News | Year: 2013

24 Dec 2013

I will be traveling to Germany in January to give this talk along with presentations by Robin Mackay, Iain Hamilton Grant and others.
Frontiers of Manipulation
What are the limits and conditions of material manipulability? More importantly, is there a connection between the concept of the material and the function of manipulation in the sense that the latter decides the former? Drawing on some of the recent discussions in the field of engineering with regard to models, cross-level causal intervention, renormalization groups, morphogenetic analysis (the science of forms) and non-extendable explanatory and functional levels, this presentation aims at providing a concept of material organization beyond but reconcilable with the level of appearances. Whilst claiming that (1) material descriptions are blind to explanations and (2) only causal and functional explanations are capable of rendering the material intelligible and making material intervention possible, a robust concept of construction and manipulation cannot dispense with descriptive resources of appearances and macro-level domains. Once approached through local possibility spaces opened up by deep explanatory levels or the scientific image, the powers of abductive inference implicit in the manipulation conditionals at the level of ordinary descriptions enable a mode of construction that expands its frontiers from the top and from the bottom. This marks an encounter with the material that is neither quite speculative nor quite empirical while it is both abductive/non-monotonic and under real constraints.
Date: January 4, 2014
Time: 17.30 – 18.30
Location:
Fridericianum
Friedrichsplatz 18
D-34117 Kassel

18 Dec 2013

Some details on the contents of the long-awaited volume 8 of Collapse:
Collapse 8: Casino Real
Robin Mackay
Introduction
Amanda Beech
The Church The Bank The Art Gallery
Jean-Luc Moulène
Untitled
Jean Cavaillès
From Collective to Wager
Elie Ayache
A Formal Deduction of the Market
Quentin Meillassoux
Mallarmé's Materialist Divinization of the Hypothesis
Sean Ashton / Nigel Cooke
Mr Heggarty Goes Down
Steve Forte
Game Control (Interview)
Ilona Gaynor
Everything Ends in Chaos
Nick Land
Transcendental Risk
Milan Ćirković
The Greatest Gamble in History
Jaspar Joseph-Lester
A Guide to the Casino Architecture of Wedding
Fernando Zalamea
Peirce's Tychism: Absolute Contingency for our Transmodern World
Elie Ayache
From Trading Pit to Blank Swan (Interview)
Jon Roffe
From a Restricted to a General Pricing Surface
Nick Srnicek and Alex Williams
On Cunning Automata: Financial Acceleration at the Limits of the Dromological
Sam Lewitt
Notes from New Jersey
Natasha Schüll
Gambling in a Control Society
John Coates, Mark Gurnell, Zoltan Sarnyai
From Molecule to Market
David Walsh
The Professional Amateur (Interview)
Jonathan Nitzan & Shimshon Bichler
Systemic Fear (Interview)
Suhail Malik
The Ontology of Finance: Price, Power, and the Arkhé-Derivative
Michel Bitbol
Quantum Mechanics as Generalised Theory of Probabilities
GegensichKollectiv
CAUTION

13 Dec 2013

I will be joining the Accelerationism symposium in Berlin via Skype. Abstracts and other details regarding the symposium can be read here. And here is my abstract:

A View of Man from the Space of Reasons
Is humanism – understood as an elaborated commitment to humanity – about human? Once humanism is accessed via the front door of the Enlightenment, a minimal definition of human can be secured. Human is defined by its capacity to enter the space of reasons as a special domain of practices. The argument of this presentation is that the definition of humanity according to the space of reasons is a minimalist definition whose consequences are not immediately given, but it is a definition that bootstraps itself to staggering ramifications, indeed posing itself as what Rene Thom termed a ‘general catastrophe’. If there were ever a real crisis, it would be our inability to cope with collateral outcomes of committing to the real content of humanity as undergirded by the neurobiolgical import of human and the ability to enter the space of reasons. The trajectory of reason is that of a global catastrophe whose pointwise instances and stepwise courses do not harbor an observable effect or noticeable discontinuity. Reason, therefore, is simultaneously a medium of local stability that reinforces procedurality and a general catastrophe, a medium of discontinuity and anti-conservation that administers the discontinuous identity of reason to the anticipated image of man. Elaborating humanity according to the self-actualizing space of reasons establishes a discontinuity between man’s anticipation of himself (what he expects himself to become) and the image of man modified according to its functionally autonomous content. It is exactly this discontinuity that characterizes the view of human from the space of reasons as a general catastrophe set in motion by activating the content of humanity whose functional kernel is not just autonomous but also compulsive and transformative. The sufficient discernment of humanity which is at the core of the project of humanism is in reality the activation of the autonomous space of reasons. But since this space – qua the content of humanity – is functionally autonomous even though its genesis is historical, its activation implies the deactivation of historical anticipations of what man can be or become according to a fundamentally descriptive level. Building on Ray Brassier’s identification of reflective critique as ‘inherently conservative’ and recently Deneb Kozikoski’s examination of the deep isomorphy between the critique of modernity and the logic of capitalism, it will be argued that the view of human from the space of reasons forestalls the conservation of a definition or portrait of man as the basis of and a justification for a preservationist mode of conduct. Since both conservative humanism and conflationary anti-humanism fall back on this conserved definition or canonical portrait, in making the conservation of the content of humanity impossible the view from the space of reasons calls for a new interventionist ethics. This is ethics as a continuous labor or a project accustomed to the general catastrophe of reason, a design of conduct that does not resort to conservation in order to embark on construction.

07 Nov 2013

The outline of my talk at the Escape Velocities symposium on November 13:

The Human Centipede, A View From the Art World
Is it possible to understand the function of art within any consequential prescriptive or interventionist mode synchronous with the descriptive resources of the modern system of knowledge? In other words, does art have any import for a project of construction aimed at liberation of intelligence, illiberalization of freedom and collective enhancement? The positive answer to this question it will be argued hinges on a systematic extrication of the definition of art from the contemporary art world. Aimed at debunking the more ambitious claims of the art world with regard to speculative vistas and political vocations, this presentation involves an etiological scrutiny into premises of two international group art exhibitions, ‘Speculation On Anonymous Materials‘ and ‘and Materials and Money and Crisis‘. Underlining major tendencies of the art world in its search for contemporaneity and pertinence, these exhibitions accentuate the two faces of the same art world currency: longing for the outside and critical self-reflection. One through producing impersonal experience and diversification of the bijective space of affect into a myriad of relations and complicities, and the other through a politically sober introspection into the conditions under which its horizon has been integrated.
However both accelerative projection and decelerative reflection are retrofitted into a world of cognitive templates whose nebulizing function creates a cultural fog of conceptual conflation and practical impotency. It is through this operative fog that some of the more insidious mechanisms of neoliberal capitalism are directly plugged into the cognitive infrastructure under the guise of a world that appears determined to extend the plasticity of imagination and expand frontiers of action. But this is a world in which the financial closure of capitalism is cloned and grafted onto a cognitively maimed economy for accumulating false alternatives in the name of liberation of imagination and action. A suture of different overambitious vocations and driven by the wealth of waste it generates, the resulting beast is a prophetic vision of a tightly connected and controlled society with a single closed alimentary circuit, the human centipede. Those who scheme to infiltrate this world in order to militantly or cunningly liberate it from the inside are locked into the compactly segmented structure of the metameric organism. At once necessary for the growth yet expendable, every insider is a new addition to the iterated sequence of mouths and rectums through which the art world bootstraps itself – a miracle made possible by a simple but efficacious financial and cognitive algorithm. Dreams of acceleration or deceleration, speculative enthusiasm for the outside or critical self-reflection are revealed to be simply changes of frequency in the rate of the said iteration.
Time and Location:
November 13, 7pm
311 East Broadway
New York, NY 10002
T212 619 3356

30 Sep 2013

Pink_Cube.jpg
The third installment of my collaboration with Florian Hecker:
C.D.: A Script for Synthesis
C.D. – A Script for Synthesis is a sound piece, an experimental drama, and a model of abstraction, which recalls Artaud’s Theater of Cruelty as much as Beckett’s minimalist narratives and neo-imagist poetry. It is the climactic third chapter in the trilogy of text-sound pieces Hecker has created in collaboration with the philosopher and writer Reza Negarestani (following Chimerization, dOCUMENTA (13) and Hinge, Lumiar Cité, Lisbon; both 2012), who has written a libretto/script for the performance. The conceptual point of departure is a perceptual encounter with a pink ice cube, which is dramatized as a scene in which the linguistic chimeras of scent and sound descriptions are materialized through synthetic trophies, the scale and shape of auditory objects, a Greek chorus and theatrical props. C.D. – A Script for Synthesis is an experiment in putting synthetic emptiness back into synthetic thought.
Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, Peter B. Lewis Theater, 1071 5th Ave
Saturday, November 9, 7:30 pm
For more information on how to obtain tickets see HERE.

11 Sep 2013

We are pleased to announce that Urbanomic titles are now distributed by Central Books. This is an exciting move forward for us, and we expect this new alliance to make Urbanomic and Urbanomic/Sequence titles more readily available through a variety of online outlets and in a real bookstore near you.

11 Aug 2013

‘What does it mean to cognitively adapt to a reason whose interests lie elsewhere?’ I will be talking on Inhumanism as a program for appropriating and radicalizing the revisionary tendency of modernity. Details below:
The Labour of the Inhuman
(augmented rationality and its cognitive technologies)

Tuesday, September 24th, 2013
6PM
ICI Curatorial Hub
401 Broadway, Suite 1620
New York, NY 10013
RSVP at rsvp@curatorsintl.org with DARK TRAJECTORIES in the subject line.

26 Jul 2013

With the renowned Deleuze scholar Claire Colebrook’s latest very public expression of steadfast approval, so much for Professor Clark’s lies about ‘supposed’ members of the Avello Publishing Journal’s editorial board ‘asking to be removed’ from it and wishing to have ‘no further contact’ with its Editor-in-Chief!

14 Jul 2013

‘What matter who’s speaking?’, wrote Beckett, and he may well have a point. In fact, in our fast-paced, hyperconnected times matters of attribution are proving increasingly difficult to determine. Scholars in this area, including Julia Kristeva, Roland Barthes and William T. Fisher, have not been slow to unmask the bourgeois ideology underpinning our conceptions of authorial intention, and one doesn’t need a Ph.D. to appreciate the insurmountable paradoxes that can arise upon their unthinking application.

Indeed, from our postmodern Marxist vantage-point, it is hard to stifle a titter at what a Lanson or Sainte-Beuve might make of the following:

Franklin [Mirror 2013-07-14]:

Let me begin with two personal stories.

Jason M. Austria [Mirror 2013-07-14]:

Let me begin with two personal narratives about my conception of God and how it relates philosophically to some of the principles of Isaac Newton, Frank Ramsey, Bertrand Russell and William James.

Franklin [Mirror 2013-07-14]:

It was one rainy day. I intended to be too early to go to UP for my afternoon Tuesday classes because I had to read my readings in the library.

Jason M. Austria [Mirror 2013-07-14]:

One morning I woke up too early to go to the UP, so I went instead to the library to read Ramsey’s ‘Probability and Partial Belief’ in The Foundations of Mathematics and other Logical Essays ed. R.B Braithwaite. London: Kegan Paul, Trench & Trubner.

Franklin [Mirror 2013-07-14]:

Around 11:30 am, I felt my hunger so I decided to go to the Shopping Center to have my lunch.

Jason M. Austria [Mirror 2013-07-14]:

Around 11:30 am, I felt my hunger develop, thus I decided to go to the nearby Shopping Center to have my lunch.

Franklin [Mirror 2013-07-14]:

As I was walking along the aisle of the Shopping Center, a big white teaser in a bulletin board posted by a certain Catholic Student Organization in UP caught my attention. I read its contents.

Jason M. Austria [Mirror 2013-07-14]:

As I was walking along the aisle of the Shopping Center, a big white teaser on a bulletin board posted by a certain Catholic Student Organization in UP caught my attention. I read its contents.

Franklin [Mirror 2013-07-14]:

What were written were a big question printed in capital letters and some answers from the students. The teaser asks: “DO YOU BELIEVE IN LIFE AFTER DEATH?”

Jason M. Austria [Mirror 2013-07-14]:

quietly intrigued by what was displayed, as a big, theological question was printed in capital letters, next to some answers from Ph. D students. The teaser asked: “DO YOU BELIEVE IN LIFE AFTER DEATH?”

Franklin [Mirror 2013-07-14]:

I did not answer the question at hand, even though I already knew what would be my answer if asked (minding that I stayed from the seminary for four years, comes from a religious family and became a Religion Teacher).

Jason M. Austria [Mirror 2013-07-14]:

I did not answer the question at hand, even though I already knew what would be my answer if asked, (considering that I stayed at a theological seminary for a period of four years; come from a religious family and eventually became a religious philosophy teacher myself).

Franklin [Mirror 2013-07-14]:

I tried to detach myself and hold my religious prejudices into abeyance and glanced first at the answers of some students. One sarcastic answer really struck me. The student’s answer was written in Filipino and reads likes this: “NO. I don’t believe in such a thing because I did not yet experience how to die. Don’t worry, if I die, I will come back to you and let you know if there is really life after death.”

Jason M. Austria [Mirror 2013-07-14]:

I tried to detach myself and hold my religious prejudices into silent abeyance and glanced first at the answers of some Ph. D students. One sarcastic answer really struck me. The student’s answer was written in Filipino and read like this: “NO. I don’t believe in such a thing because I did not yet experience how to die. Don’t worry, if I die, I will come back to you and let you know if there is really life after death.”

Franklin [Mirror 2013-07-14]:

It made me really rethink about my automatic answer if I were to be asked the same question. After that, I took my lunch. Across the Shopping Center is the Parish of the Holy Sacrifice, I decided to attend the Holy Mass. As I knelt down and pray, the answer of that student really perplexed my mind and stayed at the recesses of my heart.

Jason M. Austria [Mirror 2013-07-14]:

It made me really rethink about my automatic answer if I were to be asked the same question. After that, I took my lunch and thought about Ramsey’s psychological reading of subjective probability. Across the Shopping Center is the Parish of the Holy Sacrifice, I decided to attend the Holy Mass. As I knelt down and prayed, the answer of that Ph. D student really perplexed my mind and stayed in the recesses of my heart.

Franklin [Mirror 2013-07-14]:

Here is another personal story. It was a very ordinary Monday morning. I surf the Internet to check my e-mail and see who was online. I saw an online classmate in my Social Political Philosophy Class.

Jason M. Austria [Mirror 2013-07-14]:

Here is another personal narrative. It was a very ordinary Monday morning in the library reading about Ramsey’s theory of probability as a branch of partial belief logic. I surfed the Internet to check my e-mail and see who was online to speak about Ramsey’s inconclusive argument. I saw an online classmate in my Social Political Philosophy Class.

Franklin [Mirror 2013-07-14]:

I messaged her and we had a pep talk about many topics. Suddenly, she asked me if I believe in God. I replied that I believe in God and she said to me that she is an agnostic.

Jason M. Austria [Mirror 2013-07-14]:

I messaged her and we had a pep talk about many topics including the importance of probability not only to logic but also to statistical and physical science. Suddenly, she asked me if I believe in God. I replied that I believe in God and she said to me that she is an agnostic like Bertrand Russell.

Franklin [Mirror 2013-07-14]:

She tried to ask me about my reasons in believing in God. I gave her some answers and she tried to argue with me. One argument that made me ponder was when she said that most people who do not believe in God are those people who are indeed learned and critical thinkers, that is, great philosophers at that. I don’t know if her argument is factual.

Jason M. Austria [Mirror 2013-07-14]:

She tried to ask me about my reasons in believing in God. I gave her some answers and she tried to argue with me. One argument that made me ponder was when she said that most people who do not believe in God are those people who are indeed learned and critical thinkers, that is, great philosophers at that. I don’t know if her argument is factual enough to avoid a purely verbal controversy..

Franklin [Mirror 2013-07-14]:

Nonetheless, I tried to absorb the essence of the argument and it made me reflect on my own rationality in believing in God.

Jason M. Austria [Mirror 2013-07-14]:

Nonetheless, I tried to absorb the essence of the argument and it made me reflect on my own rationality in believing in God through the calculus of probabilities as a branch of pure mathematics.

Franklin [Mirror 2013-07-14]:

I suppose that it is still unclear to you about what position I really want to be highlighted. There are some grey areas that are not yet crystal clear to you.

Jason M. Austria [Mirror 2013-07-14]:

I suppose that it is still unclear to you about what position I really want to be highlighted. There might be some grey areas that are not yet crystal clear to you with regards to formulae and axioms.

Franklin [Mirror 2013-07-14]:

However I also suppose that you already got some grasps that it must have something to do about “believing in God.” To elucidate the issue that I am pursuing, let me draw it from the two above stories that I related to you.

Jason M. Austria [Mirror 2013-07-14]:

However I suppose that you already have some grasp that this article must have something to do with the symbolic calculus developed by Keynes and “believing in God.” To elucidate the issue that I am pursuing, let me draw it from the two above stories that I related to you.

Franklin [Mirror 2013-07-14]:

The first story forces me to examine if one have the right to believe in life after death or in God. The second story forces me to examine the rationality in believing in God. To put these into two intertwined questions: Do we have a right to believe in God? Are we rational in believing in God? To answer these connected questions is the endeavor of this opus.

Jason M. Austria [Mirror 2013-07-14]:

The first story forced me to examine if one has the right to believe in life after death or in God in terms of Ramsey’s ideas on partial belief. The second story forced me to examine the rationality in believing in God. To put these into two intertwined questions: Do we have an ethical right to believe in God? Are we mathematically rational in believing in God? To answer these connected questions is the endeavor of this opus.

Franklin [Mirror 2013-07-14]:

In order for me to do this, I will discuss first some concerns about evidentialism, which criticizes or even condemns such a belief in God, especially about religion. Then, I will try to criticize evidentialism adopting the attack of William James. Consequently, I can already give answers to the two questions posed above. Let us begin.

Jason M. Austria [Mirror 2013-07-14]:

In order for me to do this, I will discuss first some concerns about evidentialism, which criticizes or even condemns such a belief in God, especially about religion. Then, I will try to criticize evidentialism adopting the attack of William James. Consequently, I can already give answers to the two questions posed above. Let us begin.

Franklin [Mirror 2013-07-14]:

The student’s sarcastic answer in the first story captures the notion of evidentialism. Evidentialism holds that one ought to believe only that for which one has sufficient evidence. To put it in William Clifford’s words, “it is wrong always, everywhere, and for anyone to believe anything upon insufficient evidence.”

Jason M. Austria [Mirror 2013-07-14]:

The Ph. D student’s sarcastic answer in my first narrative captures the notion of evidentialism. Evidentialism holds that one ought to believe only that for which one has sufficient evidence. To put it in William Clifford’s words, “it is wrong always, everywhere, and for anyone to believe anything upon insufficient evidence.”i

(more…)

13 Jul 2013

After an eonic hiatus, I am back on this blog and will resume posting soon. A new age of productivity is finally in sight.
In the meantime: I will be in conversation with Ray Brassier and Suhail Malik around the themes of reason and enlightenment on July 20th. I am hopeful we will have the opportunity to focus on subjects such as freedom and alienation in relation to the project of new rationalism.
Blow Your Mind: On Freedom and Enlightenment
A conversation between Ray Brassier, Suhail Malik, and Reza Negarestani
Saturday, July 20, 2013
7 p.m.
88 Eldridge Street, 4th floor
New York, NY 10002

03 Jul 2013

Collapse Vols I-IV as delivered to NY customer by @USPS #WeCare

27 Jun 2013

Alex Williams on Nick Land and Accelerationism at E-Flux #accelerate

12 Jun 2013

09 Jun 2013

Bloodied but unbowed, Dr Jason Wakefield’s inaugural Avello Publishing Journal Conference is set to take place tomorrow in an as-yet undisclosed location at the
University of Cambridge. The conference topic, ‘The History of Newton’s Philosophy’ (inaccurately reported in some quarters as ‘The History of Oxbridge Philosophy’), will surely be of interest to scholars across the broadest range of disciplines and adepts of ‘the Hunting of the Greene Lion’ alike.

Unfortunately, shameless censorship and wanton misrepresentation on the part of Philos-L moderator Professor Stephen Clark has left many with the mistaken impression that
Dr Wakefield is a pathetic, deluded fantasist whose claim to a Cambridge Philosophy doctorate is nothing but a figment of his own fevered imagination, mere contact with whom
will prove fatal to one’s professional reputation.

Luckily, the Conference’s dramatis personæ (accurate at the time of writing) will surely prove a standing refutation of any such charge. I for one am particularly looking forward to Dummett protégé Howard Marks’s lucid and compelling contribution, not to mention the enigmatic Jason Austria’s ethical interruption!

Conference Program

Key — Note Speech:

Paradigm Shift: Rethinking Communication for the 21st Century David Gunkel, University of Northern Illinois.

Introductory Panel Chair:

Philosophy & Physics at Oxford Howard Marks, University of Oxford, U.K

Session 1:

Philosopiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica Jason Wakefield, University of Cambridge, U.K.

Session 2:

Isaac Newton and the Architectural Models of the People of Solomon Tessa Morrison, University of Newcastle, Australia.

Session 3:

Isaac Newton and Solomon’s Temple: a Fifty Year Study Tessa Morrison, University of Newcastle, Australia.

Session 4:

Ethics of Belief Jason Austria, University of Phillipines Dilliman.

Round-Table Discussion:

Wittgenstein Wren Library Notes Jason Wakefield, University of Cambridge, U.K.

Concluding Debate: Closing Motion:

Arche — Writing: Derrida & Husserl Martin Hägglund, University of Yale, U.S.A.

© Avello Publishing, Cambridge, 2013.

[Mirror 2013-06-09]

24 May 2013

Send bookstores@urbanomic.com your suggestions for cool local independent bookstores worldwide who should stock Urbanomic/Sequence!

23 May 2013

Oresme-Galileo-Huygens.jpg
Via Finitude
A reconstruction of Nicole Oresme’s diagrams
Frequently characterized by historians as an early anticipation of Galilean epistemology and rationality’s total deracination of man and gods alike in the cosmos, Nicole Oresme’s diagrams of ‘extensivity of forms’ are simple epistemic devices developed in order to understand three classical problems: (1) The problem of variation (motion), (2) The problem of articulation of intelligibility (measurement), and (3) The problem of global integration of the variable and the intelligible (universality).
The aim of this lecture is to extract and formalize the constructive kernel of Oresme’s original diagrams, latitudo formarum, as a gesture toward a conception of knowledge capable of conditioning a sharp and irreversible noetic propulsion for the subject. We shall examine the constructive phases of this gesture in forming the schematic landscape of knowledge in terms of a number of consecutive operations: Initiating epistemic ratios of separation from nature, localizing different rational orientations born by the epistemic separation, organization of local orientations according to a global transport, determining the limit projected by the global transport, mobilizing local orientations toward the hypothetical limit, recalibrating the scope of navigation by way of reorganization of local orientations, renormalization of the global transport and reprojecting the limit.
As a conclusion, we shall argue that, following Oresme, the understanding of knowledge as a system of navigation destroys one of the enduring philosophical dogmas responsible for engendering both pseudo-rationalist myopia and quasi-mystical irrationalism, the thought of an essential bound in classical rationalism and the thought of after finitude as manifested in speculative materialism/realism: that is, the alleged incommensurability between finitude and unboundedness.
Date: May 28, 2013
Location: the Dean’s Boardroom, SSC 9420, on the 9th Floor of the Social Science Centre, London, Ontario.

17 Apr 2013

‘Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery’, so they say. But can we be so sure?

With not inconsiderable surprise, Sphaleotas has discovered that the Charles S. Peirce Foundation, a hitherto respectable organisation dedicated to supporting education and research related to the work of the founder of American pragmatism, has flagrantly plagiarised the 2013 Avello Publishing Journal Conference’s web page in its Charles S. Peirce International Centennial Congress 2014 publicity material.

One would have to be blind not to notice that, onwards of the section ‘III. SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS: PANELS’, the Foundation brazenly cuts and pastes from Dr Wakefield’s Call for Papers, typographical errors and all.

It may seem harsh to some, but Sphaleotas feels duty bound to painstakingly enumerate these instances of theft on a line-by-line basis. Indeed, one wonders if this is simply the tip of a particularly lugubrious iceberg.

Jason Wakefield [Mirror 2013-04-17]:

SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS: PANELS

Charles S. Peirce Foundation [Mirror 2013-04-17]:

III. SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS: PANELS

Jason Wakefield [Mirror 2013-04-17]:

A. Panels are 90 minute, open format, sessions. Panel organizers are free to propose any format (including the format described above) that is appropriate to the objectives for their panel. There must be at least two contributors, and their contributions must be consistent with the general guidelines on number of submissions and with the length requirement stated below. All contributors must have confirmed their participation to the panel organizer before submission.

Charles S. Peirce Foundation [Mirror 2013-04-17]:

A. Panels are 90 minute, open format, sessions. Panel organizers are free to propose any format (including the format described above in §II.A) that is appropriate to the objectives for their panel. There must be at least two contributors, and their contributions must be consistent with the general guidelines on number of submissions (§I.D), and with the length requirement stated below. All contributors must have confirmed their participation to the panel organizer before submission.

Jason Wakefield [Mirror 2013-04-17]:

B. Length: Length of the papers will depend on the panel format, but may not exceed 3000 words. It is the responsibility of the panel organizer to ensure that all planned activities can be completed within 90 minutes. If your proposed format does not allow at least 30 minutes for discussion, please include a justification for this in your proposal.

Charles S. Peirce Foundation [Mirror 2013-04-17]:

B. Length: Length of the papers will depend on the panel format, but may not exceed 3000 words. It is the responsibility of the panel organizer to ensure that all planned activities can be completed within 90 minutes. If your proposed format does not allow at least 30 minutes for discussion, please include a justification for this in your proposal.

Jason Wakefield [Mirror 2013-04-17]:

C. Deadline: 3 April 2013. This is a firm deadline: no panel submissions will be accepted if they carry a time stamp later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern Standard Time on that date.

Charles S. Peirce Foundation [Mirror 2013-04-17]:

C. Deadline: 1 April 2013. This is a firm deadline: no panel submissions will be accepted if they carry a time stamp later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern Standard Time on that date.

(more…)

14 Apr 2013

MIT-event.jpg
Guerino Mazzola & Reza Negarestani \ Sonic Practice, Discourse and Auditory Experimentation

Location: act cube, Wiener Building (E15-001), 20 Ames Street, Cambridge, MA
Date: Thursday, May 9 (10am-12:30pm), free and open to the public
Index terms: Philosophy of Synthesis, Philosophy of Gesture, Category Theory, Mathematical Music, Performance Theory and Improvisation, Computer Musicology
Funded in part by the Council for the Arts at MIT.

11 Apr 2013

FIACS for cover FB 3.jpg
Exciting event from @00arika00 in Glasgow 18-21 Apr, with Ray Brassier among others – “a kind of festival or salon of experimental music, poetry, performance and discussions, variously concerned with notions of the performance of freedom.” Details

10 Apr 2013

Scan-130409-0001.jpg
Ko::Labs 1997 w/ DJs Turbo (@kodenine)+Delta (@urbanomicdotcom) inc Delta/CCRU sub-bass materialist classic “Gray Matter”. On Soundcloud

08 Apr 2013

554225_10201059414837006_278333047_n.jpg
Florian Hecker/Reza Negarestani – documentation+continuation+further chimerization of this major collaborative project, published by Primary Information – more details

18 Mar 2013

School-of-Athens.jpg
Structural symmetries and perspective variations of Raphael’s The School of Athens in Mazzola, et al. Rasterbild – Bildraster
I will be reading excerpts from The Mortiloquist (A Barbaric Interpretation of the Life and Problems of Western Philosophy) followed by a discussion on theory-fiction as philosophy’s simulation engine.
Thursday, March 28, 2013 – 6:00pm
UPenn, Kelly Writers House, 3805 Locust Walk Philadelphia, PA 19104

13 Mar 2013


Reza Negarestani will be reading from his eagerly-anticipated The Mortiloquist, and speaking about 'Theory-Fiction as Philosophy's Minecraft', at the University of Pennsylvania (Kelly Writers House, 3805 Locust Walk Philadelphia, PA 19104), on 28 March, at 1800 hrs. Link to Venue.

10 Mar 2013

There can be no sub-genre more intellectually exciting than the book review that sets the terms for future philosophical debate. One thinks immediately of Heidegger’s ‘Anmerkungen zu Karl Jaspers’ Psychologie der Weltanschauungen’ (1919), Chomsky’s ‘A Review of B.F. Skinner’s Verbal Behavior’ (1959), Frege’s ‘Rezension von: Dr. E.G. Husserl, Philosophie der Arithmetik’ (1894), Ryle’s ‘Heidegger’s Sein und Zeit’ (1929), Russell’s ‘Review of A. Meinong, Untersuchungen zur Gegenstandstheorie und Psychologie’ (1905) or indeed Hamann’s 1784 ‘Metakritik über den Purismum der Vernunft’.

But where is the present-day equivalent of a Zur Judenfrage, a Briefe über die Kantische Philosophie, a Differenz des Fichteschen und Schellingschen Systems der Philosophie? Which philosopher has the audacity to reconfigure our very intellectual parameters? Look no further…

(more…)

06 Mar 2013


Over the course of the past few weeks, Jason Wakefield (left) has been on the receiving end of all manner of quite undeserved obloquy. Some say that his editorials and book reviews for the Avello Publishing Journal consist of a bewildering succession of non sequiturs. Others that his highfalutin high-theory allusions belie a cargo-cult like obliviousness to what actually constitutes rational argument and persuasion. Yet others, that his writing inexplicably crowbars in gratuitous, fawning references to the University of Cambridge and members of his journal’s editorial board at every turn, as if childishly basking in reflected glory. Some have even suggested Jason’s claim that he holds a Cambridge doctorate is a witting untruth.
Wrong, all wrong!
What, I ask you, do his detractors have in common? A trustafarian’s decadent disdain for entrepreneurial vision and sheer hard work, even where it is in the service of publishing world-class scholarship in continental philosophy from the likes of John Milbank or Catherine Malabou. Cowards to a man, do Jason’s detractors genuinely believe that editorial board members of the calibre of Professor Claire Colebrook, Professor Keith Ansell-Pearson, or indeed the aforementioned Professor Catherine Malabou would allow their names to be associated with the Avello Publishing Journal if Dr Wakefield’s work were anything other than exemplary? For that matter, would Oxford University Press have considered for an instant including Jason’s endorsement of Korsgaard’s The Constitution of Agency: Essays on Practical Reason and Moral Psychology in its marketing material if it did not have complete confidence in this young Cambridge scholar’s judgement?
With a sense of quiet self-confidence proper to his intellect – Dr Wakefield disarmingly describes his interests as ‘diverse, much like the interests of a polymath (πολυμαθής) such as Leonardo Da Vinchi or Gottfried Leibniz’ – Jason is surely an example to us all, but where his Facebook calumniators laugh hyena-like at Jason’s efforts in the guise of DJ Luga Ayd, pointing impertinently to his work for the Playboy Girls of Hawaiian Tropic ‘Beach Party Booby Bus’ Yum Yum Models Party on behalf of Funky Bubblers Entertainment (of which Jason is the proud CEO, and Avello Publishing a wholly-owned subsidiary), Wakefield may nonetheless rest content that his unique project is the future face of peer reviewed open-access philosophy publishing.

22 Feb 2013

Althusser meets Miami Vice during CIA Powerpoint presentation in the Mojave Desert.
Amanda Beech: Final Machine
p84 red soil & circle.jpg
Launch event, panel discussion tomorrow afternoon at Herbert Art Gallery, Coventry. Details here.
The book Final Machine, featuring a foreword by Robin Mackay, texts by Bridget Crone and Reza Negarestani, along with the full script of the work and a retrospective of Beech's previous works, is released on monday and is available for pre-order at our web store now.

14 Feb 2013

Felicitaciones to Fernando Zalamea, who has been awarded the Premio Nacional de Ensayo Siglo XXI for his essay Pasajes de Proteo: More here.

11 Feb 2013

Details of the forthcoming Collapse Volume 8: Here

25 Jan 2013

I will be talking at CUNY, the center for humanities on February 21, 6:30pm:
The Topos of the Earth:
Telescopic and stereoscopic visions of the abyss-in-one

Yoneda-Pinocchio.jpg
Yoneda construction of Pinocchio
‘What are the implications of locating the topos of the earth within a cosmological continuum’, ‘what does the local have in store for thought’, ‘what does it mean to be local or regional’, ‘where am I, where do I come from, in what direction do I proceed’, ‘how do systematic decisions and rational orientations with regard to local methods and exigencies shape the navigational dynamism of knowledge’, these questions constitute one of the most central aspects of the modern system of knowledge, namely, the problem of localization. It is by way of inferring the topoi of knowledge or locating sites through which the world can be thought and the space of the universal can be navigated that the germinal edifice of knowledge expands its frontiers. Whether as the space of the concept or the particular cosmological horizon that brings about the possibility of thought, the local outlines the navigational task of the philosopher with regard to analysis and synthesis, committing to worldly problems and speculating out of this world. Only through a systematic approach to the question of localization is it possible to embark upon a non-trivial philosophy of analysis and synthesis. Furthermore, a modern understanding of the local allows a more thorough examination of the valence of various epistemological tools and modes of inference as normative methodologies for the navigation of the space of the concept qua a local site.
Since the modern system of knowledge is understood as a multi-modal system of navigation endowed with universal orientation, the question of the topos or the site of the local is linked to the question of epistemology and knowledge both in its analytical and synthetic dimensions. It will be argued that the local – like the global – is not an a-priori given datum. Instead the determination of the local is a procedural task always threatened by the impotency of the generic perspective and the localist myopia of the particular. We shall argue that the task of localization needs to be understood as an oblique procedure that operates by means of certain ‘perspective operators’ and ‘epistemic mediators’. These perspective operators or navigational tools are able to interweave depth and surface, the generic and the vague (particular) and diagonally connect the diachronic to the synchronic (telescopic view), or cohere various depths such as the scientific and manifest images of the local (stereoscopic vision) so as to bring into focus the local and determine its relation to the open, the space of the Universal or the real. The dual task of ‘focalization’ and ‘depth-tracking’ of the local constitutes the panorama of what should be called a vertiginous enlightenment – i.e. inferring the horizon of the local from both generic-to-particular and vague-to-generic, universal-to-regional and regional-to-universal perspectives. The vertiginous enlightenment is but the reading of the local according to and within the abyss.
The aim of this lecture is to examine the problem of localization and its imports for a speculative cosmology and an ultramodern understanding of the system of knowledge through the theoretical appropriation of two pivotal concepts: (a) Homothetic variations of the local and (b) Yoneda addressing (built on the concept of Yoneda lemma in topos theory and category theory). These concepts assist us in studying the problem of localization in the wake of the vertiginous enlightenment and a new definition of the local: The local is now defined by its continuously unfolding ramified path structures and alternative addresses. That is to say, the local cannot be approached via any conception of given fixed coordinates. Since the local is not invariant under topos-inference, every act of localization finds the local site within a new set of coordinates because each telescopic and stereoscopic inspection into the topos of the local unlocks new addresses and brings to light contingent path structures, further distancing the local from its spurious roots that try to strictly demarcate it. Therefore, we can say that the local is defined not by its roots but by its ramified path structures into the open and its ever-changing alternative addresses which unravel as it is telescopically and stereoscopically determined and brought into focus. An understanding of the local via its alternative addresses and contingent sidetracks should be interpreted as a concept of non-ineffable depth through which the open, the universal or the real freely expresses itself in the local and the local ramifies into the open or gains traction upon the universal. It is this depthwise definition of the local that simultaneously diverges from Nietzschean-Heideggerian and Deleuze-Guattarian variants of a true-to-the-earth philosophy toward a geophilosophy as a local thought procedure whose topos is a true-to-the-universe earth.
Details: February 21, 2013, 6:30pm | The James Gallery

17 Jan 2013



Publication 25 February: Amanda Beech, Final Machine – with texts by Reza Negarestani, Bridget Crone, Robin Mackay.
A launch and discussion event for the book will be held at Lanchester Gallery Projects, Coventry, UK, on 23 February, 2-5pm.

14 Jan 2013

Join our e-mailing list for bulletins on Urbanomic publications and events: mail office@urbanomic.com with subject line 'subscribe'.

08 Jan 2013

dtoh.jpg
#nonphilosophy #nonstandardphilosophy Finally available: Urbanomic/Sequence Press's collection of philosophical essays and experimental texts by François Laruelle – from our online store and on Amazon.co.uk. All advance orders have been shipped (thanks for your patience).

05 Jan 2013

@pitchforkmedia Review of Florian Hecker and Reza Negarestani&#39s astonishing Chimerization project: Here

05 Jan 2013


In his recent article for Artforum, ‘Tedious Methods’, leading Brooklynite Jeff Nagy speaks to many of our concerns regarding Speculative Realism as but the mere ideological appendage of capitalist technoscience. Indeed, in this review of The Number and the Siren by Quentin Meillassoux, Mr Nagy has not shirked the gruelling labour of philosophical exegesis and, by means of a dense sequence of argument rarely seen in a trade paper (or indeed, outside of the more technically demanding elements of Frege’s œuvre), has irrefutably demonstrated the coterminous nature of ‘speculative realism’ and ‘financial speculation’ – where the new breed of charlatans, trailing an enthralled audience of shills that outnumbers even the throngs habitually met with at ‘fast poetry’ readings, would likely have been satisfied to draw conclusions from the mere fact that they share nine letters in common.
As sagely observed by Nagy, who did not enjoy math class at school, Meillassoux’s counting up of the words in Mallarmé’s poem falls far short of its purportedly innovative approach to the Riemann zeta function and arithmetic L-series: in fact it ‘is not so much mathematical as merely arithmetical, not so much a mathematization as an accounting’, and as such, therefore, given its cynical, abject relationship to the positive sciences and their political masters, a ‘sure bet’ and ‘infinite success’.
It would be wrong, however, to portray Nagy’s review-article as being somehow inaccessible to a philosophical lay readership, for he has been careful to leaven his critique with witheringly funny examples of where Speculative Realism’s objective, disinterested façade falls away, and we are all forced to conclude that it is all so much ‘money for old rope’.