Abstract
AbstractOne of the main criticisms of object-oriented ontology in its current formulation by Graham Harman is that it includes a notion of time that, upon closer inspection, renders the overall theory inconsistent. I argue that while this is indeed the case, Harman’s notion of time can be modified in a way that leaves the framework of object-oriented ontology intact. More specifically, Harman’s theory of time as a single surface tension between sensual objects and their qualities should be expanded into a theory of time as a twofold of related yet irreducible temporalities. Such a theory can already be found in Gilles Deleuze’s The Logic of Sense. I argue that much of the latter theory is already tacitly presupposed in Harman’s ontology, and show that the proposed modification successfully addresses the most salient criticisms that have been voiced at Harman’s notion of time.
Highlights
One of the main criticisms of object-oriented ontology in its current formulation by Graham Harman is that it includes a notion of time that, upon closer inspection, renders the overall theory inconsistent
It must allow for the production, alteration, and annihilation of real objects with real qualities, and do so in a way that implies neither undermining nor overmining. It must allow the ten links between aspects of the fourfold to be temporal, because these links refer to what happens in reality. It must account for the persistence of objects, but without positing a time that would exist over and above objects, as this would violate the thesis that objects are the basic constituents of reality
We are looking for a notion of time that accounts for the temporality of sensual as well as real objects, plus the temporality of the links between those levels
Summary
Object-oriented philosophy would certainly be a corpse . According to Ray Brassier, for example, their combined force amounts to a “speculative autopsy” of especially Graham Harman’s objectoriented ontology (OOO).[1] Others, myself included, might not be so sure, if only because it could be possible to adapt instead of abandon the theory in response to its criticisms This will surely sound naive to those who have already consigned object-oriented ontology to the grave. Given that object-oriented ontology is still a young philosophy, it seems logical to improve rather than abandon it in response to serious criticism Such an attempt should obviously not focus on peripheral objections, but concern itself with criticisms that go straight to the heart of the theory. I discuss how the surprising compatibility of a Deleuzian theory of time with Harman’s fourfold model of entities sheds new light on the perceived ‘distance’ between Deleuze’s and Harman’s philosophies
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
