ru | En
PHILOSOPHICAL
LITERARY
JOURNAL
ISSN 0869-5377
Author: Vyatkin Dmitry

Vyatkin Dmitry

Independent researcher, publisher, hylepress@gmail.com. Hyle Press, 87 Petropavlovskaya str., apt 216, Perm 614000, Russia.

Publications

“Plasma in Itself”: Between Ontology and Epistemology / Logos. 2017. № 3 (118). P. 57-82
annotation:  This article, based on texts and discussions concerning works of Bruno Latour and Graham Harman, examines the link between the problem of relations, which are never sufficient for changes to be made, and the problem of objects, which are always excessive for changes to be made. Both Latour and Harman solve these problems in their own ways; however, their solutions produce some byproducts in the form of special residues that cannot be fully assigned by their theories; both the authors name them “plasma.” This study focuses on clarifying the dynamics of such ontological and epistemological residues. It should be noted that based on these dynamics, Harman’s object-oriented philosophy, as well as Latour’s actor-network theory, turn out to be insensitive to the actual distribution of objects and relations, and this fact is proven by the introduction of plasma as an epistemological residue, which called to balance the redundancy of objects in Harman’s theory of objects (whereas in the actor-network theory of Latour, plasma acts as an ontological balance, balancing the lack of relationship). But such balancing in fact turns into a new imbalance. The problem then is that behind the facade of “smoothly” functioning object (Harman) and relational (Latour) machines there’s hidden a “shadow economy” providing their smooth operation by illegal sublimation of objects to relationships, and relationships — into objects. It is therefore required to move on to a more transparent and equitable distribution principle to consider (along with objects and relations) relations which are more essential than certain objects, and objects which are more essential than certain relations.
Keywords:  Graham Harman; Bruno Latour; plasma; objects; relations; actualism; ontological residues; epistemological residues

Vyatkin Dmitry

Independent researcher, publisher, hylepress@gmail.com. Hyle Press, 87 Petropavlovskaya str., apt 216, Perm 614000, Russia.

Publications

“Plasma in Itself”: Between Ontology and Epistemology / Logos. 2017. № 3 (118). P. 57-82
annotation:  This article, based on texts and discussions concerning works of Bruno Latour and Graham Harman, examines the link between the problem of relations, which are never sufficient for changes to be made, and the problem of objects, which are always excessive for changes to be made. Both Latour and Harman solve these problems in their own ways; however, their solutions produce some byproducts in the form of special residues that cannot be fully assigned by their theories; both the authors name them “plasma.” This study focuses on clarifying the dynamics of such ontological and epistemological residues. It should be noted that based on these dynamics, Harman’s object-oriented philosophy, as well as Latour’s actor-network theory, turn out to be insensitive to the actual distribution of objects and relations, and this fact is proven by the introduction of plasma as an epistemological residue, which called to balance the redundancy of objects in Harman’s theory of objects (whereas in the actor-network theory of Latour, plasma acts as an ontological balance, balancing the lack of relationship). But such balancing in fact turns into a new imbalance. The problem then is that behind the facade of “smoothly” functioning object (Harman) and relational (Latour) machines there’s hidden a “shadow economy” providing their smooth operation by illegal sublimation of objects to relationships, and relationships — into objects. It is therefore required to move on to a more transparent and equitable distribution principle to consider (along with objects and relations) relations which are more essential than certain objects, and objects which are more essential than certain relations.
Keywords:  Graham Harman; Bruno Latour; plasma; objects; relations; actualism; ontological residues; epistemological residues

Vyatkin Dmitry

Independent researcher, publisher, hylepress@gmail.com. Hyle Press, 87 Petropavlovskaya str., apt 216, Perm 614000, Russia.

Publications

“Plasma in Itself”: Between Ontology and Epistemology / Logos. 2017. № 3 (118). P. 57-82
annotation:  This article, based on texts and discussions concerning works of Bruno Latour and Graham Harman, examines the link between the problem of relations, which are never sufficient for changes to be made, and the problem of objects, which are always excessive for changes to be made. Both Latour and Harman solve these problems in their own ways; however, their solutions produce some byproducts in the form of special residues that cannot be fully assigned by their theories; both the authors name them “plasma.” This study focuses on clarifying the dynamics of such ontological and epistemological residues. It should be noted that based on these dynamics, Harman’s object-oriented philosophy, as well as Latour’s actor-network theory, turn out to be insensitive to the actual distribution of objects and relations, and this fact is proven by the introduction of plasma as an epistemological residue, which called to balance the redundancy of objects in Harman’s theory of objects (whereas in the actor-network theory of Latour, plasma acts as an ontological balance, balancing the lack of relationship). But such balancing in fact turns into a new imbalance. The problem then is that behind the facade of “smoothly” functioning object (Harman) and relational (Latour) machines there’s hidden a “shadow economy” providing their smooth operation by illegal sublimation of objects to relationships, and relationships — into objects. It is therefore required to move on to a more transparent and equitable distribution principle to consider (along with objects and relations) relations which are more essential than certain objects, and objects which are more essential than certain relations.
Keywords:  Graham Harman; Bruno Latour; plasma; objects; relations; actualism; ontological residues; epistemological residues

Vyatkin Dmitry

Independent researcher, publisher, hylepress@gmail.com. Hyle Press, 87 Petropavlovskaya str., apt 216, Perm 614000, Russia.

Publications

“Plasma in Itself”: Between Ontology and Epistemology / Logos. 2017. № 3 (118). P. 57-82
annotation:  This article, based on texts and discussions concerning works of Bruno Latour and Graham Harman, examines the link between the problem of relations, which are never sufficient for changes to be made, and the problem of objects, which are always excessive for changes to be made. Both Latour and Harman solve these problems in their own ways; however, their solutions produce some byproducts in the form of special residues that cannot be fully assigned by their theories; both the authors name them “plasma.” This study focuses on clarifying the dynamics of such ontological and epistemological residues. It should be noted that based on these dynamics, Harman’s object-oriented philosophy, as well as Latour’s actor-network theory, turn out to be insensitive to the actual distribution of objects and relations, and this fact is proven by the introduction of plasma as an epistemological residue, which called to balance the redundancy of objects in Harman’s theory of objects (whereas in the actor-network theory of Latour, plasma acts as an ontological balance, balancing the lack of relationship). But such balancing in fact turns into a new imbalance. The problem then is that behind the facade of “smoothly” functioning object (Harman) and relational (Latour) machines there’s hidden a “shadow economy” providing their smooth operation by illegal sublimation of objects to relationships, and relationships — into objects. It is therefore required to move on to a more transparent and equitable distribution principle to consider (along with objects and relations) relations which are more essential than certain objects, and objects which are more essential than certain relations.
Keywords:  Graham Harman; Bruno Latour; plasma; objects; relations; actualism; ontological residues; epistemological residues

Vyatkin Dmitry

Independent researcher, publisher, hylepress@gmail.com. Hyle Press, 87 Petropavlovskaya str., apt 216, Perm 614000, Russia.

Publications

“Plasma in Itself”: Between Ontology and Epistemology / Logos. 2017. № 3 (118). P. 57-82
annotation:  This article, based on texts and discussions concerning works of Bruno Latour and Graham Harman, examines the link between the problem of relations, which are never sufficient for changes to be made, and the problem of objects, which are always excessive for changes to be made. Both Latour and Harman solve these problems in their own ways; however, their solutions produce some byproducts in the form of special residues that cannot be fully assigned by their theories; both the authors name them “plasma.” This study focuses on clarifying the dynamics of such ontological and epistemological residues. It should be noted that based on these dynamics, Harman’s object-oriented philosophy, as well as Latour’s actor-network theory, turn out to be insensitive to the actual distribution of objects and relations, and this fact is proven by the introduction of plasma as an epistemological residue, which called to balance the redundancy of objects in Harman’s theory of objects (whereas in the actor-network theory of Latour, plasma acts as an ontological balance, balancing the lack of relationship). But such balancing in fact turns into a new imbalance. The problem then is that behind the facade of “smoothly” functioning object (Harman) and relational (Latour) machines there’s hidden a “shadow economy” providing their smooth operation by illegal sublimation of objects to relationships, and relationships — into objects. It is therefore required to move on to a more transparent and equitable distribution principle to consider (along with objects and relations) relations which are more essential than certain objects, and objects which are more essential than certain relations.
Keywords:  Graham Harman; Bruno Latour; plasma; objects; relations; actualism; ontological residues; epistemological residues

Vyatkin Dmitry

Independent researcher, publisher, hylepress@gmail.com. Hyle Press, 87 Petropavlovskaya str., apt 216, Perm 614000, Russia.

Publications

“Plasma in Itself”: Between Ontology and Epistemology / Logos. 2017. № 3 (118). P. 57-82
annotation:  This article, based on texts and discussions concerning works of Bruno Latour and Graham Harman, examines the link between the problem of relations, which are never sufficient for changes to be made, and the problem of objects, which are always excessive for changes to be made. Both Latour and Harman solve these problems in their own ways; however, their solutions produce some byproducts in the form of special residues that cannot be fully assigned by their theories; both the authors name them “plasma.” This study focuses on clarifying the dynamics of such ontological and epistemological residues. It should be noted that based on these dynamics, Harman’s object-oriented philosophy, as well as Latour’s actor-network theory, turn out to be insensitive to the actual distribution of objects and relations, and this fact is proven by the introduction of plasma as an epistemological residue, which called to balance the redundancy of objects in Harman’s theory of objects (whereas in the actor-network theory of Latour, plasma acts as an ontological balance, balancing the lack of relationship). But such balancing in fact turns into a new imbalance. The problem then is that behind the facade of “smoothly” functioning object (Harman) and relational (Latour) machines there’s hidden a “shadow economy” providing their smooth operation by illegal sublimation of objects to relationships, and relationships — into objects. It is therefore required to move on to a more transparent and equitable distribution principle to consider (along with objects and relations) relations which are more essential than certain objects, and objects which are more essential than certain relations.
Keywords:  Graham Harman; Bruno Latour; plasma; objects; relations; actualism; ontological residues; epistemological residues

Vyatkin Dmitry

Independent researcher, publisher, hylepress@gmail.com. Hyle Press, 87 Petropavlovskaya str., apt 216, Perm 614000, Russia.

Publications

“Plasma in Itself”: Between Ontology and Epistemology / Logos. 2017. № 3 (118). P. 57-82
annotation:  This article, based on texts and discussions concerning works of Bruno Latour and Graham Harman, examines the link between the problem of relations, which are never sufficient for changes to be made, and the problem of objects, which are always excessive for changes to be made. Both Latour and Harman solve these problems in their own ways; however, their solutions produce some byproducts in the form of special residues that cannot be fully assigned by their theories; both the authors name them “plasma.” This study focuses on clarifying the dynamics of such ontological and epistemological residues. It should be noted that based on these dynamics, Harman’s object-oriented philosophy, as well as Latour’s actor-network theory, turn out to be insensitive to the actual distribution of objects and relations, and this fact is proven by the introduction of plasma as an epistemological residue, which called to balance the redundancy of objects in Harman’s theory of objects (whereas in the actor-network theory of Latour, plasma acts as an ontological balance, balancing the lack of relationship). But such balancing in fact turns into a new imbalance. The problem then is that behind the facade of “smoothly” functioning object (Harman) and relational (Latour) machines there’s hidden a “shadow economy” providing their smooth operation by illegal sublimation of objects to relationships, and relationships — into objects. It is therefore required to move on to a more transparent and equitable distribution principle to consider (along with objects and relations) relations which are more essential than certain objects, and objects which are more essential than certain relations.
Keywords:  Graham Harman; Bruno Latour; plasma; objects; relations; actualism; ontological residues; epistemological residues

Vyatkin Dmitry

Independent researcher, publisher, hylepress@gmail.com. Hyle Press, 87 Petropavlovskaya str., apt 216, Perm 614000, Russia.

Publications

“Plasma in Itself”: Between Ontology and Epistemology / Logos. 2017. № 3 (118). P. 57-82
annotation:  This article, based on texts and discussions concerning works of Bruno Latour and Graham Harman, examines the link between the problem of relations, which are never sufficient for changes to be made, and the problem of objects, which are always excessive for changes to be made. Both Latour and Harman solve these problems in their own ways; however, their solutions produce some byproducts in the form of special residues that cannot be fully assigned by their theories; both the authors name them “plasma.” This study focuses on clarifying the dynamics of such ontological and epistemological residues. It should be noted that based on these dynamics, Harman’s object-oriented philosophy, as well as Latour’s actor-network theory, turn out to be insensitive to the actual distribution of objects and relations, and this fact is proven by the introduction of plasma as an epistemological residue, which called to balance the redundancy of objects in Harman’s theory of objects (whereas in the actor-network theory of Latour, plasma acts as an ontological balance, balancing the lack of relationship). But such balancing in fact turns into a new imbalance. The problem then is that behind the facade of “smoothly” functioning object (Harman) and relational (Latour) machines there’s hidden a “shadow economy” providing their smooth operation by illegal sublimation of objects to relationships, and relationships — into objects. It is therefore required to move on to a more transparent and equitable distribution principle to consider (along with objects and relations) relations which are more essential than certain objects, and objects which are more essential than certain relations.
Keywords:  Graham Harman; Bruno Latour; plasma; objects; relations; actualism; ontological residues; epistemological residues

Vyatkin Dmitry

Independent researcher, publisher, hylepress@gmail.com. Hyle Press, 87 Petropavlovskaya str., apt 216, Perm 614000, Russia.

Publications

“Plasma in Itself”: Between Ontology and Epistemology / Logos. 2017. № 3 (118). P. 57-82
annotation:  This article, based on texts and discussions concerning works of Bruno Latour and Graham Harman, examines the link between the problem of relations, which are never sufficient for changes to be made, and the problem of objects, which are always excessive for changes to be made. Both Latour and Harman solve these problems in their own ways; however, their solutions produce some byproducts in the form of special residues that cannot be fully assigned by their theories; both the authors name them “plasma.” This study focuses on clarifying the dynamics of such ontological and epistemological residues. It should be noted that based on these dynamics, Harman’s object-oriented philosophy, as well as Latour’s actor-network theory, turn out to be insensitive to the actual distribution of objects and relations, and this fact is proven by the introduction of plasma as an epistemological residue, which called to balance the redundancy of objects in Harman’s theory of objects (whereas in the actor-network theory of Latour, plasma acts as an ontological balance, balancing the lack of relationship). But such balancing in fact turns into a new imbalance. The problem then is that behind the facade of “smoothly” functioning object (Harman) and relational (Latour) machines there’s hidden a “shadow economy” providing their smooth operation by illegal sublimation of objects to relationships, and relationships — into objects. It is therefore required to move on to a more transparent and equitable distribution principle to consider (along with objects and relations) relations which are more essential than certain objects, and objects which are more essential than certain relations.
Keywords:  Graham Harman; Bruno Latour; plasma; objects; relations; actualism; ontological residues; epistemological residues

Vyatkin Dmitry

Independent researcher, publisher, hylepress@gmail.com. Hyle Press, 87 Petropavlovskaya str., apt 216, Perm 614000, Russia.

Publications

“Plasma in Itself”: Between Ontology and Epistemology / Logos. 2017. № 3 (118). P. 57-82
annotation:  This article, based on texts and discussions concerning works of Bruno Latour and Graham Harman, examines the link between the problem of relations, which are never sufficient for changes to be made, and the problem of objects, which are always excessive for changes to be made. Both Latour and Harman solve these problems in their own ways; however, their solutions produce some byproducts in the form of special residues that cannot be fully assigned by their theories; both the authors name them “plasma.” This study focuses on clarifying the dynamics of such ontological and epistemological residues. It should be noted that based on these dynamics, Harman’s object-oriented philosophy, as well as Latour’s actor-network theory, turn out to be insensitive to the actual distribution of objects and relations, and this fact is proven by the introduction of plasma as an epistemological residue, which called to balance the redundancy of objects in Harman’s theory of objects (whereas in the actor-network theory of Latour, plasma acts as an ontological balance, balancing the lack of relationship). But such balancing in fact turns into a new imbalance. The problem then is that behind the facade of “smoothly” functioning object (Harman) and relational (Latour) machines there’s hidden a “shadow economy” providing their smooth operation by illegal sublimation of objects to relationships, and relationships — into objects. It is therefore required to move on to a more transparent and equitable distribution principle to consider (along with objects and relations) relations which are more essential than certain objects, and objects which are more essential than certain relations.
Keywords:  Graham Harman; Bruno Latour; plasma; objects; relations; actualism; ontological residues; epistemological residues

Vyatkin Dmitry

Independent researcher, publisher, hylepress@gmail.com. Hyle Press, 87 Petropavlovskaya str., apt 216, Perm 614000, Russia.

Publications

“Plasma in Itself”: Between Ontology and Epistemology / Logos. 2017. № 3 (118). P. 57-82
annotation:  This article, based on texts and discussions concerning works of Bruno Latour and Graham Harman, examines the link between the problem of relations, which are never sufficient for changes to be made, and the problem of objects, which are always excessive for changes to be made. Both Latour and Harman solve these problems in their own ways; however, their solutions produce some byproducts in the form of special residues that cannot be fully assigned by their theories; both the authors name them “plasma.” This study focuses on clarifying the dynamics of such ontological and epistemological residues. It should be noted that based on these dynamics, Harman’s object-oriented philosophy, as well as Latour’s actor-network theory, turn out to be insensitive to the actual distribution of objects and relations, and this fact is proven by the introduction of plasma as an epistemological residue, which called to balance the redundancy of objects in Harman’s theory of objects (whereas in the actor-network theory of Latour, plasma acts as an ontological balance, balancing the lack of relationship). But such balancing in fact turns into a new imbalance. The problem then is that behind the facade of “smoothly” functioning object (Harman) and relational (Latour) machines there’s hidden a “shadow economy” providing their smooth operation by illegal sublimation of objects to relationships, and relationships — into objects. It is therefore required to move on to a more transparent and equitable distribution principle to consider (along with objects and relations) relations which are more essential than certain objects, and objects which are more essential than certain relations.
Keywords:  Graham Harman; Bruno Latour; plasma; objects; relations; actualism; ontological residues; epistemological residues

Vyatkin Dmitry

Independent researcher, publisher, hylepress@gmail.com. Hyle Press, 87 Petropavlovskaya str., apt 216, Perm 614000, Russia.

Publications

“Plasma in Itself”: Between Ontology and Epistemology / Logos. 2017. № 3 (118). P. 57-82
annotation:  This article, based on texts and discussions concerning works of Bruno Latour and Graham Harman, examines the link between the problem of relations, which are never sufficient for changes to be made, and the problem of objects, which are always excessive for changes to be made. Both Latour and Harman solve these problems in their own ways; however, their solutions produce some byproducts in the form of special residues that cannot be fully assigned by their theories; both the authors name them “plasma.” This study focuses on clarifying the dynamics of such ontological and epistemological residues. It should be noted that based on these dynamics, Harman’s object-oriented philosophy, as well as Latour’s actor-network theory, turn out to be insensitive to the actual distribution of objects and relations, and this fact is proven by the introduction of plasma as an epistemological residue, which called to balance the redundancy of objects in Harman’s theory of objects (whereas in the actor-network theory of Latour, plasma acts as an ontological balance, balancing the lack of relationship). But such balancing in fact turns into a new imbalance. The problem then is that behind the facade of “smoothly” functioning object (Harman) and relational (Latour) machines there’s hidden a “shadow economy” providing their smooth operation by illegal sublimation of objects to relationships, and relationships — into objects. It is therefore required to move on to a more transparent and equitable distribution principle to consider (along with objects and relations) relations which are more essential than certain objects, and objects which are more essential than certain relations.
Keywords:  Graham Harman; Bruno Latour; plasma; objects; relations; actualism; ontological residues; epistemological residues

Vyatkin Dmitry

Independent researcher, publisher, hylepress@gmail.com. Hyle Press, 87 Petropavlovskaya str., apt 216, Perm 614000, Russia.

Publications

“Plasma in Itself”: Between Ontology and Epistemology / Logos. 2017. № 3 (118). P. 57-82
annotation:  This article, based on texts and discussions concerning works of Bruno Latour and Graham Harman, examines the link between the problem of relations, which are never sufficient for changes to be made, and the problem of objects, which are always excessive for changes to be made. Both Latour and Harman solve these problems in their own ways; however, their solutions produce some byproducts in the form of special residues that cannot be fully assigned by their theories; both the authors name them “plasma.” This study focuses on clarifying the dynamics of such ontological and epistemological residues. It should be noted that based on these dynamics, Harman’s object-oriented philosophy, as well as Latour’s actor-network theory, turn out to be insensitive to the actual distribution of objects and relations, and this fact is proven by the introduction of plasma as an epistemological residue, which called to balance the redundancy of objects in Harman’s theory of objects (whereas in the actor-network theory of Latour, plasma acts as an ontological balance, balancing the lack of relationship). But such balancing in fact turns into a new imbalance. The problem then is that behind the facade of “smoothly” functioning object (Harman) and relational (Latour) machines there’s hidden a “shadow economy” providing their smooth operation by illegal sublimation of objects to relationships, and relationships — into objects. It is therefore required to move on to a more transparent and equitable distribution principle to consider (along with objects and relations) relations which are more essential than certain objects, and objects which are more essential than certain relations.
Keywords:  Graham Harman; Bruno Latour; plasma; objects; relations; actualism; ontological residues; epistemological residues

Vyatkin Dmitry

Independent researcher, publisher, hylepress@gmail.com. Hyle Press, 87 Petropavlovskaya str., apt 216, Perm 614000, Russia.

Publications

“Plasma in Itself”: Between Ontology and Epistemology / Logos. 2017. № 3 (118). P. 57-82
annotation:  This article, based on texts and discussions concerning works of Bruno Latour and Graham Harman, examines the link between the problem of relations, which are never sufficient for changes to be made, and the problem of objects, which are always excessive for changes to be made. Both Latour and Harman solve these problems in their own ways; however, their solutions produce some byproducts in the form of special residues that cannot be fully assigned by their theories; both the authors name them “plasma.” This study focuses on clarifying the dynamics of such ontological and epistemological residues. It should be noted that based on these dynamics, Harman’s object-oriented philosophy, as well as Latour’s actor-network theory, turn out to be insensitive to the actual distribution of objects and relations, and this fact is proven by the introduction of plasma as an epistemological residue, which called to balance the redundancy of objects in Harman’s theory of objects (whereas in the actor-network theory of Latour, plasma acts as an ontological balance, balancing the lack of relationship). But such balancing in fact turns into a new imbalance. The problem then is that behind the facade of “smoothly” functioning object (Harman) and relational (Latour) machines there’s hidden a “shadow economy” providing their smooth operation by illegal sublimation of objects to relationships, and relationships — into objects. It is therefore required to move on to a more transparent and equitable distribution principle to consider (along with objects and relations) relations which are more essential than certain objects, and objects which are more essential than certain relations.
Keywords:  Graham Harman; Bruno Latour; plasma; objects; relations; actualism; ontological residues; epistemological residues

Vyatkin Dmitry

Independent researcher, publisher, hylepress@gmail.com. Hyle Press, 87 Petropavlovskaya str., apt 216, Perm 614000, Russia.

Publications

“Plasma in Itself”: Between Ontology and Epistemology / Logos. 2017. № 3 (118). P. 57-82
annotation:  This article, based on texts and discussions concerning works of Bruno Latour and Graham Harman, examines the link between the problem of relations, which are never sufficient for changes to be made, and the problem of objects, which are always excessive for changes to be made. Both Latour and Harman solve these problems in their own ways; however, their solutions produce some byproducts in the form of special residues that cannot be fully assigned by their theories; both the authors name them “plasma.” This study focuses on clarifying the dynamics of such ontological and epistemological residues. It should be noted that based on these dynamics, Harman’s object-oriented philosophy, as well as Latour’s actor-network theory, turn out to be insensitive to the actual distribution of objects and relations, and this fact is proven by the introduction of plasma as an epistemological residue, which called to balance the redundancy of objects in Harman’s theory of objects (whereas in the actor-network theory of Latour, plasma acts as an ontological balance, balancing the lack of relationship). But such balancing in fact turns into a new imbalance. The problem then is that behind the facade of “smoothly” functioning object (Harman) and relational (Latour) machines there’s hidden a “shadow economy” providing their smooth operation by illegal sublimation of objects to relationships, and relationships — into objects. It is therefore required to move on to a more transparent and equitable distribution principle to consider (along with objects and relations) relations which are more essential than certain objects, and objects which are more essential than certain relations.
Keywords:  Graham Harman; Bruno Latour; plasma; objects; relations; actualism; ontological residues; epistemological residues

Vyatkin Dmitry

Independent researcher, publisher, hylepress@gmail.com. Hyle Press, 87 Petropavlovskaya str., apt 216, Perm 614000, Russia.

Publications

“Plasma in Itself”: Between Ontology and Epistemology / Logos. 2017. № 3 (118). P. 57-82
annotation:  This article, based on texts and discussions concerning works of Bruno Latour and Graham Harman, examines the link between the problem of relations, which are never sufficient for changes to be made, and the problem of objects, which are always excessive for changes to be made. Both Latour and Harman solve these problems in their own ways; however, their solutions produce some byproducts in the form of special residues that cannot be fully assigned by their theories; both the authors name them “plasma.” This study focuses on clarifying the dynamics of such ontological and epistemological residues. It should be noted that based on these dynamics, Harman’s object-oriented philosophy, as well as Latour’s actor-network theory, turn out to be insensitive to the actual distribution of objects and relations, and this fact is proven by the introduction of plasma as an epistemological residue, which called to balance the redundancy of objects in Harman’s theory of objects (whereas in the actor-network theory of Latour, plasma acts as an ontological balance, balancing the lack of relationship). But such balancing in fact turns into a new imbalance. The problem then is that behind the facade of “smoothly” functioning object (Harman) and relational (Latour) machines there’s hidden a “shadow economy” providing their smooth operation by illegal sublimation of objects to relationships, and relationships — into objects. It is therefore required to move on to a more transparent and equitable distribution principle to consider (along with objects and relations) relations which are more essential than certain objects, and objects which are more essential than certain relations.
Keywords:  Graham Harman; Bruno Latour; plasma; objects; relations; actualism; ontological residues; epistemological residues

Vyatkin Dmitry

Independent researcher, publisher, hylepress@gmail.com. Hyle Press, 87 Petropavlovskaya str., apt 216, Perm 614000, Russia.

Publications

“Plasma in Itself”: Between Ontology and Epistemology / Logos. 2017. № 3 (118). P. 57-82
annotation:  This article, based on texts and discussions concerning works of Bruno Latour and Graham Harman, examines the link between the problem of relations, which are never sufficient for changes to be made, and the problem of objects, which are always excessive for changes to be made. Both Latour and Harman solve these problems in their own ways; however, their solutions produce some byproducts in the form of special residues that cannot be fully assigned by their theories; both the authors name them “plasma.” This study focuses on clarifying the dynamics of such ontological and epistemological residues. It should be noted that based on these dynamics, Harman’s object-oriented philosophy, as well as Latour’s actor-network theory, turn out to be insensitive to the actual distribution of objects and relations, and this fact is proven by the introduction of plasma as an epistemological residue, which called to balance the redundancy of objects in Harman’s theory of objects (whereas in the actor-network theory of Latour, plasma acts as an ontological balance, balancing the lack of relationship). But such balancing in fact turns into a new imbalance. The problem then is that behind the facade of “smoothly” functioning object (Harman) and relational (Latour) machines there’s hidden a “shadow economy” providing their smooth operation by illegal sublimation of objects to relationships, and relationships — into objects. It is therefore required to move on to a more transparent and equitable distribution principle to consider (along with objects and relations) relations which are more essential than certain objects, and objects which are more essential than certain relations.
Keywords:  Graham Harman; Bruno Latour; plasma; objects; relations; actualism; ontological residues; epistemological residues

Vyatkin Dmitry

Independent researcher, publisher, hylepress@gmail.com. Hyle Press, 87 Petropavlovskaya str., apt 216, Perm 614000, Russia.

Publications

“Plasma in Itself”: Between Ontology and Epistemology / Logos. 2017. № 3 (118). P. 57-82
annotation:  This article, based on texts and discussions concerning works of Bruno Latour and Graham Harman, examines the link between the problem of relations, which are never sufficient for changes to be made, and the problem of objects, which are always excessive for changes to be made. Both Latour and Harman solve these problems in their own ways; however, their solutions produce some byproducts in the form of special residues that cannot be fully assigned by their theories; both the authors name them “plasma.” This study focuses on clarifying the dynamics of such ontological and epistemological residues. It should be noted that based on these dynamics, Harman’s object-oriented philosophy, as well as Latour’s actor-network theory, turn out to be insensitive to the actual distribution of objects and relations, and this fact is proven by the introduction of plasma as an epistemological residue, which called to balance the redundancy of objects in Harman’s theory of objects (whereas in the actor-network theory of Latour, plasma acts as an ontological balance, balancing the lack of relationship). But such balancing in fact turns into a new imbalance. The problem then is that behind the facade of “smoothly” functioning object (Harman) and relational (Latour) machines there’s hidden a “shadow economy” providing their smooth operation by illegal sublimation of objects to relationships, and relationships — into objects. It is therefore required to move on to a more transparent and equitable distribution principle to consider (along with objects and relations) relations which are more essential than certain objects, and objects which are more essential than certain relations.
Keywords:  Graham Harman; Bruno Latour; plasma; objects; relations; actualism; ontological residues; epistemological residues

Vyatkin Dmitry

Independent researcher, publisher, hylepress@gmail.com. Hyle Press, 87 Petropavlovskaya str., apt 216, Perm 614000, Russia.

Publications

“Plasma in Itself”: Between Ontology and Epistemology / Logos. 2017. № 3 (118). P. 57-82
annotation:  This article, based on texts and discussions concerning works of Bruno Latour and Graham Harman, examines the link between the problem of relations, which are never sufficient for changes to be made, and the problem of objects, which are always excessive for changes to be made. Both Latour and Harman solve these problems in their own ways; however, their solutions produce some byproducts in the form of special residues that cannot be fully assigned by their theories; both the authors name them “plasma.” This study focuses on clarifying the dynamics of such ontological and epistemological residues. It should be noted that based on these dynamics, Harman’s object-oriented philosophy, as well as Latour’s actor-network theory, turn out to be insensitive to the actual distribution of objects and relations, and this fact is proven by the introduction of plasma as an epistemological residue, which called to balance the redundancy of objects in Harman’s theory of objects (whereas in the actor-network theory of Latour, plasma acts as an ontological balance, balancing the lack of relationship). But such balancing in fact turns into a new imbalance. The problem then is that behind the facade of “smoothly” functioning object (Harman) and relational (Latour) machines there’s hidden a “shadow economy” providing their smooth operation by illegal sublimation of objects to relationships, and relationships — into objects. It is therefore required to move on to a more transparent and equitable distribution principle to consider (along with objects and relations) relations which are more essential than certain objects, and objects which are more essential than certain relations.
Keywords:  Graham Harman; Bruno Latour; plasma; objects; relations; actualism; ontological residues; epistemological residues

Vyatkin Dmitry

Independent researcher, publisher, hylepress@gmail.com. Hyle Press, 87 Petropavlovskaya str., apt 216, Perm 614000, Russia.

Publications

“Plasma in Itself”: Between Ontology and Epistemology / Logos. 2017. № 3 (118). P. 57-82
annotation:  This article, based on texts and discussions concerning works of Bruno Latour and Graham Harman, examines the link between the problem of relations, which are never sufficient for changes to be made, and the problem of objects, which are always excessive for changes to be made. Both Latour and Harman solve these problems in their own ways; however, their solutions produce some byproducts in the form of special residues that cannot be fully assigned by their theories; both the authors name them “plasma.” This study focuses on clarifying the dynamics of such ontological and epistemological residues. It should be noted that based on these dynamics, Harman’s object-oriented philosophy, as well as Latour’s actor-network theory, turn out to be insensitive to the actual distribution of objects and relations, and this fact is proven by the introduction of plasma as an epistemological residue, which called to balance the redundancy of objects in Harman’s theory of objects (whereas in the actor-network theory of Latour, plasma acts as an ontological balance, balancing the lack of relationship). But such balancing in fact turns into a new imbalance. The problem then is that behind the facade of “smoothly” functioning object (Harman) and relational (Latour) machines there’s hidden a “shadow economy” providing their smooth operation by illegal sublimation of objects to relationships, and relationships — into objects. It is therefore required to move on to a more transparent and equitable distribution principle to consider (along with objects and relations) relations which are more essential than certain objects, and objects which are more essential than certain relations.
Keywords:  Graham Harman; Bruno Latour; plasma; objects; relations; actualism; ontological residues; epistemological residues

Vyatkin Dmitry

Independent researcher, publisher, hylepress@gmail.com. Hyle Press, 87 Petropavlovskaya str., apt 216, Perm 614000, Russia.

Publications

“Plasma in Itself”: Between Ontology and Epistemology / Logos. 2017. № 3 (118). P. 57-82
annotation:  This article, based on texts and discussions concerning works of Bruno Latour and Graham Harman, examines the link between the problem of relations, which are never sufficient for changes to be made, and the problem of objects, which are always excessive for changes to be made. Both Latour and Harman solve these problems in their own ways; however, their solutions produce some byproducts in the form of special residues that cannot be fully assigned by their theories; both the authors name them “plasma.” This study focuses on clarifying the dynamics of such ontological and epistemological residues. It should be noted that based on these dynamics, Harman’s object-oriented philosophy, as well as Latour’s actor-network theory, turn out to be insensitive to the actual distribution of objects and relations, and this fact is proven by the introduction of plasma as an epistemological residue, which called to balance the redundancy of objects in Harman’s theory of objects (whereas in the actor-network theory of Latour, plasma acts as an ontological balance, balancing the lack of relationship). But such balancing in fact turns into a new imbalance. The problem then is that behind the facade of “smoothly” functioning object (Harman) and relational (Latour) machines there’s hidden a “shadow economy” providing their smooth operation by illegal sublimation of objects to relationships, and relationships — into objects. It is therefore required to move on to a more transparent and equitable distribution principle to consider (along with objects and relations) relations which are more essential than certain objects, and objects which are more essential than certain relations.
Keywords:  Graham Harman; Bruno Latour; plasma; objects; relations; actualism; ontological residues; epistemological residues

Vyatkin Dmitry

Independent researcher, publisher, hylepress@gmail.com. Hyle Press, 87 Petropavlovskaya str., apt 216, Perm 614000, Russia.

Publications

“Plasma in Itself”: Between Ontology and Epistemology / Logos. 2017. № 3 (118). P. 57-82
annotation:  This article, based on texts and discussions concerning works of Bruno Latour and Graham Harman, examines the link between the problem of relations, which are never sufficient for changes to be made, and the problem of objects, which are always excessive for changes to be made. Both Latour and Harman solve these problems in their own ways; however, their solutions produce some byproducts in the form of special residues that cannot be fully assigned by their theories; both the authors name them “plasma.” This study focuses on clarifying the dynamics of such ontological and epistemological residues. It should be noted that based on these dynamics, Harman’s object-oriented philosophy, as well as Latour’s actor-network theory, turn out to be insensitive to the actual distribution of objects and relations, and this fact is proven by the introduction of plasma as an epistemological residue, which called to balance the redundancy of objects in Harman’s theory of objects (whereas in the actor-network theory of Latour, plasma acts as an ontological balance, balancing the lack of relationship). But such balancing in fact turns into a new imbalance. The problem then is that behind the facade of “smoothly” functioning object (Harman) and relational (Latour) machines there’s hidden a “shadow economy” providing their smooth operation by illegal sublimation of objects to relationships, and relationships — into objects. It is therefore required to move on to a more transparent and equitable distribution principle to consider (along with objects and relations) relations which are more essential than certain objects, and objects which are more essential than certain relations.
Keywords:  Graham Harman; Bruno Latour; plasma; objects; relations; actualism; ontological residues; epistemological residues

Vyatkin Dmitry

Independent researcher, publisher, hylepress@gmail.com. Hyle Press, 87 Petropavlovskaya str., apt 216, Perm 614000, Russia.

Publications

“Plasma in Itself”: Between Ontology and Epistemology / Logos. 2017. № 3 (118). P. 57-82
annotation:  This article, based on texts and discussions concerning works of Bruno Latour and Graham Harman, examines the link between the problem of relations, which are never sufficient for changes to be made, and the problem of objects, which are always excessive for changes to be made. Both Latour and Harman solve these problems in their own ways; however, their solutions produce some byproducts in the form of special residues that cannot be fully assigned by their theories; both the authors name them “plasma.” This study focuses on clarifying the dynamics of such ontological and epistemological residues. It should be noted that based on these dynamics, Harman’s object-oriented philosophy, as well as Latour’s actor-network theory, turn out to be insensitive to the actual distribution of objects and relations, and this fact is proven by the introduction of plasma as an epistemological residue, which called to balance the redundancy of objects in Harman’s theory of objects (whereas in the actor-network theory of Latour, plasma acts as an ontological balance, balancing the lack of relationship). But such balancing in fact turns into a new imbalance. The problem then is that behind the facade of “smoothly” functioning object (Harman) and relational (Latour) machines there’s hidden a “shadow economy” providing their smooth operation by illegal sublimation of objects to relationships, and relationships — into objects. It is therefore required to move on to a more transparent and equitable distribution principle to consider (along with objects and relations) relations which are more essential than certain objects, and objects which are more essential than certain relations.
Keywords:  Graham Harman; Bruno Latour; plasma; objects; relations; actualism; ontological residues; epistemological residues

Vyatkin Dmitry

Independent researcher, publisher, hylepress@gmail.com. Hyle Press, 87 Petropavlovskaya str., apt 216, Perm 614000, Russia.

Publications

“Plasma in Itself”: Between Ontology and Epistemology / Logos. 2017. № 3 (118). P. 57-82
annotation:  This article, based on texts and discussions concerning works of Bruno Latour and Graham Harman, examines the link between the problem of relations, which are never sufficient for changes to be made, and the problem of objects, which are always excessive for changes to be made. Both Latour and Harman solve these problems in their own ways; however, their solutions produce some byproducts in the form of special residues that cannot be fully assigned by their theories; both the authors name them “plasma.” This study focuses on clarifying the dynamics of such ontological and epistemological residues. It should be noted that based on these dynamics, Harman’s object-oriented philosophy, as well as Latour’s actor-network theory, turn out to be insensitive to the actual distribution of objects and relations, and this fact is proven by the introduction of plasma as an epistemological residue, which called to balance the redundancy of objects in Harman’s theory of objects (whereas in the actor-network theory of Latour, plasma acts as an ontological balance, balancing the lack of relationship). But such balancing in fact turns into a new imbalance. The problem then is that behind the facade of “smoothly” functioning object (Harman) and relational (Latour) machines there’s hidden a “shadow economy” providing their smooth operation by illegal sublimation of objects to relationships, and relationships — into objects. It is therefore required to move on to a more transparent and equitable distribution principle to consider (along with objects and relations) relations which are more essential than certain objects, and objects which are more essential than certain relations.
Keywords:  Graham Harman; Bruno Latour; plasma; objects; relations; actualism; ontological residues; epistemological residues

Vyatkin Dmitry

Independent researcher, publisher, hylepress@gmail.com. Hyle Press, 87 Petropavlovskaya str., apt 216, Perm 614000, Russia.

Publications

“Plasma in Itself”: Between Ontology and Epistemology / Logos. 2017. № 3 (118). P. 57-82
annotation:  This article, based on texts and discussions concerning works of Bruno Latour and Graham Harman, examines the link between the problem of relations, which are never sufficient for changes to be made, and the problem of objects, which are always excessive for changes to be made. Both Latour and Harman solve these problems in their own ways; however, their solutions produce some byproducts in the form of special residues that cannot be fully assigned by their theories; both the authors name them “plasma.” This study focuses on clarifying the dynamics of such ontological and epistemological residues. It should be noted that based on these dynamics, Harman’s object-oriented philosophy, as well as Latour’s actor-network theory, turn out to be insensitive to the actual distribution of objects and relations, and this fact is proven by the introduction of plasma as an epistemological residue, which called to balance the redundancy of objects in Harman’s theory of objects (whereas in the actor-network theory of Latour, plasma acts as an ontological balance, balancing the lack of relationship). But such balancing in fact turns into a new imbalance. The problem then is that behind the facade of “smoothly” functioning object (Harman) and relational (Latour) machines there’s hidden a “shadow economy” providing their smooth operation by illegal sublimation of objects to relationships, and relationships — into objects. It is therefore required to move on to a more transparent and equitable distribution principle to consider (along with objects and relations) relations which are more essential than certain objects, and objects which are more essential than certain relations.
Keywords:  Graham Harman; Bruno Latour; plasma; objects; relations; actualism; ontological residues; epistemological residues

Vyatkin Dmitry

Independent researcher, publisher, hylepress@gmail.com. Hyle Press, 87 Petropavlovskaya str., apt 216, Perm 614000, Russia.

Publications

“Plasma in Itself”: Between Ontology and Epistemology / Logos. 2017. № 3 (118). P. 57-82
annotation:  This article, based on texts and discussions concerning works of Bruno Latour and Graham Harman, examines the link between the problem of relations, which are never sufficient for changes to be made, and the problem of objects, which are always excessive for changes to be made. Both Latour and Harman solve these problems in their own ways; however, their solutions produce some byproducts in the form of special residues that cannot be fully assigned by their theories; both the authors name them “plasma.” This study focuses on clarifying the dynamics of such ontological and epistemological residues. It should be noted that based on these dynamics, Harman’s object-oriented philosophy, as well as Latour’s actor-network theory, turn out to be insensitive to the actual distribution of objects and relations, and this fact is proven by the introduction of plasma as an epistemological residue, which called to balance the redundancy of objects in Harman’s theory of objects (whereas in the actor-network theory of Latour, plasma acts as an ontological balance, balancing the lack of relationship). But such balancing in fact turns into a new imbalance. The problem then is that behind the facade of “smoothly” functioning object (Harman) and relational (Latour) machines there’s hidden a “shadow economy” providing their smooth operation by illegal sublimation of objects to relationships, and relationships — into objects. It is therefore required to move on to a more transparent and equitable distribution principle to consider (along with objects and relations) relations which are more essential than certain objects, and objects which are more essential than certain relations.
Keywords:  Graham Harman; Bruno Latour; plasma; objects; relations; actualism; ontological residues; epistemological residues

Vyatkin Dmitry

Independent researcher, publisher, hylepress@gmail.com. Hyle Press, 87 Petropavlovskaya str., apt 216, Perm 614000, Russia.

Publications

“Plasma in Itself”: Between Ontology and Epistemology / Logos. 2017. № 3 (118). P. 57-82
annotation:  This article, based on texts and discussions concerning works of Bruno Latour and Graham Harman, examines the link between the problem of relations, which are never sufficient for changes to be made, and the problem of objects, which are always excessive for changes to be made. Both Latour and Harman solve these problems in their own ways; however, their solutions produce some byproducts in the form of special residues that cannot be fully assigned by their theories; both the authors name them “plasma.” This study focuses on clarifying the dynamics of such ontological and epistemological residues. It should be noted that based on these dynamics, Harman’s object-oriented philosophy, as well as Latour’s actor-network theory, turn out to be insensitive to the actual distribution of objects and relations, and this fact is proven by the introduction of plasma as an epistemological residue, which called to balance the redundancy of objects in Harman’s theory of objects (whereas in the actor-network theory of Latour, plasma acts as an ontological balance, balancing the lack of relationship). But such balancing in fact turns into a new imbalance. The problem then is that behind the facade of “smoothly” functioning object (Harman) and relational (Latour) machines there’s hidden a “shadow economy” providing their smooth operation by illegal sublimation of objects to relationships, and relationships — into objects. It is therefore required to move on to a more transparent and equitable distribution principle to consider (along with objects and relations) relations which are more essential than certain objects, and objects which are more essential than certain relations.
Keywords:  Graham Harman; Bruno Latour; plasma; objects; relations; actualism; ontological residues; epistemological residues

Vyatkin Dmitry

Independent researcher, publisher, hylepress@gmail.com. Hyle Press, 87 Petropavlovskaya str., apt 216, Perm 614000, Russia.

Publications

“Plasma in Itself”: Between Ontology and Epistemology / Logos. 2017. № 3 (118). P. 57-82
annotation:  This article, based on texts and discussions concerning works of Bruno Latour and Graham Harman, examines the link between the problem of relations, which are never sufficient for changes to be made, and the problem of objects, which are always excessive for changes to be made. Both Latour and Harman solve these problems in their own ways; however, their solutions produce some byproducts in the form of special residues that cannot be fully assigned by their theories; both the authors name them “plasma.” This study focuses on clarifying the dynamics of such ontological and epistemological residues. It should be noted that based on these dynamics, Harman’s object-oriented philosophy, as well as Latour’s actor-network theory, turn out to be insensitive to the actual distribution of objects and relations, and this fact is proven by the introduction of plasma as an epistemological residue, which called to balance the redundancy of objects in Harman’s theory of objects (whereas in the actor-network theory of Latour, plasma acts as an ontological balance, balancing the lack of relationship). But such balancing in fact turns into a new imbalance. The problem then is that behind the facade of “smoothly” functioning object (Harman) and relational (Latour) machines there’s hidden a “shadow economy” providing their smooth operation by illegal sublimation of objects to relationships, and relationships — into objects. It is therefore required to move on to a more transparent and equitable distribution principle to consider (along with objects and relations) relations which are more essential than certain objects, and objects which are more essential than certain relations.
Keywords:  Graham Harman; Bruno Latour; plasma; objects; relations; actualism; ontological residues; epistemological residues

Vyatkin Dmitry

Independent researcher, publisher, hylepress@gmail.com. Hyle Press, 87 Petropavlovskaya str., apt 216, Perm 614000, Russia.

Publications

“Plasma in Itself”: Between Ontology and Epistemology / Logos. 2017. № 3 (118). P. 57-82
annotation:  This article, based on texts and discussions concerning works of Bruno Latour and Graham Harman, examines the link between the problem of relations, which are never sufficient for changes to be made, and the problem of objects, which are always excessive for changes to be made. Both Latour and Harman solve these problems in their own ways; however, their solutions produce some byproducts in the form of special residues that cannot be fully assigned by their theories; both the authors name them “plasma.” This study focuses on clarifying the dynamics of such ontological and epistemological residues. It should be noted that based on these dynamics, Harman’s object-oriented philosophy, as well as Latour’s actor-network theory, turn out to be insensitive to the actual distribution of objects and relations, and this fact is proven by the introduction of plasma as an epistemological residue, which called to balance the redundancy of objects in Harman’s theory of objects (whereas in the actor-network theory of Latour, plasma acts as an ontological balance, balancing the lack of relationship). But such balancing in fact turns into a new imbalance. The problem then is that behind the facade of “smoothly” functioning object (Harman) and relational (Latour) machines there’s hidden a “shadow economy” providing their smooth operation by illegal sublimation of objects to relationships, and relationships — into objects. It is therefore required to move on to a more transparent and equitable distribution principle to consider (along with objects and relations) relations which are more essential than certain objects, and objects which are more essential than certain relations.
Keywords:  Graham Harman; Bruno Latour; plasma; objects; relations; actualism; ontological residues; epistemological residues

Vyatkin Dmitry

Independent researcher, publisher, hylepress@gmail.com. Hyle Press, 87 Petropavlovskaya str., apt 216, Perm 614000, Russia.

Publications

“Plasma in Itself”: Between Ontology and Epistemology / Logos. 2017. № 3 (118). P. 57-82
annotation:  This article, based on texts and discussions concerning works of Bruno Latour and Graham Harman, examines the link between the problem of relations, which are never sufficient for changes to be made, and the problem of objects, which are always excessive for changes to be made. Both Latour and Harman solve these problems in their own ways; however, their solutions produce some byproducts in the form of special residues that cannot be fully assigned by their theories; both the authors name them “plasma.” This study focuses on clarifying the dynamics of such ontological and epistemological residues. It should be noted that based on these dynamics, Harman’s object-oriented philosophy, as well as Latour’s actor-network theory, turn out to be insensitive to the actual distribution of objects and relations, and this fact is proven by the introduction of plasma as an epistemological residue, which called to balance the redundancy of objects in Harman’s theory of objects (whereas in the actor-network theory of Latour, plasma acts as an ontological balance, balancing the lack of relationship). But such balancing in fact turns into a new imbalance. The problem then is that behind the facade of “smoothly” functioning object (Harman) and relational (Latour) machines there’s hidden a “shadow economy” providing their smooth operation by illegal sublimation of objects to relationships, and relationships — into objects. It is therefore required to move on to a more transparent and equitable distribution principle to consider (along with objects and relations) relations which are more essential than certain objects, and objects which are more essential than certain relations.
Keywords:  Graham Harman; Bruno Latour; plasma; objects; relations; actualism; ontological residues; epistemological residues

Vyatkin Dmitry

Independent researcher, publisher, hylepress@gmail.com. Hyle Press, 87 Petropavlovskaya str., apt 216, Perm 614000, Russia.

Publications

“Plasma in Itself”: Between Ontology and Epistemology / Logos. 2017. № 3 (118). P. 57-82
annotation:  This article, based on texts and discussions concerning works of Bruno Latour and Graham Harman, examines the link between the problem of relations, which are never sufficient for changes to be made, and the problem of objects, which are always excessive for changes to be made. Both Latour and Harman solve these problems in their own ways; however, their solutions produce some byproducts in the form of special residues that cannot be fully assigned by their theories; both the authors name them “plasma.” This study focuses on clarifying the dynamics of such ontological and epistemological residues. It should be noted that based on these dynamics, Harman’s object-oriented philosophy, as well as Latour’s actor-network theory, turn out to be insensitive to the actual distribution of objects and relations, and this fact is proven by the introduction of plasma as an epistemological residue, which called to balance the redundancy of objects in Harman’s theory of objects (whereas in the actor-network theory of Latour, plasma acts as an ontological balance, balancing the lack of relationship). But such balancing in fact turns into a new imbalance. The problem then is that behind the facade of “smoothly” functioning object (Harman) and relational (Latour) machines there’s hidden a “shadow economy” providing their smooth operation by illegal sublimation of objects to relationships, and relationships — into objects. It is therefore required to move on to a more transparent and equitable distribution principle to consider (along with objects and relations) relations which are more essential than certain objects, and objects which are more essential than certain relations.
Keywords:  Graham Harman; Bruno Latour; plasma; objects; relations; actualism; ontological residues; epistemological residues

Vyatkin Dmitry

Independent researcher, publisher, hylepress@gmail.com. Hyle Press, 87 Petropavlovskaya str., apt 216, Perm 614000, Russia.

Publications

“Plasma in Itself”: Between Ontology and Epistemology / Logos. 2017. № 3 (118). P. 57-82
annotation:  This article, based on texts and discussions concerning works of Bruno Latour and Graham Harman, examines the link between the problem of relations, which are never sufficient for changes to be made, and the problem of objects, which are always excessive for changes to be made. Both Latour and Harman solve these problems in their own ways; however, their solutions produce some byproducts in the form of special residues that cannot be fully assigned by their theories; both the authors name them “plasma.” This study focuses on clarifying the dynamics of such ontological and epistemological residues. It should be noted that based on these dynamics, Harman’s object-oriented philosophy, as well as Latour’s actor-network theory, turn out to be insensitive to the actual distribution of objects and relations, and this fact is proven by the introduction of plasma as an epistemological residue, which called to balance the redundancy of objects in Harman’s theory of objects (whereas in the actor-network theory of Latour, plasma acts as an ontological balance, balancing the lack of relationship). But such balancing in fact turns into a new imbalance. The problem then is that behind the facade of “smoothly” functioning object (Harman) and relational (Latour) machines there’s hidden a “shadow economy” providing their smooth operation by illegal sublimation of objects to relationships, and relationships — into objects. It is therefore required to move on to a more transparent and equitable distribution principle to consider (along with objects and relations) relations which are more essential than certain objects, and objects which are more essential than certain relations.
Keywords:  Graham Harman; Bruno Latour; plasma; objects; relations; actualism; ontological residues; epistemological residues

Vyatkin Dmitry

Independent researcher, publisher, hylepress@gmail.com. Hyle Press, 87 Petropavlovskaya str., apt 216, Perm 614000, Russia.

Publications

“Plasma in Itself”: Between Ontology and Epistemology / Logos. 2017. № 3 (118). P. 57-82
annotation:  This article, based on texts and discussions concerning works of Bruno Latour and Graham Harman, examines the link between the problem of relations, which are never sufficient for changes to be made, and the problem of objects, which are always excessive for changes to be made. Both Latour and Harman solve these problems in their own ways; however, their solutions produce some byproducts in the form of special residues that cannot be fully assigned by their theories; both the authors name them “plasma.” This study focuses on clarifying the dynamics of such ontological and epistemological residues. It should be noted that based on these dynamics, Harman’s object-oriented philosophy, as well as Latour’s actor-network theory, turn out to be insensitive to the actual distribution of objects and relations, and this fact is proven by the introduction of plasma as an epistemological residue, which called to balance the redundancy of objects in Harman’s theory of objects (whereas in the actor-network theory of Latour, plasma acts as an ontological balance, balancing the lack of relationship). But such balancing in fact turns into a new imbalance. The problem then is that behind the facade of “smoothly” functioning object (Harman) and relational (Latour) machines there’s hidden a “shadow economy” providing their smooth operation by illegal sublimation of objects to relationships, and relationships — into objects. It is therefore required to move on to a more transparent and equitable distribution principle to consider (along with objects and relations) relations which are more essential than certain objects, and objects which are more essential than certain relations.
Keywords:  Graham Harman; Bruno Latour; plasma; objects; relations; actualism; ontological residues; epistemological residues

Vyatkin Dmitry

Independent researcher, publisher, hylepress@gmail.com. Hyle Press, 87 Petropavlovskaya str., apt 216, Perm 614000, Russia.

Publications

“Plasma in Itself”: Between Ontology and Epistemology / Logos. 2017. № 3 (118). P. 57-82
annotation:  This article, based on texts and discussions concerning works of Bruno Latour and Graham Harman, examines the link between the problem of relations, which are never sufficient for changes to be made, and the problem of objects, which are always excessive for changes to be made. Both Latour and Harman solve these problems in their own ways; however, their solutions produce some byproducts in the form of special residues that cannot be fully assigned by their theories; both the authors name them “plasma.” This study focuses on clarifying the dynamics of such ontological and epistemological residues. It should be noted that based on these dynamics, Harman’s object-oriented philosophy, as well as Latour’s actor-network theory, turn out to be insensitive to the actual distribution of objects and relations, and this fact is proven by the introduction of plasma as an epistemological residue, which called to balance the redundancy of objects in Harman’s theory of objects (whereas in the actor-network theory of Latour, plasma acts as an ontological balance, balancing the lack of relationship). But such balancing in fact turns into a new imbalance. The problem then is that behind the facade of “smoothly” functioning object (Harman) and relational (Latour) machines there’s hidden a “shadow economy” providing their smooth operation by illegal sublimation of objects to relationships, and relationships — into objects. It is therefore required to move on to a more transparent and equitable distribution principle to consider (along with objects and relations) relations which are more essential than certain objects, and objects which are more essential than certain relations.
Keywords:  Graham Harman; Bruno Latour; plasma; objects; relations; actualism; ontological residues; epistemological residues

Vyatkin Dmitry

Independent researcher, publisher, hylepress@gmail.com. Hyle Press, 87 Petropavlovskaya str., apt 216, Perm 614000, Russia.

Publications

“Plasma in Itself”: Between Ontology and Epistemology / Logos. 2017. № 3 (118). P. 57-82
annotation:  This article, based on texts and discussions concerning works of Bruno Latour and Graham Harman, examines the link between the problem of relations, which are never sufficient for changes to be made, and the problem of objects, which are always excessive for changes to be made. Both Latour and Harman solve these problems in their own ways; however, their solutions produce some byproducts in the form of special residues that cannot be fully assigned by their theories; both the authors name them “plasma.” This study focuses on clarifying the dynamics of such ontological and epistemological residues. It should be noted that based on these dynamics, Harman’s object-oriented philosophy, as well as Latour’s actor-network theory, turn out to be insensitive to the actual distribution of objects and relations, and this fact is proven by the introduction of plasma as an epistemological residue, which called to balance the redundancy of objects in Harman’s theory of objects (whereas in the actor-network theory of Latour, plasma acts as an ontological balance, balancing the lack of relationship). But such balancing in fact turns into a new imbalance. The problem then is that behind the facade of “smoothly” functioning object (Harman) and relational (Latour) machines there’s hidden a “shadow economy” providing their smooth operation by illegal sublimation of objects to relationships, and relationships — into objects. It is therefore required to move on to a more transparent and equitable distribution principle to consider (along with objects and relations) relations which are more essential than certain objects, and objects which are more essential than certain relations.
Keywords:  Graham Harman; Bruno Latour; plasma; objects; relations; actualism; ontological residues; epistemological residues
All authors

© 1991—2019 Логос. Философско-литературный журнал.
Все права защищены.
Дизайн Юлия Михина, jmikhina@gmail.com,
программирование Антон Чубченко