Diana Coole: Matter in place: A new materialist perspective - Uferstudios Berlin - June 25 2015

Video: https://vimeo.com/165541933

Excerpts from:

Lecture #4: Matter in Place: A New Materialist Perspective with Diana Coole

Regularly defined as matter out of place and associated ambiguously with life (soil) and death (toxic detritus), what is dirt shorn of such metaphors and value judgements? How does it circulate in place, as the material fabric of embodied everyday lives? Beyond well-meaning ecological projects for recycling it, Diana Coole asks: where and what is its constitutive or subversive contribution to human / non-human creation?

Arjun Appadurai // HUMANS, MATERIALITY AND THE FUTURE OF SHARED AGENCY

In his lecture, Arjun Appadurai plans to address the gap between the emerging anthropological literature on "relational ontology (Descola, Viveiros de Castro, Bird-David) and the literature on "new materialisms" (Jane Bennet, Diana Coole, Karen Barad) both of which explore the links between human and non-human agency, with Bruno Latour as a major link figure. He will suggest the ways in which anthropological perspectives can enrich the dialogue between theories of materiality and mediation.

Miranda Bruce - The Matter with Matter: New Materialist theory and the Internet of Things

Video contribution for the First Conference on the Philosophy of the Internet of Things, York, 3rd July 2014.

Geç dönem Althusser’de Materyalizmin Yeniden İnşasının Ana Hatları | Ekrem Ekici

Link: http://foralthusser.blogspot.com/2014/08/gec-donem-althusserde-materyalizmin.html

Digital Tool Thinking: Object Oriented Ontology versus New Materialism | Neil Leach

Link: http://papers.cumincad.org/data/works/att/acadia16_344.pdf

Why Experientialism Is The New Materialism | DO Wales, 2015 (Video)

Link: https://www.thedolectures.com/james-wallman-why-experientialism-is-the-new-materialism/#.WxNlEEiFPIU

The Transversality of New Materialism | Iris van der Tuin & Rick Dolphijn (Article)

Link: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09574042.2010.488377

Abstract

This article centres around three ways in which ‘new materialism’ or ‘neomaterialism’—terms coined by DeLanda and Braidotti in the second half of the 1990s—can be called ‘transversal’. New materialism is a cultural theory that does not privilege culture, but focuses on what Haraway would call ‘naturecultures’. It explores a monist perspective of the human being, disposed of the dualisms that have dominated the humanities until today, by giving special attention to matter, as it has been so much neglected by dualist thought. New materialism, a cultural theory inspired by the thoughts of Deleuze, that spurs a renewed interest in philosophers such as Spinoza and Leibniz, shows how cultured humans are always already in nature, and how nature is necessarily cultured, how the mind is always already material, and how matter is necessarily something of the mind. New materialism opposes the transcendental and humanist (dualist) traditions that are haunting a cultural theory that is standing on the brink of both the modern and the post-postmodern era. The transcendental and humanist traditions, which are manifold yet consistently predicated on dualist structures, continue to stir debates that have a stifling effect on the field (think of the feminist polemic concerning the failed materialism in the work of Butler, and of the Saussurian/Lacanian linguistic heritage in media and cultural studies). New materialism allows for the conceptualisation of the travelling of the fluxes of matter and mind, body and soul, nature and culture, and opens up active theory formation. The three transversalities concern disciplinarity, paradigms and the spatiotemporality of theory.

Keywords: (anti-)representationalism, cultural theory, feminist theory, matter, neomaterialism, new materialism

A critique of new materialism: ethics and ontology | Paul Rekret (Article)

Link: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1057/s41286-016-0001-y

Abstract

This article seeks to offer a critical assessment of the conception of ethics underlying the growing constellation of ‘new materialist’ social theories. It argues that such theories offer little if any purchase in understanding the contemporary transformations of relations between mind and body or human and non-human natures. Taking as exemplary the work of Jane Bennett, Rosi Braidotti, and Karen Barad, this article asserts that a continuity between ethics and ontology is central to recent theories of ‘materiality’. These theories assert the primacy of matter by calling upon a spiritual or ascetic self-transformation so that one might be ‘attuned to’ or ‘register’ materiality and, conversely, portray critique as hubristic, conceited, or resentful, blinded by its anthropocentrism. It is argued that framing the grounds for ontological speculation in these ethical terms licences the omission of analysis of social forces mediating thought’s access to the world and so grants the theorist leave to sidestep any questions over the conditions of thought. In particular, the essay points to ongoing processes of the so-called primitive accumulation as constituting the relationship between mind and body, human and non-human natures.

Keywords

materialism posthumanism new materialism anthropocentrism