Among recent philosophers, perhaps only Whitehead
can claim to have accounted for the life of non-human objects, though his
position is haunted by other serious difficulties. The problem is that everyone
wants to avoid the naive versions of realism, but they also don’t want to be
driven into the patent absurdities of solipsism, since it is far safer not to
adopt any metaphysical position at all. Having painted itself into a corner on
this issue, contemporary philosophy is left with the sole emergency measure of
inventing sophistical compromise phrases such as “internal realism,”
“quasi-realism,” or “the mad human subject positing the very gap between real
and ideal.” But all of this reduces reality to its effect on humans: a position
better known simply as idealism. NAIVE
IDEALISM 427 Graham Harman PHILOSOPHY TODAY WINTER 2004
Braver accuses Nietzsche of backsliding into
noumenal naiveté of a sort that Hegel had ended, and that even Putnam is praised
for transcending (159). For despite Nietzsche’s apparent dissolution of reality
into infinite interpretations, “this metaphor of interpretations brings in the
idea of the text that gets interpreted, masks [that] imply an original face,
and so on” (159). Braver’s verdict is clear: “[Nietzsche’s] Kantian way of
framing the issues is strewn with conceptual traps…. Another revolution is
needed” (159). For Braver that revolution is found in the later Heidegger, with
the early Heidegger paving the way. A
FESTIVAL OF ANTI-REALISM 203 Graham Harman PHILOSOPHY TODAY SUMMER 2008
I think my first bet would be on Levinas standing
the test of time a lot better than many of my friends think he will. So many
people seem to view Levinas as just a preachy old finger-wagger who talks about
God too much. That’s not the Levinas I know. Then again, the Levinas I know was
encountered through Alphonso Lingis, who isn’t exactly a preachy old
finger-wagger who talks about God too much. Maybe you need to encounter Levinas
through Lingis to be able to see Levinas as an utterly cutting-edge thinker,
which is exactly the way I see him. 4th and final Philosophy Today article now posted by doctorzamalek
“Levinas and the Triple Critique of Heidegger.” HERE.
