Archive for the ‘Harman’ Category
Maurizo Ferraris’ recent short text Positive Realism (Zer0, Dec 2015) attempts to define what his form of New Realism is against, and what it builds off of, engaging a wide range of philosophical positions (metaphysical realism, internal realism, scientific realism, Markus Gabriel’s New Realism, Harman’s ontology and others) while making a general claim to a philosophy […]
Filed under: art, Brassier, cognitive science, Harman, Hegel, Kant, ontology, Speculative Realism | 1 Comment
Tags: Markus Gabriel, Maurizo Ferraris, new realism, Philosophy, ray brassier, Speculative Realism, Tristan Garcia
The initial chatter around Pete Wolfendale’s book generally seemed to fall into two camps. The first being that the text was merely a massive pile of vitriol directed towards OOOers with the second being the question ‘Why would Pete devote so much of his time to a provocation that may well go unanswered?’ Wolfendale addresses […]
Filed under: Badiou, Brassier, Deleuze, Harman, Hegel, Heidegger, history, Iain Hamilton Grant, Kant, Meillassoux, ontology, Speculative Realism | 8 Comments
Tags: Iain Grant, Markus Gabriel, ooo, oop, pete wolfendale, ray brassier
This post is largely jumping off from a string of comments between Reza Negarestani, Benedict Singleton, and Alex Williams amongst others from several weeks ago. Also Liam Sprod discusses some similar issues here. It is also jumping from from Reza’s two recent lectures in NYC. It started with this quote from Giuseppe Longo: “In this […]
Filed under: Brassier, Harman, Iain Hamilton Grant, nature, ontology, Schelling, Speculative Realism | 1 Comment
Tags: Bertholz, Brassier, Chatelet, German Idealism, Longo, Negarestani, Oresme, reza negarestani, Speculative Realism, Zalamea
There are too many ways to address the difference, to try and even partially grapple what the difference really means. In Speculative Realism broadly construed and the related fields generally realism is taken as deflationary and materialism is inflationary. Realism is taken to be more concerned with epistemology whereas materialism is more concerned with doing […]
Filed under: cognitive science, Harman, Hegel, history, Kant, nature, ontology, psychoanalysis, Schelling, Speculative Realism, transcendental materialism | Leave a Comment
Tags: Adrian Johnston, cognitive science, eliminativism, epistemology, hyperobjects, material, realism
Recently I have been thinking about the collapse of metaphysics and ontology. It seems they were once clearly distinct but have become almost interchangeable. One the one hand metaphysics is the broader school of issues historically deemed to be beyond the physical which eventually became (due to the progression of modern science) that which is […]
Filed under: Harman, Iain Hamilton Grant, Meillassoux, nature, ontology, Schelling, Speculative Realism | Leave a Comment
I was quite unable to keep up with the exchanges between Jussi Parika, the commenters on his blog, and the OOO folks (Harman, Bogost, Bryant, Paul Caplan, and Robert Jackson). It’s always hard in such situations to separate the critique from the shit talking as argumentative strategy falls right in the middle. Part of the […]
Filed under: Brassier, Harman, ontology, Speculative Realism | 9 Comments
Tags: Ian Bogost, levi bryant, ooo
Ongoing Processes v Objects
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 […]
Filed under: Deleuze, Harman, Iain Hamilton Grant, Meillassoux, nature, ontology, Speculative Realism | 1 Comment
Tags: becoming, process, process philosophy
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 […]
Filed under: Deleuze, Harman, Iain Hamilton Grant, Meillassoux, nature, ontology, Schelling, Speculative Realism | 5 Comments
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 […]
Filed under: Deleuze, Harman, Iain Hamilton Grant, Meillassoux, nature, ontology, Schelling, Speculative Realism | 16 Comments
Tags: becoming, flux, peirce, process philosophy, reza negarestani
Several interesting conferences coming up: 1 – The schedule for the next Dundee conference on 21st century idealisms is here. 2-The schedule for the Cyclonopedia event in NYC on March 11th is here. 3-The first issue of continent (an onlline journal started by some fellow EGSers) is available online here. I have a short piece […]
Filed under: Harman, ligotti, Meillassoux, nature, Schelling, Speculative Realism, transcendental materialism | Leave a Comment
Naught Thought 