Archives mensuelles : août 2020

I am glad Russell Sbriglia and his collaborators are opening up the debate around OOO with new ideas and arguments. I have read their book and Harman’s response to it and listened to Sbriglia’s informal response on the podcast Zizek … Lire la suite →

Graham Harman’s OOO was born refuted. Incoherent in its fundamental premises, responding to a non-existent problem, positioning itself in a totally fictitious intellectual history, contrasting itself with alternative ideas and potential rivals by travestying what it did not even take … Lire la suite →

Paul Feyerabend’s posthumous PHILOSOPHY OF NATURE (published 2016) is the missing link in a decades spanning work that has principally been read as devoted to philosophy of science and epistemology. His later work can seem to be an anomaly in … Lire la suite →

The principal contradiction in OOO is not that of the posited impossible relation between subject and object. It is squarely in their account of « objects », in the distinction between real objects and sensual objects. No example of a real object … Lire la suite →

Graham Harman’s problematic (1) a simplistic binary grid of subject/object, imposed on more complex thought (2) a false analysis of Continental Philosophy as all-subject (3) which he considers to be mere fashion (simplistic reductionist de-concepting marketisation of philosophy in the … Lire la suite →

I have thought a lot about the first example in Zizek’s SEX AND THE FAILED ABSOLUE. Zizek summarises and comments on the short story THE WAISTCOAT, and concludes that it provides us with a good illustration of Absolute Knowing, the … Lire la suite →

I am in the process of re-reading Zizek’s SEX AND THE FAILED ABSOLUTE and I find it a very interesting and inspiring work. It contains a very useful and systematic elaboration of Zizek’s main ontological and epistemological theses. In particular, … Lire la suite →

« Withdrawal » is not a scalar concept for Harman, it is absolute. There are no degrees of withdrawal, nor can a real object de-withdraw, not even partially. Any proposed example of an « object » is of necessity always sensual, i.e. illusory. The … Lire la suite →

We have seen in the previous post that sometimes Zizek slips into a vocabulary of access, and that this is unfortunate. This usage can be contrasted with an analysis making use of the terms of « embodiment » and « inherence », which I think … Lire la suite →

In his book SEX AND THE FAILED ABSOLUTE Zizek gives a systematic presentation of his philosophy in the form of four theorems (I – Parallax, II – Redoubling, III – Unorientability, IV – Negativity). I describe these theorems in the … Lire la suite →