Clear, stylish, and humorous, like your books I'm currently reading for a paper on Thoreau.
Regarding the first of your statements on the profound claims of OOO (of which I wish to learn more, having encountered it through Florian Hecker's work and a guest lecture by Ennis), I ask myself, you, or any strange stranger:
- Is there a difference between "entity" and Spinoza's substance (Deus sive Natura)?
- Is "entity" (and perhaps God, substance) a "strange stranger"?
- Should that be the case, is OOO different from Arne Naess'non-anthropocentric ecology? Is "entity" not like a rhizome?
- And finally where does Harman differ from Guattari's refrain in Three Ecologies regarding the shift from a scientific towards an aesthetic paradigm?
and respond you did. I just had to finish your books. It's been a great ride! "Here Comes Everything: The Promise of OOO" is perhaps the briefest and simplest introduction to both your thought and to OOO. Timely!
Clear, stylish, and humorous, like your books I'm currently reading for a paper on Thoreau.
ReplyDeleteRegarding the first of your statements on the profound claims of OOO (of which I wish to learn more, having encountered it through Florian Hecker's work and a guest lecture by Ennis), I ask myself, you, or any strange stranger:
- Is there a difference between "entity" and Spinoza's substance (Deus sive Natura)?
- Is "entity" (and perhaps God, substance) a "strange stranger"?
- Should that be the case, is OOO different from Arne Naess'non-anthropocentric ecology? Is "entity" not like a rhizome?
- And finally where does Harman differ from Guattari's refrain in Three Ecologies regarding the shift from a scientific towards an aesthetic paradigm?
Regards and thanks!
Good questions--I shall respond.
ReplyDeleteand respond you did. I just had to finish your books. It's been a great ride! "Here Comes Everything: The Promise of OOO" is perhaps the briefest and simplest introduction to both your thought and to OOO. Timely!
ReplyDeleteandreas.burckhardt@gmail.com