“Was not their mistake once more bred of the life of slavery that they had been living?—a life which was always looking upon everything, except mankind, animate and inanimate—‘nature,’ as people used to call it—as one thing, and mankind as another, it was natural to people thinking in this way, that they should try to make ‘nature’ their slave, since they thought ‘nature’ was something outside them” — William Morris
Wednesday, January 29, 2014
UC Davis Animal Studies Group
If you didn't care
What happened to me
And I didn't care
For you
We would zigzag away
Through the boredom and pain
Occasionally glancing up through the rain
So a few months ago I was thinking about subject/object orientation in relationship to nature, and I came across some of your work and am very interested in it.
After looking at some of the commentary regarding artifice/tools and OOO, it came to my mind that in some ways there is a sort of crossover between what Terence McKenna calls the "UFO"/Human Soul Exteriorized/Shockwave of Eschatlogy/"Ultimate Tool"... As a sort of construct that is self-created as a univocal whole.
Since Terence seems to be more focused on Teleology than Ontology, and the work is still not fully developed according to the OO ideas (Humans still play a central role as a subject), I don't necessarily think I would consider him OOO, however...
I have pondered that he might be a distant precursor in the form of an OOT (Object Oriented Teleology)?
What does the OOO movement have to say about Telos?
1 comment:
Heh - I'm listening to Pink Floyd right now.
So a few months ago I was thinking about subject/object orientation in relationship to nature, and I came across some of your work and am very interested in it.
After looking at some of the commentary regarding artifice/tools and OOO, it came to my mind that in some ways there is a sort of crossover between what Terence McKenna calls the "UFO"/Human Soul Exteriorized/Shockwave of Eschatlogy/"Ultimate Tool"... As a sort of construct that is self-created as a univocal whole.
Since Terence seems to be more focused on Teleology than Ontology, and the work is still not fully developed according to the OO ideas (Humans still play a central role as a subject), I don't necessarily think I would consider him OOO, however...
I have pondered that he might be a distant precursor in the form of an OOT (Object Oriented Teleology)?
What does the OOO movement have to say about Telos?
Warm Regards
-Dave
Post a Comment