О понятии корреляционизма: К. Мейясу, Г. Харман, Р. Брассье

Abstract

Speculative realism is often associated with a group of thinkers who have consciously united around the idea of fighting a common enemy – correlationism. The article substantiates the thesis that there is no agreement among speculative realists both about correlationism and the ways to overcome it. Based on the works of Meillassoux, Harman and Brassier, the author demonstrates that their interpretations of correlationism and programs for its refutation are incompatible. It is suggested that the result of such incongruence of the concept of correlationism is the conviction of the philosophers of this direction in correlationism of each other. The author considers Meillassoux’s concept of the “Era of Correlation”. From the point of view of Brassier, Meillassoux fails to substantiate the anti-correlationist thesis that human thinking is capable of cognizing non-subjective being. Rather, on the contrary, Meillassoux once again subordinates this being to thinking, and therefore remains a correlationist. Harman also accuses Meillassoux of correlationism for anthropocentrism. The author also clarifies Harman’s concept of the “philosophy of access”. It is established that the concepts of correlationism in the interpretation of Harman and Meillassoux cannot be completely compatible. It is revealed that Harman remains a philosopher of the era of correlation for Meillassoux, because, firstly, he illegitimately attributes human characteristics to non-human beings. Secondly, it does not accept the correlationist argument of the circle and preserves the Kantian metaphysical dichotomy of the noumenal/phenomenal. Brassier also considers Harman a correlationist, since he ontologically equates natural science knowledge and scientific rationality with other types of knowledge. The paper reveals the main features of correlationism in the interpretation of Brassier. It is established that for Meillassoux, the Brassier approach is correlationist on the same basis as the Harman approach. Harman, in turn, considers Brassier as a correlationist, since the latter postulates various ontological taxonomies, the most obvious among which are the priority of scientific rationality and anthropocentrism. According to the results of the work done, it is once again emphasized that speculative realists are by no means united in their understanding of correlationism and ways to overthrow this philosophical program.