tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-251592157127672248.post258473159304285799..comments2023-10-31T06:15:38.224-07:00Comments on Videre Spectare: Object Oriented Philosophy: Reflections on Style and MethodJtrileyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05982512687346949724noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-251592157127672248.post-47766481120293357422012-12-28T23:03:04.184-08:002012-12-28T23:03:04.184-08:00I think you're spot on when you say that OOO a...I think you're spot on when you say that OOO and OOP are "<i>representational</i> philosophies," and that their "Writing serves to create vivid scenes and helpful narratives to explain and argue for positions." Maybe in the future you will say more on this and why it leads many to consider it a "regression". This has always confused me: as if somehow by <i>talking</i> about objects more, I automatically have more to do with them and with reality! And conversely, as if by speaking "abstractly" or "obtusely" I've somehow divorced myself from reality and real things!<br /><br />There's a lesson from the poetic tradition which speaks about the "materiality of words" to be learned here, I think. No matter what you say (no pun intended), any "intervention" is going to be using "language" as a thoroughfare-- especially in the long run. And so how you look at language, how you "use" language, matters in terms of how you are setting yourself in relation to objects and the world. OOO's almost obsessive concern about "style" only drives this point home. And yet their usage remains, to my mind, very "instrumental" and, in that sense, somewhat naive.<br /><br />Lastly, it should be noted how OOO's "vivid scenes," along with the cataloging of objects, often comes with the express purpose of <i>ethically obliging</i> the reader. What the subsequent program/prescription is, I'm never very sure-- other than to be more of a materialist than we had been before (whatever that means).fragilekeys.comhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07945608366871667839noreply@blogger.com