A Non Philosophical Theory of Nature Read ´ 105

A Non Philosophical Theory of Nature

Summary A Non Philosophical Theory of Nature

In A Non Philosophical Theory of Nature Anthony Paul Smith asserts that the old theological and philosophical ideas about the unnatural are no longer tenable Parts of nature seem to be at war with one another the human against the rest of the biosp.

characters ´ PDF, eBook or Kindle ePUB free ✓ Anthony Paul Smith

Methodology of François Laruelle's non philosophy to bring together the fields of philosophy theology and scientific ecology and treat them as ecological material Out of this ecology of thought a new theory of nature emerges for an ecological age.

Anthony Paul Smith ✓ 5 Download

Here and this is because our very understanding of the idea of nature that comes to us from philosophy and theology has perpetuated that war Smith argues that the very idea of nature must be rethought as ecological and towards that purpose uses the.

  • Hardcover
  • 292
  • A Non Philosophical Theory of Nature
  • Anthony Paul Smith
  • English
  • 12 October 2019
  • 9781137335876

2 thoughts on “A Non Philosophical Theory of Nature

  1. says:

    While I’m sure that much of this text went over my head Anothy Paul Smith’s “A Non Philosophical Theory of Nature” was a text that I learned a lot from and enjoyed uite a bit The text builds upon François Laruelle’s concept of “Non philosophy” in order to produce a “Non philosophical theology” that enables the science of ecology to impact philosophy in order to discover a notion of nature that isn’t reduced to naturalism The text is divided into 4 parts The first part entitled “The Perversity of Nature Foreclosed to Thought” delves into current work that attempts to bring both philosophy and theology into conversation with ecology In each of the examples that Smith provides he shows that the engagement is always a hierarchical one In every case it is philosophy or theology that provides insight into the ecological without the insight ever moving in the opposite direction Smith posits that this is the result of the history of philosophical engagement with science with suggests that science simply a empirical field that produces raw facts In contrast theology and philosophy attempt to provide normative claims Thus philosophers and theologians argue that philosophy and theology are able to use the empirical claims of science and provide meanings to them Thus the engagement is not one between theologyphilosophy and science but rather a practice where theology and philosophy impose certain principles onto science This is all a part of Smith’s attempt to show that nature is perverse In philosophy nature is often tied with the Real The Real can be explained through Plato’s allegory of the cave where the people trapped in the cave are given false images before one of them is rescued and is able to see the real world Philosophy is always striving to discover what the Real is It seeks to find the ultimate reality In doing so it presents the Real as some hidden thing that needs to be discovered In contrast Smith suggests that nature is not hidden but perverse This is kind of difficult to explain but the perversity of the Realnature uses Laruelle’s understanding of the real wherein the Real is the ungrounded foundation from which thought originates The Real is the position that we are already thinking from The second part develops thoroughly what the principle of non philosophy is He shows how Laruelle criticizes the divide between philosophy and science and compares it to other philosophers who have attempted to undo this divide In this section he explains how non philosophy attempts to use other philosophical systems as material within its practice By positioning the Real as the place of thought we can see that each of these philosophical systems so long as the function are able to be used as materials within new systems So one can take Badiou’s set theory and Deleuze’s rhizomatic theories and treat them as material within various ecosystems of thought So much like within a regular ecosystem you will have a variety of different species we might think of these different philosophical dialogues as different species within different niches of the ecosystem though the language I’m using doesn’t come about until the third section He explains how these material are developed “in the last instance” of their autonomy This is a little bit hard to explain but it relies on the generic or minimal movement of the idea The generic or minimal of some thought is its struggle So APS uses the idea of Christian and Muslim struggle as the solidarity against the oppressor in the Arab Springs This is what these things appear as “in the last instance” He describes these actions as “messianic” in that they struggle against the oppressor in order to save the oppressed It is the struggle which is messianic The third part of the book delves into ecology in order to later develop how thought itself is an ecosystem He goes through how thought is ecological In terms of energy transferal thought is ecological literally not metaphorically From there he goes on to talk about 6 ecological principles which can be used in the ecology of thought He talks both about the roles of these principles in ecological discussions and how they might be used in this non philosophy The six are 1 Ecosystem – which is immanent to every discussion of ecology; 2 Biodiversity – which argues that there needs to be diversity in order for any system to continue; 3 Niche – the space that each species takes up within an ecosystem; 4 Exchange of Matter and Energy – the flows of energy between the various entities within an ecosystem bringing together the living dead and never living; 5 Space and Time – the spacial and temporal aspects of ecosystems which impact the way that things live in the ecosystem Both are heterogeneous within ecosystems as homogenous spacetime would lead to repetitions that would undermine diversity; 6 Resilience – Resilience is the way that ecosystems continue their own survival This happens through maintaining thresholds and being adaptive to the heterogeneity Resilience actually undermines notions of sustainability which promote homogeneity The section closes with a chapter on “Ecologies without nature” – a position held by Bruno Latour and Timothy Morton APS argues that he agrees with Morton but fights for a nature with ecology a nature that is different than the naturalism which Morton fights against A nature akin to the perverse Real described in earlier chapters Section Four then presents materials for moving towards a non philosophical theory of nature which is ultimately given in the conclusion The first chapter in this section looks at Heidegger and Badiou in order to use Heidegger’s “fourfold” to develop a theory of nature that goes beyond Being and Identity This allows us to think about Nature as in One or in the real I’m not going to attempt to explain the arguments presented in this chapter but it moves toward a natureculture divide where culture is seen as natural rather than as opposed to nature The final chapter looks at Auinas notion of analogy Spinoza’s notion of chimera and Ismaili Islam’s notion of the 6 groundless clones of the Real in order to provide material to be used for a non philosophical ecology in the conclusion This opens the door for the conclusion in which APS presents a theory of nature which combines the unified creatural Auinas analogy with the messianic potential Spinoza’s chimera in a non theitic transcendence Ismaili Islam where the messianic creatural are in community within the non theitic transcendence Where the immanence of divine is prior to knowledge as the perverse Real One where “The immanence can’t be known philosophically or theologically but only through a kind of faithfulness as struggle” p 224 where all of creation is in struggle for its survival This is probably a confusing summary to anyone who hasn’t read the book and to be honest its likely not a very good summary doing to some of the text going above my head but I would recommend the book to anyone who is interested in learning about Laruelle and who is interested in diving into APS’s theory of nature Its a bit of a struggle at times but the book really helped me to engage in areas of thought that I hadn’t been exposed to before

  2. says:

    Clear and insightful argument for a non philosophical ecology thought

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *