I was once described as a "beautiful, intelligent iguana".
Post with 2 notes
is there a context for that Bogost quote? I like it a lot
I think it comes from Bogost’s “Alien Phenomenology”, though it’s also been mentioned on his blog a few times, e.g.:
I get the sense that many people misconstrue object-oriented ontology as a singular material affair, as a reductionism: “everything’s an object.” But instead, proponents of OOO hold that all things equally exist, yet they do not exist equally. The funeral pyre is not the same as the aardvark; the porcelatta is not equivalent to the rubgy ball. Not only are neither pair reducible to human encounter, but also neither are reducible to one another. In this respect, McLuhan is a better place to look for materialism than is Marx.
[via: http://www.bogost.com/blog/materialisms.shtml - I’m wary about that last claim about Marx/McLuhan, but that’s because I don’t have enough context to really understand it].
also doesnt OOO sort of go against an intensive ontological schema then? Im not quite defending it, just curious
Well, let me just make sure I understand you here first, since (for some reason) ‘intensive’ is just one of those words that my brain never wants to remember. Intensive properties are those that don’t depend on scale, right? (Like, temperature for example). So an ‘intensive ontological schema’ is just an ontology that incorporates intensive properties, correct?