What do you think?
Rate this book
Object-Oriented Philosophy: The Noumenon's New Clothes
A remarkably clear explication of the tenets of Object-Oriented Philosophy and an acute critique of the movement's ramifications for philosophy today.
How does the patience and rigour of philosophical explanation fare when confronted with an irrepressible desire to commune with the object and to escape the subjective perplexities of reference, meaning, and sense?
Moving beyond the hype and the inflated claims made for “Object-Oriented” thought, Peter Wolfendale considers its emergence in the light of the intertwined legacies of twentieth-century analytic and Continental traditions.
Both a remarkably clear explication of the tenets of OOP and an acute critique of the movement's ramifications for philosophy today, Object-Oriented Philosophy is a major engagement with one of the most prevalent trends in recent philosophy.
464 pages, Kindle Edition
First published October 31, 2014
18 people are currently reading
443 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews
September 24, 2019
OOO invokes such an initial response ("ooh..."), relying upon its evocative and momentary allure. And yet, beneath the facade of this draw there is the reality of this theoretical "object" - a nothing, a void, a hollowness which is more vapid than profound, relying on the flash and allure of language and rhetorical flair to cover over a lack of formal discipline and thoughtful explication. Said otherwise - sophistry. Props to Pete for pointing out the nudity of the emperor of objects, for unmasking his dissimulated inanity.
Much like his beloved objects, then, Harman's thought is all about allure and sensational appearance, which masks an ungraspable void which could equally be called really real or absolutely empty (a vacuous and pernicious nothingness). As Brassier adeptly points out in his addendum to Pete's book (pg. 420), Harman's theory is founded upon a pseudo-phenomenological methodology (which, as Pete notes in multiple instances, is never thematically expressed or questioned, for it remains methodologically faithful neither to Phenomenology nor to any critical enterprise) which, in denying the reality of phenomenal access to objects qua real, ends up giving up the real import of Husserl's philosophical strategy. If phenomenology cannot access the real qua phenomenality, then what is the value of a theory rooted in phenomenological methodology? Again, it remains but an act, a dumb-show - a vacuous and vapid mimesis; sophistry.
Read this book if you desire an unquestionable disclosure and explication of the irremediable faults in Harman's "philosophy." If not, please, only one thing - do not take Harman, or Object Oriented Anything, seriously unless they/it are/is willing to (actually) engage in a critical dialogue concerning the "objects" in question. Not sure if the day of OOP/O has set yet or not, for I heard word from a colleague in a music department of students interested in OOO and music. The phantom of the noumenal refuses to be exercised; then let us run it through some rigorous, philosophical exercises, and so to exhaust its rhetorical embellishments, exposing its nudity, its fleshless skeleton always already decomposing. This speculative autopsy reveals that its subject was never living to begin with - but a rhetorical or aesthetic corpse, miming the words and the thought of philosophy.
Much like his beloved objects, then, Harman's thought is all about allure and sensational appearance, which masks an ungraspable void which could equally be called really real or absolutely empty (a vacuous and pernicious nothingness). As Brassier adeptly points out in his addendum to Pete's book (pg. 420), Harman's theory is founded upon a pseudo-phenomenological methodology (which, as Pete notes in multiple instances, is never thematically expressed or questioned, for it remains methodologically faithful neither to Phenomenology nor to any critical enterprise) which, in denying the reality of phenomenal access to objects qua real, ends up giving up the real import of Husserl's philosophical strategy. If phenomenology cannot access the real qua phenomenality, then what is the value of a theory rooted in phenomenological methodology? Again, it remains but an act, a dumb-show - a vacuous and vapid mimesis; sophistry.
Read this book if you desire an unquestionable disclosure and explication of the irremediable faults in Harman's "philosophy." If not, please, only one thing - do not take Harman, or Object Oriented Anything, seriously unless they/it are/is willing to (actually) engage in a critical dialogue concerning the "objects" in question. Not sure if the day of OOP/O has set yet or not, for I heard word from a colleague in a music department of students interested in OOO and music. The phantom of the noumenal refuses to be exercised; then let us run it through some rigorous, philosophical exercises, and so to exhaust its rhetorical embellishments, exposing its nudity, its fleshless skeleton always already decomposing. This speculative autopsy reveals that its subject was never living to begin with - but a rhetorical or aesthetic corpse, miming the words and the thought of philosophy.
January 6, 2023
A devastating analysis of Harman that extends to contemporary trends of thought which grant equal agential footing to non-human actants. The conclusive refutation of "allusive ontology" and its resultant ontological liberalism is the highlight of the book. Wolfendale spares no punches, but this is medicine that any thinker even remotely interested in these ideas can't afford to deny. Wolfendale is right: aesthetics is not first philosophy, as Harman suggests. It is almost certainly the heart of last philosophy.
October 13, 2020
Triple O, the hot new thing in the realm of anglo-continental philosophy! What could go wrong? Misreadings of Heidegger? Check. Style over substance? Check. Writing multiple books that revolve around the same idea (if there is one)? Check. Graham Harman is your guy if you're into that type of 'philosophy'. I on the other hand have heard about Object-Oriented-Ontology's existence for years now but never felt the need to delve into his work and I am glad I didn't.
Wolfendale has made a fantastically well-written book that also has explicit argumentation that not only explains OOO/OOP more clearly than Harman himself but blows down the rickitity philosophical-musings that Graham (apparently) professes in his many books. Recommended reading for anyone that has plans to read any of Graham Harman's books.
PS. I think those quote from the book encapsulates Harman's project.
"Harman may see himself as Lovecraft, Picasso, or even Coltrane- a bold innovator reshaping the cultural terrain-but he is really Michael Bay: a conservative authority continually churning
out ever more explosive (and unfortunately popular) cultural products, which serve only to exemplify the vices of his artform rather than its virtues"
Wolfendale has made a fantastically well-written book that also has explicit argumentation that not only explains OOO/OOP more clearly than Harman himself but blows down the rickitity philosophical-musings that Graham (apparently) professes in his many books. Recommended reading for anyone that has plans to read any of Graham Harman's books.
PS. I think those quote from the book encapsulates Harman's project.
"Harman may see himself as Lovecraft, Picasso, or even Coltrane- a bold innovator reshaping the cultural terrain-but he is really Michael Bay: a conservative authority continually churning
out ever more explosive (and unfortunately popular) cultural products, which serve only to exemplify the vices of his artform rather than its virtues"
June 6, 2021
More than a systematic dismantling of Graham Harman’s rickety framework of “ontology,” Object-Oriented Philosophy acts as a succinct guide to the history of the very concept — traversing both continental and analytic fields, Wolfendale’s draws a line between thinkers as seemingly disparate as Heidegger and Quine with laudatory precision.
The virtue of this approach is in its ability to clarify the problems that OOP claims to tackle, in a manner that reveals the sophistry at work and shows its historical role as a faithless interceptor of honest discourse. In lieu of going into the details of Wolfendale’s (incredibly thorough) critique, it suffices to say that Harman misinterprets and misappropriates Heidegger’s notion of “thrownness,” using rhetorical slight of hand to shift the conceptual goalposts from a phenomenological to an ontological register without developing any methodology to support this shift. The result of Harman’s “ontology” is thus a vulgarization of Heidegger’s pre-theoretical phenomenology in which the haecceity of pure encounter precludes any relationship to truth and reduces reality to a series of de-potentialized and inaccessible objects. By the end of the analysis, Wolfendale has managed to deflate any sense of metaphysical systematicity that might have still clung to OOP as a field and managed to reveal its character as a insidious rhetorical style apropos of the textually-oriented “correlationism” it purports to counter.
As a polemic, Object-Oriented Philosophy succeeds on every front, and more so: the analytical rigor and rhetorical candor of Wolfendale’s arguments simultaneously manage to outline the basics of his own method of transcendental realism. What’s most remarkable about Wolfendale’s method is the ease at which he feels in either analytic or continental camps; this is a true post-divide work. The book closes with Ray Brassier’s pithy send-off of “Speculative Realism,” pointing the way towards those emergent philosophical realisms and new rationalisms that show promise where OOP has failed. We can only hope that Harman’s glitzy objects stay submerged in the mysterious depths.
The virtue of this approach is in its ability to clarify the problems that OOP claims to tackle, in a manner that reveals the sophistry at work and shows its historical role as a faithless interceptor of honest discourse. In lieu of going into the details of Wolfendale’s (incredibly thorough) critique, it suffices to say that Harman misinterprets and misappropriates Heidegger’s notion of “thrownness,” using rhetorical slight of hand to shift the conceptual goalposts from a phenomenological to an ontological register without developing any methodology to support this shift. The result of Harman’s “ontology” is thus a vulgarization of Heidegger’s pre-theoretical phenomenology in which the haecceity of pure encounter precludes any relationship to truth and reduces reality to a series of de-potentialized and inaccessible objects. By the end of the analysis, Wolfendale has managed to deflate any sense of metaphysical systematicity that might have still clung to OOP as a field and managed to reveal its character as a insidious rhetorical style apropos of the textually-oriented “correlationism” it purports to counter.
As a polemic, Object-Oriented Philosophy succeeds on every front, and more so: the analytical rigor and rhetorical candor of Wolfendale’s arguments simultaneously manage to outline the basics of his own method of transcendental realism. What’s most remarkable about Wolfendale’s method is the ease at which he feels in either analytic or continental camps; this is a true post-divide work. The book closes with Ray Brassier’s pithy send-off of “Speculative Realism,” pointing the way towards those emergent philosophical realisms and new rationalisms that show promise where OOP has failed. We can only hope that Harman’s glitzy objects stay submerged in the mysterious depths.
May 20, 2022
A level of engagement with philosophy that is worth aspiring to, I think that this book could give a good reference to anyone trying to understand the popular contemporary trends of continental philosophy. I found it to be a bit long-winded at times, however I appreciate the urgency the work represents.
After stumbling into the "speculative realist" theses a few years back, my interest in metaphysics was sparked. Fortunately, that was all; I didn't start any major projects or open a new museum, investing in the object of Harman-Industries. I had a stiff anti-metaphysical and skeptical bend at the time, following a rough experience with the actual science discipline. So, the naive "anti-Kantianism" of this 'tradition', the egalitarian ontology, the metaphysics to kill them all [loosely veiled in the all too moralistic and flamboyant language the authors employ] did have substantial allure. I was a naive mind, pulling at any loose threads I could spot.
Fortunately, I was directed towards Lee Braver's A Thing of this World, A history of continental anti-realism, which successfully works through majors canonical figures in the tradition which this speculative realist movement is intended to supervene--with the explicit intention of doing much of what Wolfendale does here, without the tiring direct engagement, the exegetical miracles their work requires. Further, Tom Sparrow's The End of Phenomenology situates the 'speculative realists' in relation to some common thread of anti-correlationism which assists in seeing the broader picture again before losing sense in its garb, however that work doesn't succeed in allowing the dust to settle.
Wolfendale's work here assists the unwary critic to come to terms with the failed speculative realist project, leading a path towards (or back to) more fertile ground.
After stumbling into the "speculative realist" theses a few years back, my interest in metaphysics was sparked. Fortunately, that was all; I didn't start any major projects or open a new museum, investing in the object of Harman-Industries. I had a stiff anti-metaphysical and skeptical bend at the time, following a rough experience with the actual science discipline. So, the naive "anti-Kantianism" of this 'tradition', the egalitarian ontology, the metaphysics to kill them all [loosely veiled in the all too moralistic and flamboyant language the authors employ] did have substantial allure. I was a naive mind, pulling at any loose threads I could spot.
Fortunately, I was directed towards Lee Braver's A Thing of this World, A history of continental anti-realism, which successfully works through majors canonical figures in the tradition which this speculative realist movement is intended to supervene--with the explicit intention of doing much of what Wolfendale does here, without the tiring direct engagement, the exegetical miracles their work requires. Further, Tom Sparrow's The End of Phenomenology situates the 'speculative realists' in relation to some common thread of anti-correlationism which assists in seeing the broader picture again before losing sense in its garb, however that work doesn't succeed in allowing the dust to settle.
Wolfendale's work here assists the unwary critic to come to terms with the failed speculative realist project, leading a path towards (or back to) more fertile ground.
August 8, 2024
看兩三個月總算是看完了，真的好長⋯
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews