Archive for February, 2009



Splintering Bone Ashes and Plamenology and Object Oriented Philosophy have all discussed the concept of emergence and whether it stands as an ontological, epistemological or ontic category.  While the concept of behaviour or pattern is highly subjective (to point out the complexity of an ant colony in a human world) there is still the issue […]

There are many enemies of Nature Philosophy among them mysticism, romanticism, and the countless gnarled roots of anthropic and theologic thought creeping out from the noetic morass of first causes.  Quantum physics for instance can (following Michio Kaku) over-ride the problems of first causes in that there does not need to be a primary mover […]

The following in a brief summation of Plotinus’ One: The One is a non-concept which is known through its effect as power, foundation and location.  The One, as all that is and what is potential, emanates all existents.  The One is pure possibility. The One generates intelligence which is the source of being yet this […]

The nagging issue that I have with Speculative Realism is how synchronicity fits in.  Since having first read Brassier in the Summer of 2008 this issue has not stopped bothering me and, no doubt, it has to do with Lacan as my ‘first master.’  Though I would not refer to myself as a Lacanian I […]

In his First Outline of a System of the Philosophy of Nature Schelling makes a fairly Bohrian statement.  Discussing the relation of freedom to nature Schelling discusses the experiment as how science invades  nature via a question with an implied judgement which produces a phenomenon (196-197).  The difference that is immediately noticeable is that Schelling […]