Quentin Meillassoux is a French philosopher. He teaches at the Université Paris 1 Badiou, who wrote the foreword for Meillassoux’s first book After Finitude. It is no exaggeration to say that Quentin Meillassoux has opened up a new path in the history of philosophy, understood here as the history of what it is to know. This is an overview of ‘After Finitude’ by Quentin Meillassoux. It covers his ideas on the archi-fossil, facticity, Cantorian set theory (the.
|Country:||Sao Tome and Principe|
|Published (Last):||17 December 2007|
|PDF File Size:||10.71 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||12.60 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
He anticipates counterarguments and, what’s more, explicitly uses them as opportunities to better explicate his contentions rather than merely bash on fools for not being rigorous enough. Want to Read Currently Reading Read. His preferred way o I have rather mixed feelings about this book. After Finitude will certainly become an ideal corrosive against too rigid assumptions and will shake entrenched positions.
I suppose YECism is mmeillassoux genuine case of correlationism God, being eternal, always observes all that existsbut merely agreeing about that detail doesn’t make one a reactionary.
Raoni Padui – – Idealistic Studies 40 3: This page was last edited on 14 Novemberat This remarkable “critique of critique” is introduced here without embellishment, cutting straight to the heart of the matter in a particularly clear and logical manner. There is thus a nihilistic nothingness beyond the human. It is no exaggeration to say that Quentin Meillassoux has opened up a new path in the history of philosophy, understood here as the history of what it is to know QM points out that we cannot take contingency empirically as finituee, of a perishability that is bound to occur.
Added to PP index Total downloads 23of 2, Recent downloads 6 months 4of 2, How can I increase my downloads?
The book’s meticulous argumentation is not for the logically faint of heart. The trouble with this demonstration is that it depends on treating the “contradictory object” as if it were contradictory in ALL respects; but only 1 aspect would be needed for a contradictory object. What then is the truth of a scientific statement? All the same this is a highly charged book.
Quentin Meillassoux does exactly this. Philosophy in the Making, Edinburgh: The principle of unreason is then changed from a negative statement to a positive one: He explores the ethical and metaphysical implications.
After Finitude: An Essay on the Necessity of Contingency
A fascinating, ambitious little book. It’s a good book, in that Meillassoux and his translator could keep a relative neophyte like me from being completely lost, but I wouldn’t fully recommend it to anyone who didn’t have a lot of continental philosophy under her belt. Even though he begins After Finitude with a question pertaining to empirical knowledge, it soon becomes clear that, by taking the meaning of ancestral statements literally, he raises a series of issues that touch the very core of current philosophical debates.
Against this current situation, the goal is meillassous find access to an absolute “capable of founding science’s ancestral discourse. Incredibly interesting and, in all likelihood, philosophically important, but not something I’d meiplassoux a whole whackadoodle of meillasaoux.
I haven’t read any clearer reading of the philosophical tradition in a while, and that’s saying quite a bit.
The absolutization of facticity — the idea afer to which Meillassoux posits the absolute impossibility of a necessary being — entails a shifting away from the principle of sufficient reason into an anhypothetical and absolute principle of unreason. Meillassoux’s approach to what seemed to be an innocuous metaphysical issue — Hume’s problem of primary and secondary properties — allows him to uncover a more originary comprehension fknitude the in-itself, and to subtract it from the framework of Kantian transcendentalism.
However, and as we have argued, the absence of reason in the apparent is precisely the product of the necessary finitude of finite perspectives. The exposition and critique of correlationism is brilliant and Meillassoux is at his best when showing the philosophical complacency of contemporary Kantians and phenomenologists. Secondly, he says that correlationism cannot accommodate “ancestrality”, which is the problem that modern science posits events and entities that existed before any sentient beings existed to observe them.
As time went on and I continued this philosophical detox, I occasionally lapsed back in but felt a slight lack of the wonderment I once had when studying philosophy. The final chapter elaborates on how the correlationist split came about, and how it holds philosophy back.
Non-necessitarian theories of laws are not new, they were the prevailing view in Anglo departments, at least up to the 90s. Probably because Lyotard framed his ideas in the context of occasional essays which do not seem to have the same level of argumentational development they were not received or have not had the same impact as a book like After Finitude, even if their conceptual implications are equally as far reaching.
Secondly is a certain equivocation which Meillasoux seems to engage in, in respect to the categories of necessity and reason. In possibly the most important philosophical text of the 21st century thus far, Meillassoux sets his sights to refute numerous sacred tropes in traditional philosophy from Kantian transcendentalism to even Heideggerian existentialism Being no longer requires Thinking.
He brings us around to Badiou and demonstrates in slightly different terms, Badiou’s genius and how that enables us to begin to formulate a new beginning, one that does meillaassoux rely on Being meillassojx totalization in order to guarantee finittude.
Chapter 2, “Fideism, Metaphysics, Speculation,” not only maps the different positions that have determined and still determine different conceptions of the absolute, but also exposes the necessary conditions to de-absolutize correlationism and fknitude clear the way toward a truly speculative materialist form of the absolute.
The mfillassoux claim that can be made is based upon our facticity, not as limit but as absolute: These are people who share “the idea according to which we only ever have access to the correlation between thinking and being, and never to either term considered apart from the other” p.
Like many of the 20th century philosophers Meillassoux confronts in After Finitude, I’ve tended to side with those who assume absolute knowledge is out of our reach as humans, or at least, aftrr Hume’s problem of induction pretty much killed any pretension we had about a “completed” science.
QM portrays the correlationist as rejecting such a view, emillassoux instead claiming something more like Kant’s transcendental idealism, capable of appealing to counterfactuals about possible-but-not-actual observers.
Paris France. Much of the time you do need to have some way of organizing discourse so as to be able to relate to one another. Probably the first question arose in relation to the principle claim of the first chapter around the supposed novelty of the problem which the ancestral fossil poses to the perspective which Meillasoux labels correlationism.
After Finitude: An Essay on the Necessity of Contingency: Quentin Meillassoux: Continuum
The archi-fossil designates an event anterior to terrestrial life and hence anterior to givenness itself p. Thanks for telling us about the problem. Meillasoux argues that because we cannot calculate the totality of possible outcomes which could be derived by taking the billiard table as the initial state from which we calculate probabilities, we are unable to argue that we would have already noticed the contingency of the law’s of nature because, quite simply, if it is impossible to calculate the total number of possible outcomes then it is also impossible to say that it simply hasn’t happened yet.
The Anthropocene and the Hetero-Archive. Thus what is mathematizable cannot be reduced to a correlate of thought p.