Ingold, hermeneutics, and hylomorphic animism

Kochan, Jeff

Ingold, hermeneutics, and hylomorphic animism

Dateien

Kochan_2-n5digsjouhlh0.pdfGröße: 336.77 KBDownloads: 14

Datum

2023

Open Access-Veröffentlichung

Open Access Hybrid

Sammlungen

Zukunftskolleg

Publikationstyp

Zeitschriftenartikel

Publikationsstatus

Published

Erschienen in

Anthropological Theory. Sage. 2023, 24(1), S. 88-108. ISSN 1463-4996. eISSN 1741-2641. Verfügbar unter: doi: 10.1177/14634996231175282

Zusammenfassung

Tim Ingold draws a sharp line between animism and hylomorphism, that is, between his relational ontology and a rival genealogical ontology. He argues that genealogical hylomorphism collapses under a fallacy of circularity, while his relationism does not. Yet Ingold fails to distinguish between vicious or fallacious circles, on the one hand, and virtuous or hermeneutic circles, on the other. I demonstrate that hylomorphism and Ingold's relational animism are both virtuously circular. Hence, there is no difference between them on this count. A path thus opens for what I call hylomorphic animism. While Ingold's relational animism leads into obscurity, hylomorphic animism is able to explain the differences in power between material things.

Fachgebiet (DDC)

100 Philosophie

Schlagwörter

Tim Ingold, animism, hylomorphism, hermeneutics, relationism, ontology

Zitieren

ISO 690

KOCHAN, Jeff, 2023. Ingold, hermeneutics, and hylomorphic animism. In: Anthropological Theory. Sage. 2023, 24(1), S. 88-108. ISSN 1463-4996. eISSN 1741-2641. Verfügbar unter: doi: 10.1177/14634996231175282

BibTex

@article{Kochan2023-05-16Ingol-67282,
  year={2023},
  doi={10.1177/14634996231175282},
  title={Ingold, hermeneutics, and hylomorphic animism},
  number={1},
  volume={24},
  issn={1463-4996},
  journal={Anthropological Theory},
  pages={88--108},
  author={Kochan, Jeff}
}

RDF

<rdf:RDF
    xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/"
    xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
    xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
    xmlns:bibo="http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/"
    xmlns:dspace="http://digital-repositories.org/ontologies/dspace/0.1.0#"
    xmlns:foaf="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/"
    xmlns:void="http://rdfs.org/ns/void#"
    xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#" > 
  <rdf:Description rdf:about="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/67282">
    <dcterms:issued>2023-05-16</dcterms:issued>
    <dc:date rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2023-07-03T07:36:21Z</dc:date>
    <dspace:hasBitstream rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/bitstream/123456789/67282/1/Kochan_2-n5digsjouhlh0.pdf"/>
    <dspace:isPartOfCollection rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/52"/>
    <dc:contributor>Kochan, Jeff</dc:contributor>
    <dcterms:available rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2023-07-03T07:36:21Z</dcterms:available>
    <dc:creator>Kochan, Jeff</dc:creator>
    <dc:language>eng</dc:language>
    <dcterms:isPartOf rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/52"/>
    <dcterms:hasPart rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/bitstream/123456789/67282/1/Kochan_2-n5digsjouhlh0.pdf"/>
    <foaf:homepage rdf:resource="http://localhost:8080/"/>
    <dcterms:rights rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"/>
    <bibo:uri rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/handle/123456789/67282"/>
    <void:sparqlEndpoint rdf:resource="http://localhost/fuseki/dspace/sparql"/>
    <dc:rights>Attribution 4.0 International</dc:rights>
    <dcterms:title>Ingold, hermeneutics, and hylomorphic animism</dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:abstract>Tim Ingold draws a sharp line between animism and hylomorphism, that is, between his relational ontology and a rival genealogical ontology. He argues that genealogical hylomorphism collapses under a fallacy of circularity, while his relationism does not. Yet Ingold fails to distinguish between vicious or fallacious circles, on the one hand, and virtuous or hermeneutic circles, on the other. I demonstrate that hylomorphism and Ingold's relational animism are both virtuously circular. Hence, there is no difference between them on this count. A path thus opens for what I call hylomorphic animism. While Ingold's relational animism leads into obscurity, hylomorphic animism is able to explain the differences in power between material things.</dcterms:abstract>
  </rdf:Description>
</rdf:RDF>

Universitätsbibliographie

Nein

Begutachtet

Ja