Moir, Catherine. (2013). The education of hope: On the dialectical potential of speculative materialism. in Peter Thompson and Slavoj Žižek (eds.) The privatization of hope: Ernst Bloch and the future of utopia. Durham: Duke University Press, 121-143.
Moir develops Bloch’s speculative materialism within contemporary philosophical contexts, exploring its relationships and departures from other material thought.
Keywords: materiality, new materialisms, philosophy, speculative materialism, theory,
“Bloch’s speculative materialism is dialectical and, as such, approaches the thought-being question in dialectical materialist terms, where being determines thought” (p. 122).
“We can therefore say that speculative philosophy responds to an injunction to think being in a non-correlative, non-identical way, without denying any relation between thought and being” (p. 126).
“[W]e might say that Bloch’s materialism can be called immanently speculative in that it locates the condition for the possibility of speculation in the material itself” (p. 131).
“The absolute is, therefore, what Bloch calls not-yet. Absolution is materially possible, but not certain. The injunction of speculative materialism to know the absolute thus consists not only in thinking what is whether we are or not, but also what is possible now that we are” (p. 137).
Thompson, Peter. (2013). Religion, utopia, and the metaphysics of contingency. in Peter Thompson and Slavoj Žižek (eds.) The privatization of hope: Ernst Bloch and the future of utopia. Durham: Duke University Press, 82-105.
Thompson articulates Bloch’s philosophy, particularly around Bloch’s principle of hope’s connections to materiality, with its relationship to process and becoming, the contingency of existence.
Keywords: materiality, philosophy, speculative materialism, utopia
“Bloch was engaging in a form of speculative or transcendental materialism that attempted to create a materialist understanding of an as yet nonexistent future, an ‘ontology of the not yet,’ which could be used as a means of understanding and decoding the opaque nature of human existence and the way to move toward a self-created utopia” (p. 83).
“Thus what sets Bloch apart from Lacan and Žižek, but brings him closer to Badiou, is the sense that in the process of implementing utopia we will not simply find our way toward something but will actually construct that something in the process of attaining it” (p. 89).
“Bloch’s solution to this problem is, with Aristotle and Hegel of course, werden—process, becoming—in which the tendency and latency within matter changes matter itself and with it the contingency of existence. The event in Bloch then is merely a contingent stage in a process which cannot be appreciated at the moment of its eventuation, in the ‘darkness of the lived moment'” (p. 89).
Thompson, Peter. (2013). Introduction: The privatization of hope and the crisis of negation. in Peter Thompson and Slavoj Žižek (eds.) The privatization of hope: Ernst Bloch and the future of utopia. Durham: Duke University Press, 1-20.
Thompson defines the exigency for this book as recovering Bloch from anonymity, defining his principle of hope and spirit of utopia within the context of contemporary events.
Keywords: materiality, philosophy, speculative materiality, theory, utopianism
“Hope, for Bloch, was they way in which our desire to fill in the gaps and to find something that is missing took shape” (p. 3).
“The process that would take us from a static concept of being to one of becoming and of coming to possess ourselves was at base a material one, but it was also one in which our desires, ideas, hopes, and dreams fulfilled a fundamentally important material function in overcoming the ‘ontology of the not yet'” (p. 4).
“Hope therefore learns, but it also teaches as well as constitutes its own conditions” (p. 7).
“The vast majority of utopian thinking could be said to rest in abstract utopias, in abstractions from the process in which the utopia becomes something really existing, whereas the concrete utopia is one which exists and does not exist at the same time because it is in the process of its own creation” (p. 13).