Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
A growing number of critical theorists are associating themselves with a movement now commonly referred to as ‘new materialism’. What characterizes this movement, broadly speaking, is a reconceptualization of matter in response to an alleged erasure of materiality in postmodern, poststructuralist, and/or constructivist theories. In this way of thinking, those associated with the so-called ‘linguistic turn’ are said to have upheld (and reinforced) the dichotomy of nature/culture by focusing on culture to the detriment of ‘nature’. However, in this paper, I will argue that new materialist texts are often founded upon and supported by a problematic moralistic rhetoric. Employing a somatechnic framework, I will show that the ethical investment guiding much of the new materialism could be thought of as a particular vitalism, or rather, as I am conceiving it, a material foundationalism, in which matter possesses an inherent life-force.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Dennis Bruining (2013) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: