Ennis on vicarious causation

Ennis has A GOOD POST UP ABOUT VICARIOUS CAUSATION.

On a first read I have only one objection and one further point:

The one objection: “The background of Heidegger’s referential totality is shown to be limited or only part of the picture. A further background exists, a Latourian ‘plasma,’ consisting of objects shading into momentary contact with other objects and humans before flitting back into the background.” In fact I reject Latour’s plasma, which is not articulated into individual actors at all, but is there only as a single rumbling source that disrupts all individuals suddenly without warning. It is the sort of monistic supplement that is often required by philosophies that overdetermine things in terms of their current actual state. Since if a thing is thoroughly and completely what it is here and now, it would never have any reason to change, something deeper than the current state is required. I agree with that, but don’t agree that it can be a single “whole” without articulation. The pre-actual realm, for me, is already articulated into individuals– and not just “pre-individuals.”

The further point: “Whereas there is a case to be made for Harman as a neo-Heideggerian in Tool-Being the same cannot be said of his development after Guerrilla Metaphysics [We might cheekily call this Harman’s Kehre!]” It’s quite possible, though hard for me to see. I used to keep a list of when I had ideas that really felt like breakthroughs for me. No longer do I keep it quite as diligently, but the general pattern seemed to be large steps forward every 4 years or so, with lots of smaller ones scattered in between. If object-oriented philosophy continues to be a subject of interest and of slander in the near future, this may be a good topic for an essay: “the five biggest realizations I ever had,” or something like that.

I’m not sure how universally true that would be for everyone. But let’s say it were true that people generally took a very big step forward every 4 years or so. It might also be likely, in that case, that you’re engaged in 2-year periods of ripening when not everything about the previous idea is entirely clear, and 2 more “mature” years in which you are drawing the very concrete consequences of an idea in ways that everyone can understand. And then a crisis is provoked by some element unassimilable in the previous theory, and as a result a breakthrough has to be made.

But you don’t go up to a tree in March and say: “Ha! Where are the leaves? No one has ever seen the leaves on this tree! This is ridiculous! What a joke!” After all, there’s still a big tree there.