the blurbs for Ennis’s book

The book is HERE for pre-order, and the endorsements look good:

“Paul J. Ennis has given us the first general overview of the theses of After Finitude, and of their reception in the Anglo-American philosophical field. The theses in question – speculative and correlationist – are here exposed with clarity and fidelity. An indispensable introduction to speculative realism”

Professor Quentin Meillassoux, Le Departement de philosophie, Aecole normale superieure)

“In its brief compass Ennis’s book gives a lively, sympathetic though critical account of a newly emergent movement of thought – speculative realism – that looks set to transform received ideas of what counts as ‘continental’ philosophy.”

Professor Christopher Norris, Distinguished Research Professor in Philosophy, School of English, Communication and Philosophy, Cardiff University

—

As big a tent as speculative realism is, it’s not hard to define.

*Speculative realism is a realism insofar as it opposes correlationism as the foundation of philosophy. If you think the realism vs. anti-realism debate is a “pseudo-problem,” then you’re a correlationist. This is the unfortunate side of the phenomenological legacy.

*Speculative realism is speculative insofar as it does not champion the dull billiard balls of commonsense realism. The real is much weirder than common sense can imagine. (And this is why Lovecraft was the sole shared hero among all members of the original group.)

After that, anything goes. There are different ways to attack the human-world correlate. You can say as I do that the human-world duopoly is the problem, and integrate that human-world coupling into a more general theory of relation. You can choose instead to do as Meillassoux does, and respect the human-world correlate but find a secret way to break through and regain the absolute (which I hold to be impossible, though still interesting). And there are other ways, many of them not yet invented.

One thing that has definitely changed since 2007 is that you can argue openly for realism in continental philosophy circles without looking like a killjoy or a fool. And that’s not the only thing that’s changed.