Archive for the ‘Iain Hamilton Grant’ Category

Ravaisson begins to close Of Habit writing: “Between the ultimate depths of nature and the highest point of reflective freedom, there are an infinite number of degrees of measuring the development of one and the same power, and as one rises through them, extension – the condition of knowledge – increases with the distinction and […]

In his famous “On What There Is” (hat tip Pete W.) Quine notes the paradoxical argument of Plato’s beard – namely that how can one talk of something that doesn’t exist without inferring its existence: ‘This is the old Platonic riddle of nonbeing. Nonbeing must in some sense be, otherwise what is it that there […]

Responses to my last post are here and here at Agent Swarm. Iain Hamilton Grant recently gave a talk in London where he pseudo-jokingly stated that we are merely coffee drinking carbon molecules. This kind of statement which deterritorializes (or more in the Schellingian sense ungrounds) what human beings are is central to the posthuman […]

I’ve made some comments on the reception of Deleuze in the past which seemed to trouble some. In so many of the developments of SR and related movements (though OOO is openly critical of Deleuze on the whole) Deleuze is a central figure (implicitly or explicitly) usually cited alongside Guattari, Whitehead, Spinoza, James, and Stengers. […]

CALL FOR PAPERS for the FIRST ANNUAL MEETING OF THE SCHELLING SOCIETY OF NORTH AMERICA (SSNA) AUGUST 31 – SEPTEMBER 1, 2012 SEATTLE UNIVERSITY (SEATTLE, WASHINGTON USA) The SSNA is open to anyone who conducts research on Schelling and Schellingian philosophy in the English language. The SSNA mission is to (1) further research in English, […]

Again I’ve fallen behind on posting mostly due to my relocation to Canada and starting my PhD program in Theory and Criticism at the University of Western Ontario. This upcoming week I will be responding to JJ Cohen at the second Speculative Medievalisms event and on the following day (Saturday the 17th) I’ll be presenting […]

Steven Shaviro has an excellent and length response to my previous two posts (and the subsequent discussion) here. Bogost, Bryant, and Harman have responded to Shaviro. Knowledge Ecology has a summary up as well here. And Jason from Immanent Transcendence has a recent (and very gracious) response here to several of my questions here. Update […]

Several responses to my last post are here at Knowledge Ecology, here at Immanence, here at Footnotes 2 Plato, here at After Nature, and at Immanent Transcendence. I doubt I can give each the response it deserves but, at least to keep the conversation going, I have several questions/comments in regards to each response. For […]

One of the rhetorical disadvantages to philosophies of process, or dispositions, or becoming (or however else you want to couch them) is that there’s a fuzziness that there doesn’t seem to be an urge to clarify. Part of this is the fact that these philosophies are non-common sensical and are therefore ontologically fuzzy – one […]

Quite some time ago when I first started to write about Speculative Realism and ‘dark’ aesthetics Alex Williams made a comment which I should of taken as a strong suggestion. The comment was on this post from over two years ago where I tried to outline what a Speculative Realist Naturphilosophie would be and that […]


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 187 other followers