- x

Friday, October 4, 2024

How did Isabelle Stengers use Whitehead? (ChatGPT, 2024-10-4)

Isabelle Stengers, a Belgian philosopher of science, used Alfred North Whitehead’s philosophy to critique and rethink modern science and its relationship with society. Drawing from Whitehead’s process philosophy, Stengers developed a critical perspective on science that challenges its presumed objectivity and separation from human values, ethics, and cultural contexts. Here’s how she applied Whitehead’s ideas:

1. Critique of Scientific Objectivity: Stengers uses Whitehead’s rejection of the “bifurcation of nature” (the split between objective reality and subjective experience) to critique the objectivity often claimed by modern science. For Whitehead, this bifurcation is a false divide; he saw all experiences as interconnected processes rather than separate domains of subject and object. Stengers builds on this to argue that science is not a neutral or purely objective activity but is embedded in a web of cultural, ethical, and political influences .

2. “Cosmopolitics”: Stengers coined the term cosmopolitics to propose a new way of engaging with scientific knowledge in a pluralistic, democratic context. Influenced by Whitehead’s relational ontology, she argues that all perspectives—human and nonhuman—should be considered in decisions about scientific and technological development. This idea seeks to democratize science by including diverse viewpoints and resisting the hegemony of purely scientific or technocratic perspectives.

3. Reclaiming Wonder and Experimentation: Stengers emphasizes Whitehead’s notion of adventure and wonder in scientific inquiry, advocating for a science that retains a sense of curiosity and openness to the unknown. This contrasts with the instrumental approach to science that views knowledge purely in terms of utility. In her book Thinking with Whitehead, she explores how Whitehead’s philosophy invites scientists to approach their work as a co-creative process that honors the unpredictable and mysterious qualities of the world .

4. Process and Change: Like Whitehead, Stengers sees reality as a process rather than a set of fixed entities. She argues that science should be understood as a dynamic, evolving practice that coexists with other forms of knowledge. This perspective encourages flexibility and adaptability within scientific inquiry, recognizing that scientific practices themselves are subject to change and development as they interact with social and environmental factors

| Yale Forum on Religion and Ecology.

Stengers uses Whitehead’s ideas to argue for a more inclusive, humble, and ethically aware scientific practice, where science is not isolated from other modes of human experience and knowledge but is one participant in a broader cosmopolitical conversation. Through Whitehead, she advocates for a science that respects the agency of all entities—human and nonhuman—and reclaims the imaginative, speculative, and adventurous aspects of scientific exploration.

Besides Isabelle Stengers, Matthew David Segall, are there other notable Whitehead scholars? (ChatGPT, 2024-10-4)

Yes, beyond Isabelle Stengers and Matthew David Segall, there are several other prominent scholars who have made significant contributions to the study of Alfred North Whitehead and his philosophy. Some of the most notable Whitehead scholars include:

1. David Ray Griffin: A central figure in process philosophy and theology, Griffin is known for his work on Whitehead’s influence in philosophy, ecology, and religion. His works, such as Reenchantment Without Supernaturalism and Whitehead’s Radically Different Postmodern Philosophy, argue that Whitehead’s ideas offer an alternative to traditional metaphysics and provide a basis for ecological ethics and a non-reductionist worldview.

2. John B. Cobb Jr.: As a co-founder of process theology, Cobb has applied Whitehead’s philosophy to religious studies, environmental ethics, and social issues. His work, especially in texts like A Christian Natural Theology and Process Theology: An Introductory Exposition (co-authored with David Ray Griffin), has brought Whiteheadian thought into dialogue with contemporary religious and ethical debates.

3. Steven Shaviro: Known for bridging Whiteheadian thought with aesthetics, film, and contemporary media studies, Shaviro’s book Without Criteria: Kant, Whitehead, Deleuze, and Aesthetics examines Whitehead’s influence on aesthetics and his relevance for understanding contemporary culture. Shaviro integrates Whitehead’s process philosophy with the work of Deleuze, emphasizing Whitehead’s impact on theories of affect and creativity.

4. Roland Faber: Faber’s work combines Whitehead’s process philosophy with theological and mystical dimensions, exploring how Whitehead’s thought intersects with Buddhist and Christian mystical traditions. His works, such as The Divine Manifold, highlight Whitehead’s contributions to understanding spirituality, creativity, and the nature of divine presence in the world.

5. Judith A. Jones: Jones’s scholarship, particularly in Intensities and Lines of Flight: Deleuze, Guattari, and the Schizoanalysis of Whitehead, explores connections between Whitehead’s process metaphysics and poststructuralist thinkers like Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari. She focuses on Whitehead’s ideas about subjectivity, becoming, and relationality.

6. Philip Clayton: Known for his work in science and religion, Clayton has engaged deeply with Whitehead’s ideas, particularly in relation to emergent complexity and metaphysics. His book Mind and Emergence brings Whiteheadian insights into dialogue with contemporary discussions in philosophy of mind and science, especially around topics of emergence and consciousness.

These scholars each bring unique perspectives to Whitehead’s work, demonstrating its wide-ranging influence across fields such as theology, ecology, aesthetics, metaphysics, and cultural studies. Collectively, they contribute to a dynamic and interdisciplinary tradition of Whitehead scholarship that keeps his ideas relevant in contemporary debates.

Léon Chertok （1911-1991）

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L%C3%A9on_Chertok

He had contacts with Isabelle Stengers. Not sure what these contacts meant for both of them.

10/4/24 （星期五）

一覺起來，山陀兒「主體消失」殆盡，

Explain to me what’s new materialism, and what’s speculative materialism? And what’s their significance? (ChatGPT, 2024-10-4)

簡單講，不止眾生，物亦有情，王陽明就是，new materialist，speculative materialist，否則他不會遊南鎮，為巖中花樹所見，也不會說，草木瓦石，皆有良知，意思是說，我今天下午要去墾丁，為大海所見，烏蠅蜜蜂，山下那頭水牯牛，就是我隔世弟兄，

https://www.anhsiangchan1983.tw/%E5%B0%8E%E5%B8%AB%E8%AC%9B%E8%A9%9E/mobile/%E5%AE%89%E7%A5%A5%E7%A6%AA%E7%AC%AC%E4%B8%80%E9%9B%86/%E7%89%9B%E7%9A%84%E7%A6%AE%E8%AE%9A/%E7%89%9B%E8%88%87%E7%A6%AA%E5%AE%97.htm

New Materialism and Speculative Materialism are two contemporary philosophical movements that rethink traditional materialist approaches, moving beyond mechanistic and reductionist views of matter, while addressing questions of agency, ontology, and reality. Although related in their critique of older materialisms, they are distinct in their methods and areas of focus.

1. New Materialism:

New Materialism emerged in the late 20th and early 21st centuries as a response to traditional materialist frameworks, which were often viewed as overly deterministic and reductionist. Traditional materialism generally views matter as inert and passive, governed by external forces. New Materialism seeks to challenge this by emphasizing the agency, dynamism, and complexity of matter itself.

Key Concepts:

• Matter as Active: New Materialists view matter as having agency and vitality. Instead of being passive or inert, matter is seen as dynamic, self-organizing, and capable of affecting change. This perspective is influenced by thinkers like Gilles Deleuze and Donna Haraway, who emphasize relational ontologies and complex systems.

• Posthumanism: New Materialism is often linked to posthumanist critiques of anthropocentrism. It moves beyond seeing humans as the central agents in the world and considers the entanglements between human and nonhuman actors—such as animals, ecosystems, and technology.

• Feminist Influences: Thinkers like Karen Barad and Rosi Braidotti have contributed significantly to New Materialism by integrating feminist theory with materialist philosophy. Barad’s agential realism emphasizes how matter and meaning are co-constituted, rejecting a simple distinction between objects and subjects.

Significance: New Materialism offers a way to rethink relationships between humans, the environment, and nonhuman entities in a way that reflects the interdependency and complexity of our world. It challenges the anthropocentric and mechanistic frameworks that have dominated Western thought, especially in areas like ecology, politics, and technology.

2. Speculative Materialism:

Speculative Materialism is closely tied to Speculative Realism, a philosophical movement that emerged in the early 21st century, led by philosophers like Quentin Meillassoux, Ray Brassier, and Graham Harman. It challenges the post-Kantian tradition, which argues that humans cannot access the “real” world beyond our subjective experience. Speculative Materialists argue that reality exists independently of human thought and that philosophy must engage with this reality.

Key Concepts:

• Rejection of Correlationism: Meillassoux coined the term correlationism to describe the belief that we can only know the relationship between thought and the world, but not the world itself as it is “in itself.” Speculative Materialists reject this, asserting that there is an objective reality that exists independently of human perception.

• Necessity of Contingency: Meillassoux argues for the radical contingency of all things. Unlike traditional materialists who believe in fixed laws of nature, Meillassoux claims that everything could be otherwise, and that there are no necessary laws governing reality—only contingent ones that might change.

• Object-Oriented Ontology (OOO): Some philosophers within Speculative Realism, like Graham Harman, develop object-oriented ontology, which emphasizes that all objects (whether human, nonhuman, material, or immaterial) exist in their own right and have their own reality, independently of human thought or perception.

Significance: Speculative Materialism challenges the anthropocentric limits of modern philosophy and reopens metaphysical questions about the nature of reality. It has implications for science, ethics, and metaphysics by encouraging philosophers to think beyond the limits of human thought and to engage with a more radical, speculative understanding of the universe. By doing so, it seeks to escape the constraints of correlationism and to offer a new vision of materialism that embraces the unknowability and contingency of the world.

Key Differences:

• New Materialism focuses on matter’s agency and vitality, often with an emphasis on ecology, gender, and nonhuman actors, whereas Speculative Materialism focuses on the independence of reality from human perception, engaging more with metaphysical questions about the structure and nature of reality itself.

• New Materialism often overlaps with feminist and posthumanist concerns, while Speculative Materialism is more directly engaged with metaphysical and ontological questions stemming from critiques of Kantian philosophy.

Conclusion:

Both movements are significant because they offer alternatives to traditional materialism and the limitations of human-centered thought. New Materialism reconfigures our understanding of agency and materiality in a world that is ecologically and technologically entangled, while Speculative Materialism provides a radical challenge to the limitations of modern philosophy’s engagement with reality, pushing us to think about a world that exists beyond human perception.

Speculative realism

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speculative_realism#

Notable speculative realists

New materialism

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_materialism

Associated theorists

Isabelle Stengers (b 1949)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isabelle_Stengers

Partial bibliography

Prigogine, Ilya and Isabelle Stengers. La Nouvelle Alliance (1979)
Prigogine, Ilya and Isabelle Stengers. Order out of Chaos, University of Michigan: Bantam Books (1984)
Stengers, Isabelle and Chertok L. "A critique of psychoanalytic reason: hypnosis as a scientific problem from Lavoisier to Lacan", Noel Evans M (trans.), Stanford: Stanford University Press (1992)
Prigogine, Ilya and Isabelle Stengers. The End of Certainty: Time, Chaos and the New Laws of Nature, Free Press (1997)
Stengers, Isabelle. Power and Invention: Situating Science, Bains P (trans.), Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press (1997)
Stengers, Isabelle. The Invention of Modern Science, Smith D.W (trans.), Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press (2000)
Stengers, Isabelle. Cosmopolitics I, Bononno, R (trans.), Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press (2010)
Stengers, Isabelle. Cosmopolitics II, Bononno, R (trans.), Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press (2011)
Stengers, Isabelle and Pignarre P. Capitalist Sorcery: Breaking the Spell, Goffey A (Trans.), Palgrave Macmillan (2011)
Stengers, Isabelle. Thinking with Whitehead: a free and wild creation of concepts. Harvard University Press. 2011. (translation of original: Penser avec Whitehead, 2002)
Stengers, Isabelle. In Catastrophic Times. Resisting the Coming Barbarism[1], Goffey, A. (trans.), Open Humanities Press (2015)
Stengers, Isabelle. Another Science is Possible: A Manifesto for Slow Science, Muecke, S. (trans.), Polity Press (2018)

Thursday, October 3, 2024

Are there other points of view about Schelling besides Zizek’s? (ChatGPT, 2024-10-3)

Yes, there are several interpretations of Friedrich Schelling’s work beyond Žižek’s view of him as a “vanishing mediator.” Scholars and philosophers have approached Schelling’s thought from various angles, recognizing his unique contributions to different fields of philosophy and his lasting influence. Here are a few significant perspectives:

1. Schelling as a Philosopher of Nature and Freedom:

Schelling is often celebrated as one of the first philosophers to develop a comprehensive philosophy of nature (Naturphilosophie), in which he attempted to reconcile nature with freedom. His early works explored the dynamic, organic structure of nature, emphasizing its creative, self-organizing tendencies. This aspect of Schelling’s thought heavily influenced later thinkers, especially in the Romantic movement and ecological philosophy.

• Perspective: Schelling’s philosophy of nature posits that nature itself has a form of subjectivity, working towards self-realization. This emphasis on nature’s intrinsic creativity stood in contrast to the mechanistic views of nature dominant in his time, which has made his work influential for later philosophers and ecologists who seek to integrate humanity into a living cosmos rather than seeing it as detached from it

| Yale Forum on Religion and Ecology.

2. The Philosophy of Freedom:

Schelling’s philosophy of freedom—particularly in his later works like Freedom Essay (1809)—is another area where his thought is seen as significant. Here, Schelling grapples with the problem of evil, human freedom, and the tension between necessity and freedom. Unlike Hegel’s more deterministic system, where freedom emerges from the unfolding dialectic of history, Schelling emphasizes the radical, unpredictable nature of freedom as an existential force. For some scholars, this makes Schelling a precursor to existentialist thought.

• Perspective: Martin Heidegger, in his lectures on Schelling, praised this exploration of freedom, considering it a profound engagement with metaphysical questions about existence, decision, and evil. Heidegger saw Schelling as a thinker who prefigured key existentialist concerns, laying the groundwork for future existential philosophy

| Yale Forum on Religion and Ecology.

3. Schelling as a Proto-Existentialist:

Some scholars, particularly in existentialist and phenomenological traditions, view Schelling as a precursor to existentialism. His emphasis on individual freedom, his engagement with the problem of evil, and his exploration of the non-rational aspects of existence (such as the unconscious) are seen as anticipating themes in thinkers like Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, and later existentialists.

• Perspective: Søren Kierkegaard, who attended some of Schelling’s lectures, was influenced by Schelling’s view of freedom, particularly his emphasis on the anxiety and uncertainty that accompanies human choice. Kierkegaard took these insights further in his own existential philosophy of faith, freedom, and subjectivity .

4. Schelling’s Theological Significance:

Schelling’s philosophy also has a theological dimension, especially in his later works where he explores the relationship between God, nature, and human freedom. His concept of a dynamic, evolving God who is in some sense dependent on creation and freedom had a profound impact on later religious thinkers, particularly those in process theology.

• Perspective: In this theological context, Schelling is seen as a thinker who broke away from traditional Christian theism, offering a more relational and developmental conception of God. This influenced modern theologians, such as those in the process theology movement (like Whitehead and Hartshorne), who emphasize God’s interaction with the unfolding of the world

| Yale Forum on Religion and Ecology .

5. Schelling as a Philosopher of the Unconscious:

Another key area of Schelling’s influence is his exploration of the unconscious. Schelling is one of the first philosophers to emphasize the importance of unconscious drives and forces, a theme later developed in psychoanalysis. He argued that the unconscious was not just a passive reservoir of repressed ideas (as in Freud), but an active, creative force.

• Perspective: This notion of the unconscious as creative and primordial has been of interest to thinkers like Carl Jung, who viewed Schelling’s work as foreshadowing the psychological depth of human experience and the archetypal nature of the unconscious

| Yale Forum on Religion and Ecology.

6. Schelling as a Philosopher of Art:

Schelling’s Philosophy of Art is also significant, as he believed that art provides a unique way of accessing the absolute, reconciling the finite with the infinite, the conscious with the unconscious. For Schelling, art represented the highest expression of the unity between freedom and necessity.

• Perspective: Schelling’s thoughts on aesthetics influenced many later thinkers, particularly within German Romanticism. His view that art is a way to overcome the limitations of rational thought has remained influential in both aesthetic philosophy and theories of creativity.

Conclusion:

While Žižek’s view of Schelling as a “vanishing mediator” focuses on his transitional role between Kant and Hegel, other perspectives emphasize his lasting contributions to philosophy, especially in areas like nature, freedom, existentialism, theology, and the unconscious. Schelling is increasingly recognized not just as a bridge between thinkers, but as a significant and innovative philosopher in his own right. His ideas continue to resonate with contemporary thought, particularly in ecological philosophy, existentialism, and the philosophy of the unconscious.

What does Zizek mean when he said that Schelling was a ‘vanishing mediator’? (ChatGPT, 2024-10-3)

When Slavoj Žižek refers to Friedrich Schelling as a “vanishing mediator,” he is drawing on a concept used in Marxist and structuralist theory to describe a figure or idea that serves a crucial transitional role in a historical or intellectual process but is ultimately surpassed or absorbed by later developments. The term “vanishing mediator” was popularized by Fredric Jameson, who used it to describe a phase or agent that is necessary for historical change but becomes invisible once that change has occurred.

In Žižek’s application, Schelling occupies this role between the philosophical systems of Immanuel Kant and Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel. Schelling, particularly in his later work, moves philosophy beyond Kant’s critical idealism but does not fully realize the absolute idealism that Hegel would later achieve. For Žižek, Schelling is pivotal in transitioning from Kant’s focus on human subjectivity and freedom to Hegel’s systematic dialectic, where subject and object, thought and being, are reconciled in a more comprehensive philosophical system.

However, once Hegel’s system is fully developed, Schelling’s intermediary role “vanishes,” meaning that his contributions are absorbed and largely overlooked in favor of Hegel’s more dominant philosophy. Schelling’s importance lies in how he provided the philosophical space for this transition, allowing Hegel’s absolute idealism to emerge.

Žižek also appreciates how Schelling’s work on freedom, nature, and the unconscious prefigures certain modern psychoanalytic ideas, particularly the role of the unconscious and the irrational in human experience. Despite this, in Žižek’s view, Schelling remains a transitional figure whose relevance diminishes after his role in the development of post-Kantian philosophy is completed .

Burn After Reading (2008)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burn_After_Reading (Amazon Prime Video)

You see, people were sad in 2008.

How Your Brain Detects Patterns without Conscious Thought

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-your-brain-detects-patterns-without-conscious-thought/