articles impending and just appeared

I’ve just finished correcting the proofs for “On Asymmetrical Causation,” which will appear in Parallax early in 2010. The details on that article are as follows:

*“On Asymmetrical Causation,” “Asymmetrical Causation: Influence Without Recompense,” Parallax, Vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 96-109.

Also appearing in the early months of 2010:

*“Technology, Objects, and Things in Heidegger,” in Cambridge Journal of Economics. (That one is already available on the web. I don’t know the page numbers of the print version, though maybe that’s already clear from the web version and I just didn’t realize it.)

*“On Interface: Nancy’s Weights and Masses” in Jean-Luc Nancy and Plural Thinking: Expositions of World, Politics, Art, and Sense. Edited by Peter Grattton and Marie-Ève Morin. (Albany: SUNY Press, forthcoming 2010.) (Gratton tells me he was already doing final poofreading on this volume, and it should be out shortly.)

*”War, Space, and Reversal: Paul Virilio’s Apocalypse,” in Philosophy After Hiroshima. Edited by Edward Demenchonok. (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Scholars Press, forthcoming 2009.) Pages 132-148. (Demonchonok also told me to expect this one out quite early in 2010. It’s a streamlined version of the talk I gave in Hiroshima in June 2007.)

The one that reportedly already appeared was this:

*“Levinas and the Triple Critique of Heidegger,” in Philosophy Today, Winter 2009. Pages 407-413.

The editor initially told me he didn’t like my first title, since it didn’t contain the word “Heidegger,” though Heidegger was a key part of the article. He was right. Then I changed it to the title above, and he said he still didn’t like it, and suggested “Levinas’s Threefold Critique of Heidegger.” I agreed that that was better and approved it as the new title. But now it seems to have reverted to “Levinas and the Triple Critique of Heidegger,” whether by accident or by editorial change of heart.

The weirdest thing that ever happened to me was when a journal once accidentally published my rough draft of an article rather than the much more polished final version! I won’t say which one it was. Readers will have to guess for themselves. Luckily, the rough draft wasn’t that bad, though a few passages near the end of that article do make me cringe a bit.