*Contents* 01:10 SOCIAL THEORY 06:18 Four states in object development 09:49 POLITICS 15:07 ONTOGRAPHY 16:11 Four key ‘ontographical’ tensions 24:06 CAUSATION 27:08 Vicarious causation 30:09 KNOWLEDGE 31:37 Justified untrue belief 34:37 Paradigm 40:13 Summary
i'm not sure, but given the one of the core beliefs is the idea of not being able to access reality via "mysticism," i assume that psychedelics aren't heavily endorsed. i am sure the effect on underlying processes will present an aesthetic difference in thoughts, but ultimately, are entirely subjective, fleeting, and not ultimately related to something other than phenology (which OOO seems to endorse that phenomena is a non-special interaction). your thoughts?
Thanks for the effort, but ur 3rd video is hard going because you had not read Brian Latour. But more importantly, you have not fully digested Harman. Great effort, though.
There’s a couple of interesting ideas in “ooo” but imo if you want to look at a modern philosophical brutalist minimalism I’d go with Michael Esfeld and Deckert, kind of a tough read if you’re not into your physics though. Out of speculative realism I think by far Brassier is the most interesting but he’s also the guy you’d almost certainly disagree with most lol because he’s stridently opposed to phenomenology and he also hates Bergson and has critiques of him.
Agreed on the OOO front. I'm in the throes of preparing my final video on Harman now. Critiquing Bergson?! Now I've heard everything! This is all a bit of a plunge out of my phenomenological comfort zone, but Harman had popped up on my radar a few times, so I thought it was worth checking him out. And thanks for the suggestions. I am interested in physics, although definitely as a layperson. I'll keep _A Minimalist Ontology_ in the back of my mind. Actually, my curiosity has been piqued for Brassier now... Good to read someone you totally disagree with every once in a while, anyway. "Hates Bergson..." mutter, mutter 😆
*Contents*
01:10 SOCIAL THEORY
06:18 Four states in object development
09:49 POLITICS
15:07 ONTOGRAPHY
16:11 Four key ‘ontographical’ tensions
24:06 CAUSATION
27:08 Vicarious causation
30:09 KNOWLEDGE
31:37 Justified untrue belief
34:37 Paradigm
40:13 Summary
I wonder what his thoughts are on psychedelic experiences
i'm not sure, but given the one of the core beliefs is the idea of not being able to access reality via "mysticism," i assume that psychedelics aren't heavily endorsed. i am sure the effect on underlying processes will present an aesthetic difference in thoughts, but ultimately, are entirely subjective, fleeting, and not ultimately related to something other than phenology (which OOO seems to endorse that phenomena is a non-special interaction). your thoughts?
Thanks for the effort, but ur 3rd video is hard going because you had not read Brian Latour. But more importantly, you have not fully digested Harman. Great effort, though.
Thought you and I might part company at this point. Thanks for watching, anyway.
There’s a couple of interesting ideas in “ooo” but imo if you want to look at a modern philosophical brutalist minimalism I’d go with Michael Esfeld and Deckert, kind of a tough read if you’re not into your physics though. Out of speculative realism I think by far Brassier is the most interesting but he’s also the guy you’d almost certainly disagree with most lol because he’s stridently opposed to phenomenology and he also hates Bergson and has critiques of him.
Agreed on the OOO front. I'm in the throes of preparing my final video on Harman now.
Critiquing Bergson?! Now I've heard everything!
This is all a bit of a plunge out of my phenomenological comfort zone, but Harman had popped up on my radar a few times, so I thought it was worth checking him out.
And thanks for the suggestions. I am interested in physics, although definitely as a layperson. I'll keep _A Minimalist Ontology_ in the back of my mind. Actually, my curiosity has been piqued for Brassier now... Good to read someone you totally disagree with every once in a while, anyway.
"Hates Bergson..." mutter, mutter 😆