I am finishing another paper I hope to publish and it occasioned me going over some of Graham Harmans newer books.
Harman is the contemporary philosopher noted for Object Oriented Ontology. Fyi
I am repeatedly reminded of the hard line Harman draws for his project of objects. My opinion of his ideas runs three-fold:
1) OOO is the polemical position from which I gain the structures for my project. Ironically. Lol.
2) his obstinacy and continual advocacy and adventures ever further into objects which are independent of human mind is inspiring and kind of annoying. That’s what makes him so great! Lol.
He is a professional philosopher, so, I have to give the benefit of doubt that he has work to do and so must stay the course.
3) his philosophical position runs on sheer willpower. This I say because I think his position contain compromises that I feel must be made in order for ooo to be tenable as a real position. But he does not make them or seem to notice them.
So, I figure He doesn’t make the compromises Becuase they are really involved in my work, not his. 😁
This post is from my confronting his obstinacy. And I am putting this out there:
What is a form in the context of Object Being?
An object is the form of change.