“Materialism and collectivism are fundamental aspects of constitutive thought. Ontological constitution can be given only as the appropriation and accumulation of material elements, both physical and social. … The reconstruction of the world is thus the very process of the continual physical composition and recomposition of things — and, with absolute constitutive mechanisms of historical, practical, and ethico-political nature.“
– Antonio Negri, The Savage Anomaly
William Forsythe’s Synchronous Objects.
After listening to a lecture online by William Forsythe (World renowned choreographer) and Alva Noë, author of Out of Our Heads: Why You Are Not Your Brain, and Other Lessons from the Biology of Consciousness provided to me by dmfant from Anthem: video conversation. I began thinking about something Levi R. Bryant said along with my interest in Spinoza and Antonio Negri.
Flat Ontology and Spinoza: The Foundations of Materialist Thought
Levi R. Bryant once stated his views on Flat Ontology this ways:
Someone might remark that because a text has multiple layers there can be no flat ontology of the text. In other words, it is here asserted that where there is a logic of depths and surfaces there is necessarily a vertical ontology. However, this is precisely what flat ontology rejects. If we take seriously that texts are composed of multiple layers, then only a flat ontology can properly preserve the layered nature of a text. The claim that the text is flat is the claim that each of these layers is absolutely autonomy and irreducible to the others or that all of these layers are on equal ontological footing. That is, flat ontology refuses a logic of expression that would reduce one thread, series, or layer of the text to another. Instead, flat ontology would defend the dignity of each of these layers as a distinct multiplicity. What is hereby refused is the reduction of anything to anything else.
– Levi R. Bryant (Larval Subjects) A Quick Remark on Flat Ontology