & productive differences
Posted in Philosophy, Process-relational thought, tagged Bryant, OOO on December 13, 2010 | 10 Comments »
Levi Bryant has proposed a ceasefire on the objects/relations debate, and followed that up with a nice post calling for self-moderation of our more confrontational urges and for a more affirmative writing (and blogging) style that would render the form of our writing more consonant with its content. I’m all for the latter; it’s something […]
Being knowing, knowing being
Posted in Philosophy, Process-relational thought, tagged object-oriented philosophy, Whitehead on December 12, 2010 | 3 Comments »
The debate between relational and objectological variants of speculative realism (for lack of a better characterization) has taken another of its more frenetic turns, which is both frustrating and promising — frustrating because it tends to descend into personally directed pejoratives when it does that, and because, as Steve Shaviro suggests, it seems to go […]
mediation arrives…
Posted in Philosophy on December 10, 2010 | Leave a Comment »
Michael at Archive Fire has been doing an excellent job summarizing and, at times, mediating between Levi, Bogost, and myself (and others). See, e.g., here, here, and here. He’s genuinely trying to see the best of both perspectives and to weave them into some concordance. Paragraphs like the following, which reframes the discussion over life […]
repetition with (slight) difference
Posted in Eco-theory, Philosophy, Process-relational thought, tagged Bryant, object-oriented philosophy on December 10, 2010 | 4 Comments »
Just a few quick responses to Levi Bryant. Levi writes: 1) entities are nonetheless patterned or structured despite their becoming, 2) they are unities, and 3) they cannot be submerged in or exhausted by their relations. Relations can always be detached. Objects can always enter into new relations. [. . .] if you hold that […]