Object-oriented ontology

01 Apr 2022 10:14 - 10 Jul 2022 03:58
Open in Logseq
    • I confess to never having had a clue what this was about. I get Latour, who is willing to ascribe agency and a sort of politics to random objects. That makes total sense. But OOO is always talking about deep unfathomed depths in things, like, OK, maybe a chair has a soul of the same complexity and resonance as a human.
    • a 21st-century[1] Heidegger-influenced school of thought that rejects the privileging of human existence over the existence of nonhuman objects.
    • WTF does "privileging" mean? Are nonhumans subjected to domination and need to be given political rights? Also, it seems suspicious to lump all nonhumans together. Presumably living things have interests in a way that rocks don't, and lumping them together seems like a dishonest move somehow. Giving animals and plants political rights would actually make sense, but giving rocks or screwdrivers rights sounds fanciful at best.
    • Object-oriented ontology maintains that objects exist independently (as Kantian noumena) of human perception and are not ontologically exhausted by their relations with humans or other objects.
    • Well who the fuck says otherwise?
    • Alright I feel dumb like there is something I am not getting, maybe the root of this is in Kant or Heidegger and I just am not philosophical enough.