Cake or Doughnut Ontology? | Žižek vs. Johnston
Summary
TLDRThe transcript captures a deep philosophical debate on ontological differences, focusing on the contrasting views of Professor Adrian Johnston and Slavoj Žižek. Johnston critiques Žižek's 'ontological incompleteness' and 'donut model', which links human freedom to quantum physics, suggesting it reduces subjectivity to a return of the primal chaos. Instead, Johnston advocates for a 'layer cake model', emphasizing the distinct emergence of human freedom, separate from archaic metaphysical foundations. The conversation delves into Schelling's influence on Žižek and the challenges of integrating quantum physics with a non-reductive account of human subjectivity.
Takeaways
- 📚 The ongoing debate between Professor S and J revolves around the concept of ontological incompleteness and its implications in understanding reality.
- 🎨 J introduces the idea of a 'layer cake' versus 'donut' ontology, suggesting different ways to conceptualize the relationship between the fundamental and emergent levels of reality.
- 🔬 J's work, starting with 'The Indivisible Remainder,' attempts to integrate German idealism with quantum physics to explore materialism and ontological incompleteness.
- 🌀 Schelling's philosophy, particularly his distinction between 'ground' and 'existence,' is central to J's thought, with the 'ground' representing a chaotic, anarchic basis of reality.
- 🌐 Schelling's 'ground' is seen as the source of human freedom, where moments of autonomy are intrusions of this primordial chaos into the structured reality of 'existence'.
- 🍩 Professor S criticizes this view as a 'donut model,' implying a circular return to the origin at the highest level of emergence, which he finds problematic.
- 🤔 The debate touches on the challenge of reconciling non-reductive accounts of subjectivity with materialism or naturalism, without resorting to reductionism.
- 🧠 The discussion suggests that neurobiology might be a more fruitful area of scientific exploration for understanding subjectivity and mindedness.
- 🔬 J's recent work, including 'Sex and the Failed Absolute,' continues to develop his version of dialectical materialism, engaging with quantum physics in a Schelling-influenced manner.
- 🔮 There is skepticism about the direct link between quantum mechanics and human subjectivity, with the current state of scientific understanding not yet able to substantiate such claims.
- ⏳ The conversation acknowledges the need for patience and ongoing scientific inquiry to potentially validate or refute speculative hypotheses about the connections between quantum physics and human freedom.
Q & A
What is the central debate between Professor S and J regarding ontology?
-The central debate revolves around the concept of ontological incompleteness and the metaphorical difference between a 'layer cake' and a 'donut' in their ontological models, which represent different views on the structure and nature of reality.
What is the significance of J's book 'The Indivisible Remainder' in this debate?
-It is significant because it was the first time J attempted to combine German idealism with Lukácsian Marxism to engage with quantum physics, introducing the idea of ontological incompleteness and initiating the debate on materialism and subjectivity.
How does Professor S view Schelling's philosophy in relation to the debate?
-Professor S sees Schelling's philosophy as crucial to J's version of ontological incompleteness, especially Schelling's distinction between 'ground' and 'existence', which J uses to argue for a return of the repressed ground in instances of human freedom.
What is the 'ground' in Schelling's philosophy as described by Professor S?
-In Schelling's philosophy, the 'ground' is a foundational, underlying ontological basis that is unruly, conflict-ridden, and anarchic, in contrast to the 'existence', which is the intelligible reality we inhabit.
How does Professor S critique J's use of Schelling's philosophy in relation to quantum physics?
-Professor S critiques J's approach as reductive, suggesting that J is tempted to equate human freedom with a return of quantum indeterminacy within classical reality, which Professor S sees as a shortcut rather than a fully fleshed-out argument.
What does Professor S mean by referring to the 'donut model' in Schelling's philosophy?
-The 'donut model' refers to the idea that the highest point of emergence in reality, such as human subjectivity, is a return to the underlying ground, creating a circular, layered structure where the highest and lowest points are connected.
How does Professor S differentiate his view on human freedom from J's interpretation?
-Professor S argues for a non-reductive account of human freedom, suggesting that it is distinct and new rather than a resurgence of the most primitive metaphysical basis of existence.
What is the relevance of Hegel's philosophy to the debate between Professor S and J?
-Hegel's philosophy is relevant because Professor S uses it to argue against the 'donut model', suggesting that Hegel's account of the emergence of human-mindedness out of nature supports the idea of human freedom being something distinct and new.
What is the role of quantum physics in J's recent work, as mentioned by Professor S?
-In J's recent work, quantum physics is used to flesh out a version of dialectical materialism that involves ontological incompleteness, with J engaging in conversations with eminent figures in the field to explore this connection further.
What is Professor S's stance on the speculative hypothesis linking quantum mechanics and human subjectivity?
-Professor S maintains a patient 'wait and see' outlook, acknowledging that while such a hypothesis is intriguing, it currently lacks substantiation from scientific research and requires further exploration and evidence.
How does Professor S suggest approaching the study of subjectivity from a scientific perspective?
-Professor S suggests starting at the level of neurobiology, which is closest to the study of mindedness, and working out problems from there, rather than relying on speculative hypotheses about quantum mechanics.
Outlines
📚 Ontological Debates and Quantum Physics
The first paragraph delves into a philosophical debate between Professor S and J, focusing on the concept of ontological incompleteness. It discusses how J's work, starting with 'The Indivisible Remainder', integrates German idealism with Lukácsian Marxism and quantum physics to propose a materialistic philosophy. The debate is framed as a metaphorical difference between a layer cake and a donut in ontological models, with the latter suggesting a circular return to the foundational 'ground' of reality through the highest level of subjectivity. The paragraph also references Schelling's philosophy, particularly his distinction between 'ground' and 'existence', and how it influences J's thought, especially regarding the nature of human freedom and autonomy.
🌀 The Donut Model of Reality and Subjectivity
This paragraph continues the exploration of ontological models, contrasting the 'donut model' with Hegel's philosophy of nature and the emergence of human-mindedness. It critiques Schelling's view as a form of circularity where the highest form of existence is a return to the foundational ground, akin to a donut's hole. The speaker argues for a more distinct and new aspect of human freedom, rather than seeing it as a resurgence of the most primitive aspects of existence. The influence of quantum physics on J's thought is highlighted, suggesting a connection between quantum indeterminacy and human freedom, which the speaker finds reductive and speculative without concrete scientific backing.
🔬 The Challenge of Linking Quantum Physics to Subjectivity
The final paragraph addresses the speculative nature of linking quantum physics to human subjectivity and consciousness. It points out the lack of a direct scientific connection between the quantum level and our experience of subjectivity, referencing Roger Penrose's work as an example of such attempts. The speaker advocates for a patient 'wait and see' approach, emphasizing the need for substantial collective scientific effort over time to potentially substantiate such hypotheses. The paragraph concludes by suggesting that work on a non-reductive account of subjectivity should start with neurobiology, which is more directly related to our understanding of mindedness.
Mindmap
Keywords
💡Ontological incompleteness
💡Layer cake ontology
💡Donut model
💡Quantum physics
💡German idealism
💡Schelling
💡Ground and existence
💡Autonomy
💡Dialectical materialism
💡Subjectivity
Highlights
Debate on ontological incompleteness and its implications in understanding reality.
Introduction of the layer cake and donut ontology models as a metaphor for different philosophical perspectives.
Discussion on the decades-long debate between the guest and the host, highlighting the contrast between their views.
Exploration of Schelling's philosophy and its influence on the concept of ontological incompleteness.
Analysis of the 'ground' and 'existence' distinction in Schelling's philosophy and its relevance to the debate.
Critique of Schelling's model as a 'donut' shape, suggesting a circular return to the initial state in the highest level of emergence.
Contrasting Hegel's view on the emergence of human-mindedness with Schelling's, emphasizing the novelty of human freedom.
The role of quantum physics in fleshing out a materialism that involves ontological incompleteness.
Iek's engagement with quantum physics and its connection to the concept of autonomous subjectivity.
Critique of the reductionist approach to subjectivity, suggesting it lacks a comprehensive scientific foundation.
The challenge of linking quantum mechanics to human subjectivity and the need for further scientific exploration.
The potential for future scientific advancements to substantiate speculative hypotheses about the connection between quantum reality and human freedom.
The importance of patience and a 'wait and see' approach in the face of current scientific limitations.
The call for a deeper investigation into neurobiology as a more immediate scientific field relevant to understanding subjectivity.
Reflection on the irony of seeking a non-reductive account of subjectivity through potentially reductive scientific hypotheses.
The need for collective scientific labor across various fields to make progress in understanding the nature of subjectivity.
The philosophical and scientific significance of the debate on the nature of reality and human freedom.
Transcripts
what Professor so now to kind of flesh
out your differences and kind of this
ongoing debate with J now of course
um kind of puts forward this idea of
ontological incompleteness which is also
something that I'm fully fully drawn
towards um so I I I was trying to
prepare for this conversation and I I
Read's book on freedom uh a couple of
months then I I there's one one part
here if you don't mind if I could just
read it out he he says in the book uh
freedom disase without kill uh being
involved in a decades long debate with
Edan Johnston I gladly accept his
designation of a difference as one
between uh layer cake and donut in your
ontology yes then uh you also did uh
write write a little have a bit of a
debate with him in this H book J
response which is an excellent yes read
uh read
too this debate between uh cake and
donut so if you could take as as as much
time as you need for this because I find
it fascinating and kind of try to
outline uh these ontological differences
between the dut model and the the cake
layer cake model between yourself and
xek yes well I should say that with with
with xek so starting in 1996 and that
year he he brings out um his book The
indivisible remainder an essay on
shelling related matters and one of the
you know striking and novel features of
that particular work from the mid1 1990s
is that this was the first time the
initial occasion when um when xek uh uh
attempted to uh use his at that point
primarily his combination of German
idealism with lukan and in this case
more more precisely uh sort of leanian
eyes shelling to engage with quantum
physics um and so this this gesture of
taking recourse to Quantum Physics for
fleshing out a particular sort of
materialism that would involve this this
idea of ontological incompleteness Etc
um this is really the first place where
you see XI do that um and then more
recently um it's as though that project
from the indivisible remainder has over
the course of the past I'd say
probably about 15 years s of returned
with a Vengeance in his uh in his you
know more recent work where you know he
Now talks about his his version of
dialectical materialism as essentially
involving this particular hybrid German
idealist leanian manner of engaging with
quantum physics for instance you know
his 2020 book sex in the failed absolute
um is his I think most recent sustained
presentation of that and in fact right
now he's back to working on quantum
physics again and has been in
conversation with a number of you know
eminent figures in that field and it's
very yes that's right and
so yeah he's in the middle of working on
all of that right now um but uh one
aspect of of the Kate versus donut model
that you're talking about has to do with
how in debating with him about some of
these issues one of the things that I
did is go back to shelling himself um
and you know looking at uh you know
shellings philosophy of Nature and
related aspects of shellings larger the
lack of a better word metaphysics um
that you know it became very clear to me
that with shelling schelling's account
of of autonomous subjectivity of of you
know the subject in its fullest Freedom
um as concerns X that shelling makes
clear that for him what this is a matter
of is so shelling and this is you know
this is material crucial to X's version
of shelling the middle period shelling
starting with shelling 1809 fight schift
his essay on human freedom and running
through the ages of the world up to
around 1815 or thereabouts that this
middle period shelling especially is
dear to xek and this shelling has this
distinction that xek uses again and
again between ground glun and existence
existence um and this ground existence
distinction you know for shelling the
idea is is that what we ordinarily take
to be reality is what he calls existence
which is this tamed and
domesticated um you know field of
constituted entities and events um that
is organized in a lawful fashion that is
intelligible for us you know as knowing
subjects um that we are able to
cognitively map you know get our
bearings in relation to Etc but that
this entire domain that we inhabit of
this intelligible reality that shelling
calls existence um arises from and sits
a top this more foundational underlying
ontological basis that shelling calls
ground and that this ground for the
middle and late period shelling is not a
you know calm organized lawful rule
governed um uh uh you know second
reality it is Instead This unruly
conflict-ridden
anarchic it's kind of like this
primordial chaos almost um and then for
shelling what you know we take to be
instances of effective human freedom in
our constituted reality of existence are
for shelling returns of the repressed
ground it's as though the impersonal
Anonymous uh unruly basis of all being
um returns in this you know uh uh you
know uh localized fashion in and through
human subjects and that my own
subjectivity in terms of when I am free
and in those instances in which I am I
can be said to be acting autonomously
that what is happening is this in and
through me this ground is in a sense
intruding into the domain of existence
it's a moment at which that underlying
ontological unruliness breaks through
the crust of existence and and makes
itself felt again um and perturbs that
field of existence now from within um
but of course you know in my view I
don't you know there's it almost seems a
bit like shelling is cheating and I call
this a donut model because although
Hegel is usually seen as being guilty of
of uh of privileging you know the idea
of circularity or this you know this
notion of you know coming back to where
you started uh uh ET
that it's really with shelling that you
get this model where it's that all right
ground gives rise to the various
emergent levels and layers of existence
and then at the kind of highest level of
emergence uh at the level of existence
namely our subjective autonomy that that
you know highest point is just the
return of the of the lowest you know uh
basis um so it's as though we in fact
just go through you know a series of
layers arranged in a donut shape and
then when we get get to the highest
emergent layer we've closed the circle
and rejoined you know the lowest point
so you know the highest point of the
emergent levels of existence is the
return of the ultimate underlying graph
and so it's this you know layered
circular you know dut shape kind of that
you get with shelling um you know
whereas you know I argue with Hegel if
you look especially at hegel's
philosophy of Nature and then his
account of the emergence of human-
mindedness out of nature you you know
the volumes two and three of his
encyclopedia um that you you know it's
not that for him you know the various
aspects of what we associate with Guist
you know you know Spirit mind you know
in in its various you know forms
associated with our subjectivity that
for heel is not just you know in a sense
the Resurgence of something you know
from the most primitive you know
metaphysical basis of existence that
then
reints Within
an a constituted field of natural and
human reality and its you know in all of
its particular features um that no that
there's you know something irreducibly
distinct and new about human Freedom
rather than it being just in a sense
tapping back into what is oldest and
most archaic and then xek when he you
know engages with quantum physics um in
a way that's influenced by shelling um
it's no accident that you know xak Flur
with this idea that in a way it that you
know his idea of the aut you know the
the negativity of autonomous
subjectivity iek is sometimes that this
is in a way like with shelling but now
in updated terminology that this is a
kind of return in in ordinary
non-quantum reality of certain unruly
aspects of the quantum Universe right
that it's as though you have quantum
physics as this shadowy shenian ground
and then you have the classical Universe
we inhabit of course resulting from
things like the collapse of the wave
function as like shellings existence and
that when human Freedom comes into play
for xek I think he's sometimes tempted
to take this shellian shortcut and to
say that well that's in a sense
something like Quantum indeterminancy
Etc um returning within the constituted
field of classical non-quantum reality
um and it's to me one of the ironies is
is that for someone who also of course
in part thanks to his Fidelity to things
like German idealism and dialectical
materialism for somebody who wants a
non-reductive account of subjectivity um
you know this seems to be a remarkably
reductive move is to say essentially
that you know solving the problem of
human- mindedness or subjectivity um is
just simply a matter of you know we
could really say that the UL the
smallest ultimate constituents of
physical reality are
you know a sense where we are to go
looking for the basis of what we call
subjectivity I mean that's you know of
course you know a hard-nosed you know
physical reductionist or eliminativist I
don't think ultimately we'd have too
much of a problem with that um but
efforts to do this I mean like you go
back to something like Roger penrose's
work like the emperor's new mind um you
know to the best of my knowledge nobody
has really gotten very far actually
trying to flesh out okay if you're going
to assert that there's some type of
direct connection between the quantum
level and then our subjectivity or
mindedness well there's it would seem
you would need to have the ability um to
flesh that out at the level of the
relevant sciences and as far as I know
nobody is even remotely close to being
able to do that and so you know maybe in
the long run you know decades centuries
down the road assuming we last that long
as a species we'll get around to you
know we might be able to flesh out those
details and vindicate something like the
Xian speculative hypothesis that would
have it that you know subjective freedom
is a kind of return within the field of
classical reality of certain aspects of
quantum reality um you know that to me
is something that will require a very
patient wait and see Outlook and in the
meantime you know this is why I also say
well look if you're going to spend time
diving into the Natural Sciences in
relation specifically to a nonreductive
yet still compatible with materialism or
naturalism account of subjectivity
there's plenty of work to be done you
know starting at the level of
neurobiology which would seem to be the
natural scientific level closest to you
know what we're concerned with when
talking about mindedness and to work
those problems out um and again whether
or not there's going to be any
possibility of vindicating a speculative
hypothesis about a direct link between
you know our subjectivity and quantum
mechanics I just think that um there's
not much that we can do for the time
being except wait and see you know how
much uh progress is made thanks to a
huge amount of collective scientific
labor in different fields over the
decades and you know further to you know
and beyond that uh to see whether or not
that can end up getting substantiated in
any way
Browse More Related Video
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)