Monday, June 07, 2010

Networkologies is queering speculative realism.
[It] seem to me there is a seeming underplaying of the politico-social side of philosophy, in favor of the more scientific, within speculative realism as it exists now, no? Why is this? Is it just that in giving birth to this movement from episemological-ontological questions, it has yet to focus on the ethico-political? Certainly some philosophers start at one end and work to the other (ie: Kant starts with epistemology, Heidegger with ontology, Levinas with ethics, but they each eventually get to the others, if from their own perspective). Might this happen with SR?
SR is a movement? I guess four philosophers in a room politely questioning each others' work amounts to something. It'd really get the bandwagon rolling if they'd all agree on something. I suggest a Structured Queery Language, in the same spirit as their Object-Oriented Onticality.
Comments: Post a Comment

<< Home
For when Ereignis is not sufficient.

Appropriation appropriates! Send your appropriations to enowning at gmail.com.

View mobile version