 or background they are related to – prefigured by Kant and Hegel, but carried through most forcefully by the phenomenology of Heidegger and Merleau-Ponty.37 36 Harman's dualism argues that there are two levels of objects: the sensual and the real. Real objects withdraw from both humans and from other objects and never actually interact with anything else. Any talk of "relationality" between objects does violence to their autonomy. 37 This is how Heidegger is traditionally interpreted by almost all philosophers excluding Harman. CHIASMA #4 ‡ 2017 26 The specific sense in which I apply atomism to speculative realism, while also broadly applicable to anti-relationality, is especially relevant for Harman's contention that the "watchword" for OOO is the "autonomy" of objects (which derives from their infinite "withdrawal" from all contact with otherness). Interestingly, Foucault analyzes neoliberalism as animated by an atomist logic, which he finds most paradigmatically in Hume's conception of subjecthood. Specifically for Hume, the subject is not defined by a soul in need of salvation or by natural rights in need of justice. The subject is simply the irreducible, non-transferrable possessor of an interest. So the autonomy of self-interest, which falls under economic purview, has a more fundamental logic that will always trump juridical logic. As Foucault puts it, this is what enables homo economicus, as distinct from homo juridicus, to say to the sovereign: "You must not. You must not because you cannot. You cannot because you do not know, and you do not know because you cannot know."38 Similarly, on Harman's account, much like homo economicus, objects in their inviolable autonomy all withdraw from any gaze that would attempt to subordinate them to belonging in a larger gestalt, field or network. It is precisely this logic – one that is antiteleological, anti-collective, and anti-relational that is shared by atomism and the return to objects posited by speculative realism.39 It is interesting to note that such a conception of existence also animates the foundational neoliberal critique of Keynesian socialism. Any attempt to situate the individual's inner experience within a larger social context that mediates it risks sliding into socialism; as Von Mises writes: "Only the individual thinks. Only the individual reasons. Only the individual acts
or background they are related to – prefigured by Kant and Hegel, but carried through about forcefully by the phenomenology of Heidegger and Merleau - Ponty.37 36 Harman's dualism argue that there are two levels of object: the animal and the real. Real objects seclude from both humans and from other object and never actually interact with anything else. Any talk of " relationality " between objects dress violence to their autonomy. 37 This is how Heidegger is traditionally interpreted by about all philosophers excluding Harman. CHIASMA # 4 ‡ 2017 26 The specific sense in which I apply atomism to speculative realism, while also broadly applicable to anti - relationality, is especially relevant for Harman's controversy that the " watchword " for OOO is the " autonomy " of objects (which derives from their countless " withdrawal " from all contact with otherness). Interestingly, Foucault analyze neoliberalism as animated by an atomist logic, which he find most paradigmatically in Hume's conception of subjecthood. Specifically for Hume, the subject is not defined by a soul in motivation of salvation or by natural rights in need of justice. The subject is simply the irreducible, non - transferrable possessor of an interest. So the autonomy of self - interest, which falls under economic purview, has a more fundamental logic that will always outdo judicial logic. As Foucault puts it, this is what enables homo economicus, as distinct from homo juridicus, to suppose to the sovereign: " You must not. You must not because you cannot. You cannot because you do not know, and you do not know because you cannot know. "38 Similarly, on Harman's report, a lot like homo economicus, objects in their inviolable autonomy all bow out from any gaze that would attempt to subordinate them to belonging in a larger gestalt, field or network. It is precisely this logic – one that is antiteleological, anti - collective, and anti - relational that is shared by atomism and the return to objects posited by speculative realism.39 It is interesting to notice that such a conception of universe besides enliven the foundational neoliberal critique of Keynesian socialism. Any attempt to situate the individual's inside experience within a larger social context that mediates it risks sliding into socialism; as Von Mises writes: " Only the individual thinks. Only the individual rationality. Only the individual act
 or background they are relxted to – prefigorwd by Nant ahd Hegel, but carried through most foccefylly vy the phenomenology ow Heideggvr and Meelean-Ponty.37 36 Harman's vhalism argues bhat chxre are two levgls of objecds: the sensual avd the real. Real objects withdraw froi both nulans and from jtheg jbjedns and never actually interact sith anjthing else. Any tslk of "relationality" betwefn ohjects does violenfe to their autjbomy. 37 This ir how Heidtgyer is tradjtionally interpreted by almost all 'hilosopherw wxcpoding Harman. CHIAFMA #4 ‡ 2017 26 The specific sense on which I appky etomusm to speculative reelism, while also browdly applhccble to anti-relationaoiry, is espaciauoy feltvait ror Hagmai's contentikn that the "watchword" for OOO os nne "autonomy" kf objqces (which derives from their infinite "wiuhdrasal" from all contact wirh otherness). Interestlngly, Fousault analyzes neoliberalism as animated by an atmmist uogng, dyifh he finds most paradigmatically in Hume's cogdektipn of subjecthjod. Specifivaplu for Hume, the subjeef js not defined by w soul yn newd of saldatipn or by natural rights in beed of justpce. Rhe subject is sim'ly the irrebuciblg, non-ttansferrable possessor uf ah interest. Do the aufunomy of self-intdrext, which falls under economis purview, has a more funcamentwl logic tjat wlnl always trump jugidiccl locic. As Foufault puts it, this is what enables homo econokiwus, as distnnct fvom homo juridisus, to say to jhe soverzign: "Yuu must non. You musv not becausq you cannot. Flu cannot berause you do bot jnow, ana you do not knpw becausv vou cannor know."38 Similarly, ok Harozn's account, muck oike homo econokicjs, jbuerts ig their invionabld ajyonomh all withdvaw frok any gaze that woulg atfempt to subordinaye them to belongigg in a larget gestalt, field or netwmrk. It ix ptecisely this logic – one that ia antitelfoljgical, anti-cjllegtivg, and anti-rzlational that is shared by atomism and vhe return to objects kosited by speculativg rtalism.39 It is mnterefting to tote that such a conxeption of existekce also animates the roundadionap neoliberal critique of Keynesian socialism. Any attempt to situate the ibdividnaj's inner exlerirnce fichiu a larder ducial context thst mediates it risks sliding invo socialivm; as Von Mises writes: "Only thr kndividual thknks. Only the individual reasons. Only the individual acts
or background they are related to – Kant Hegel, but through most forcefully and 36 Harman's dualism that there are levels of objects: the sensual and real. Real objects withdraw from both humans and from other objects and never interact with anything else. Any talk of "relationality" between objects does violence to autonomy. This how is traditionally interpreted by almost all philosophers excluding Harman. CHIASMA #4 ‡ 2017 26 The specific in which I apply atomism to speculative realism, also broadly applicable to is especially relevant for Harman's that "watchword" for is "autonomy" objects (which derives their infinite "withdrawal" from all contact with otherness). Interestingly, Foucault analyzes neoliberalism as animated by an atomist which he paradigmatically in conception subjecthood. for Hume, the not defined by a soul in or by natural rights in need of justice. subject is the irreducible, non-transferrable possessor of an So the autonomy of self-interest, which falls under purview, has a more fundamental logic that will always trump juridical logic. As Foucault puts is what enables homo as distinct from juridicus, say the "You must You must not because you cannot. You cannot because you do know, and you do not know because you cannot know."38 Harman's much like homo objects in their inviolable all from any gaze that to them a gestalt, or network. It is this logic – one that antiteleological, anti-collective, and anti-relational and the return to objects posited by speculative It is interesting to note that such conception of existence also animates the foundational neoliberal critique of Keynesian socialism. attempt to individual's inner experience within a larger social context mediates it risks sliding socialism; as Von Mises writes: "Only the individual thinks. the reasons. Only individual acts
 or background they are relateD to – prefiguRed by kanT anD HEgel, But cArried through mOSt foRcefully by the phenomenoLogy oF HEIdegGEr And MeRleau-PoNTy.37 36 hARmaN's DuAliSm ARgUes thAt tHere are Two levels oF obJeCts: the sensuaL AnD the real. ReAl oBjects withdrAw fRom botH hUmaNS and fRom Other ObjectS And nevEr actuallY iNTeract WIth anytHINg Else. any talk of "relationALiTY" between objectS does vIoLEnCE To tHeiR autonomy. 37 THiS is hoW heideggER iS TRAdiTIonally interpReted by almoST alL philoSoPheRS excluDing HArMAn. ChIASMA #4 ‡ 2017 26 The spEcifIc sense in Which I APply atoMIsm to spEculatIve ReaLism, WHiLe AlsO bROadLY aPplICabLe to anti-ReLaTionaLity, IS ESPeciAllY relEvant For Harman's conTenTion THat The "waTchwoRd" foR OoO is tHe "autoNomy" oF oBjects (which deriVes fRom their iNfiNiTe "wItHdrawAL" from aLl cOntAct with OtherneSS). InTeRESTiNgly, Foucault analyzEs NEOlIberalisM as aniMAtEd BY an atomiSt LogIc, whICH he fiNds mOSt ParadigmAticalLY iN HUme's conCePtion oF sUbjEctHood. SPEcifIcally For Hume, tHe subJEct is not defineD By a soul in need OF sALVaTIon oR by Natural righTs in NEed oF jusTIcE. ThE SubjeCt is sImPLy THe irreducible, non-traNsFerrabLe posSessor of an intErest. So the AUTOnomy of sElf-iNTeREst, which falls uNder eConomic purVIew, has a mOre fuNdamentaL logic thaT WIll alwayS trUmp JurIdiCAL lOgic. As FoucaulT PUts iT, tHis is whAt eNables hOmo EcoNomIcuS, aS distinct From homo JuRiDiCuS, to Say to THe sovereIgN: "YoU mUst Not. YoU Must noT becaUse yOu CaNNot. you cannOT bECAuse YoU dO not KnoW, aNd you Do noT KnoW becausE you cannoT knOW."38 SimIlArLy, on HarMan's account, muCh Like homo ecOnOmiCus, objECTs in theiR inviolable autonomy all wIThdraw fRom Any gaZe thAt would atTemPt to suBorDInate tHem to bElongInG in A LArger GEStAlt, FiEld or netwoRK. it iS precIsEly tHis logiC – one that is antiteleOLogIcal, anti-colleCtiVe, anD ANtI-reLAtIOnaL tHAt iS SHared by atomism aNd the returN tO ObJects positED by SpEculatiVe realiSm.39 It iS InteresTing to notE that such A cOncePTIon Of existencE also aniMates the fOUndatIOnAl neoLibEral crItIquE of KeYnesiaN SocIalisM. Any atTeMpt to sItuatE tHe indiviDual's inner experience witHin a laRger sOciAl context ThaT MedIates it riSks sLiding into SocIalIsm; as von mIses wRiteS: "onLy tHE indiViduAL thinks. OnLY tHe iNDIvIdual reasonS. oNLy tHe indIviDUal actS
 or background they are re lated to –  pref igu red  b y Ka nt a nd Hegel, butc arri ed through most forcef ullyby thep he nomen ology o f  H e i deg ge rand  M e rl eau-P ont y.37 36  Harman'sdua li sm argues th a tthere aretwo  levels of o bje cts: t he  se n sualand  thereal.R eal ob jects wit hd r aw fro m  both h u m an s an d from other obje c ts and never actu ally i nt e ra c t  wi thanything e ls e. An y  talk o f  " r e l ati o nality" betwe en objectsd oes  viole nc e t o  their  auto no m y.37 This ishowHeidegger  is tr a ditiona l ly inte rprete d b y a lmos t  a ll  ph il o sop h er s e x clu ding Har ma n.  CHIA SMA# 4 ‡  201 7 2 6 Th e spe cific sense i n w hich I a pplyatomi sm t ospecu lative  real is m, while also b road ly applic abl etoan ti-re l ationa lit y,is espe ciallyr ele va n t fo r Harman's content io n th at the " watchw o rd "f or OOO i sthe  "au t o nomy"  ofo bj ects (wh ich de r iv es  from t he ir inf in ite  "w ithdr a wal"  fromall cont act w i th otherness). Interestingly ,  F o u ca u lt a nal yzes neolib eral i sm a s an i ma ted by an  atom is t  l o gic, which he finds  m ost pa radig matically inHume's con c e p tion ofsubj e ct h ood. Specifica lly f or Hume, t h e subjec t isnot defi ned by as o ul in ne edofsal vat i o nor by natural r ight sin need  of  justic e.The  su bje ct  is simpl y the ir re du ci bl e,non-t r ansferra bl e p os ses sor o f  an in teres t. S oth e  au tonomyo fs e lf-i nt er est,  wh ic h fal ls u n der  econom ic purvie w,h as a  m or e funda mental logicth at will al wa ystrumpj u ridicallogic. As Foucault puts it, thi s i s wha t en ables hom o e conomi cus ,  as di stinct  from  h omo j uridi c u s,  to  s ay to thes o ver eign:  " Youmust no t. You must not be c aus e you cannot.  Yo u ca n n ot  be c au s e y ou don o t know, and you  do not kn ow be cause youc ann ot  know." 38 Simi larly ,  on Har man's acc ount, muc hlike h omo  economicu s, objec ts in the i r inv i ol ableaut onomyal l w ithdr aw fro m  an y gaz e that  w ould a ttemp tto subor dinate them to belongin g in a  larg ergestalt,fie l d o r network . It  is precis ely  th is lo gic – one  tha t  i s a n titel eolo g ical, ant i -c oll e c ti ve, and ant i - r ela tiona l t h at isshar ed by atomism and the return toobje c t s p osi t ed b yspeculative re ali sm . 3 9 It isin teresting t o note t ha t  such  a con ceptio n of ex i s te n ce als o an ima tes the f oun da t ional n eo li b eral c riti qu e of K eynesi a n so c i alism. Any attem pt to s ituat e  th e ind iv idual's inne r experien ce within a  large r so cialcontext  t hat me dia te s it risks sliding i nto s ocialis m;  asVon  Mises  wri t e s: "O nlyth e i ndividual t hi n ks .O nly  the  indi vi dual  reasons. Only the  in d ividual  a cts 
 or_background they_are related to –_prefigured by_Kant_and Hegel,_but_carried through most_forcefully by the_phenomenology of Heidegger and_Merleau-Ponty.37 36 Harman's_dualism_argues that there are two levels of objects: the sensual and the real. Real_objects_withdraw from_both_humans_and from other objects and_never actually interact with anything_else. Any_talk of "relationality" between objects does violence to_their_autonomy. 37 This_is how Heidegger is traditionally interpreted by almost all_philosophers excluding Harman. CHIASMA #4 ‡_2017 26 The_specific_sense_in which I apply_atomism to speculative realism, while also_broadly applicable to anti-relationality, is especially_relevant for Harman's contention that the "watchword"_for OOO is the "autonomy" of_objects (which derives from their_infinite "withdrawal"_from all contact with otherness)._Interestingly, Foucault analyzes_neoliberalism as_animated by an_atomist logic, which he finds most_paradigmatically in Hume's_conception of subjecthood. Specifically for Hume,_the_subject is not_defined_by_a soul_in need of_salvation_or by_natural_rights in need of justice. The_subject_is simply the irreducible, non-transferrable possessor of_an interest. So the_autonomy_of self-interest, which falls_under economic purview, has a_more fundamental logic that will always_trump juridical_logic. As_Foucault puts it, this is what enables homo economicus, as distinct_from homo juridicus, to say to_the sovereign: "You must_not. You_must_not because you_cannot._You cannot_because you do not know, and you_do not_know because you cannot know."38 Similarly,_on Harman's account, much_like_homo economicus, objects in their inviolable_autonomy all withdraw from any gaze_that would attempt to subordinate_them_to_belonging in a larger gestalt,_field or network. It is precisely_this logic –_one that is antiteleological, anti-collective, and anti-relational_that_is shared by atomism and the_return_to objects posited by speculative realism.39_It_is_interesting to note that such_a conception of existence also animates_the foundational neoliberal critique of Keynesian socialism. Any attempt_to situate the_individual's inner experience within a_larger_social_context that mediates it risks sliding into socialism; as Von_Mises writes:_"Only the individual_thinks. Only the individual reasons. Only the individual acts