On 12/02/13 15:27, Simon Biggs wrote: > Had an interesting conversation with Talan Memmott in Amsterdam this > weekend about OOO and agreed that the focus on things overlooks the > importance of process and the consequent mutability of things. This is > where OOO's reductivist nature and flaws become most apparent.
I quite like the idea of flat ontology, it makes sense under materialism. But neither sneering nor screaming at Alex Galloway's critique really answers it. > So, you are neither a thing nor an object but a process within > immanence (that's a word will drive OOO people mad). The last chapter of: http://www.furtherfield.org/features/reviews/philosophy-software has some nice meditations on *streams*, and mentions Husserl's "comets". And yes I've seen the immanence hate in OOO. Surely immanence is just another object in Meinong's Jungle? ;-) - Rob. _______________________________________________ NetBehaviour mailing list [email protected] http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
