thoughts/readings

Harman/Zizek discussion. The opening talk by Harman is a good introduction to OOO, and for me especially interesting is his take on the poverty of modern animal philosophy (around 25:00). This, he says, is due to the modern subject/object relation that only understands human minds to be of interest as subjects. His answer is to flat ontologize, whereby the subject/object relation is simply one relation among other object/object relations. Making objects more interesting. My inclination instead would be to expand our notion of subject to go beyond its modern anthroproprietariness; to see all sorts of different forms of nonhuman subjects interacting with objects in the world. Admittedly, this would retain a certain privileging of subject/object relatedness, and of phenomenological interiority (or interiorities), but one that’s no longer anthropocentric but theriocentric

 

“What we have instead is ourselves. A study published this year in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences found that if you look at the world’s mammals by weight, 96 percent of that biomass is humans and livestock; just 4 percent is wild animals”:

This is a wonderful piece on the brown marmorated stinkbug in the US:

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/03/12/when-twenty-six-thousand-stinkbugs-invade-your-home