about soil. The social life of soil, a cultured geology of sorts, is at the heart of the debate. I use the term new materialism to convey the growing academic fascination with dirt. My suggestion is that these and other publications signal the rise of
Jaime Moreno Tejada
Posthumanism, Memory, and Exclusion
exemplify the contribution ANT and new materialism can make to the study of collective memory and, thus, the theorization of legal and political exclusion. The Democratization of Collective Memory Studies A dichotomy underpins collective memory studies. It
A Posthumanist Approach to Law?
criticism of approaches that see the beginning of the development of a posthuman law here. We can go further and draw some conclusions for the theoretical approaches of New Materialism and Posthumanism as such: if they do have a legal vanishing point, they
Reanimating the Inanimate in Physics and Science Communication at CERN
Understanding inanimate ‘nature-as-such’ is traditionally considered the object of physics in Europe. The discipline acts as exemplary discursive practice of scientific knowledge production. However, as my ethnographic investigation of doing and communicating high energy physics demonstrates, animist conceptions seep into the ontological understanding of physics’ ‘objects’, resonating with contemporary concepts of new materialism, new animism and feminist science and technology studies, signifying an atmospheric shift in the understanding of ‘nature’. Drawing on my fieldwork at CERN, I argue that scientists take an opportunist stance to animate concepts of ‘nature’, depending on whom they’re talking to. I am showing how the inanimate in physics is reanimated especially in scientific outreach activities and how the universalist scientific cosmology overlaps with indigenous cosmologies, as for example the Lakota ones.
Material things and phenomena have come to vie with belief and thought as worthy subjects of inquiry in the interdisciplinary study of religion. Yet, to the extent that we are justified in speaking of a “material turn”, no consensus has arisen about what materiality is or does. This article offers a preliminary sketch of the diverse terrain of material religion studies, delineating three dominant approaches to religious materiality as well as an emerging alternative. It argues that the dominant approaches—respectively characterized by an emphasis on symbolism, material disciplines, and phenomenological experience—continue to privilege the human subject while material things themselves struggle to come into sharp focus. That is, they remain anthropocentric and beholden to the biases against materiality deeply entrenched in the study of religion. Such biases may be negotiated more successfully via the emerging alternative “new materialism”.
The Birth of “Bycatch”
and categorical structure. This article contributes to the discussion on bycatch by bringing to bear insights and methods from new materialism to examine the ontological politics of bycatch. It argues that to understand bycatch and the ways in which it
Stefan Böschen, Jochen Gläser, Martin Meister, and Cornelius Schubert
Recent years have seen an increasing interest in materiality in social research. Some might say that materiality is now back on the agenda of social research. The challenges of bringing materiality back have spurred lively debates about material agency, most of which, however, are leveled at the largely dematerialized theories of the social in the social sciences, for example, in material culture studies (Appadurai 1986; Miller 1998) as well as science and technology studies (Latour 1988; Law/Mol 1995). Since the turn of the century, a marked shift towards the material has emerged (cf. Hicks 2010), ranging from questions concerning nature (Grundmann/Stehr 2000) and everyday objects (Molotch 2003; Costall/Dreier 2006; Miller 2010) to issues of cultural theory (Reckwitz 2002), post-phenomenology (Verbeek 2005), ethnography (Henare et al. 2007), distributed cognition (Hutchins 1995), and materiality in general (Dant 2005; Miller 2005; Knappett/Malafouris 2008). A perspective on materiality is now being developed in diverse fields such as archaeology (Meskell 2005), economic sociology (Pinch/Swedberg 2008), political science (Bennett 2010; Coole/Frost 2010), and organization studies (Carlile et al. 2013). Yet the status of the material remains debated in the evolving fields of various “new” materialisms (cf. Lemke 2015).
Edited by Maryon McDonald
confronted here with some deleterious manifestations of post-Enlightenment modernity, but through elements of post-humanism and new materialisms, in a powerful language that takes us on a tour of various ‘machines of replication’ and a patchy Anthropocene
Intimations of a New Materialism
productive convergence between Connell's body-reflexive practices and new materialisms. Convergences At several points in The Men and the Boys , Connell makes claims of the type cited above in the epigraph, and which address the ways that bodies are
(De)materializing Kinship—Holding Together Mutuality and Difference
Kathryn E. Goldfarb and Caroline E. Schuster
historically and culturally specific meaning-making projects. We expand a conversation already well under way in feminist and queer theories and in social studies of science, which has been aptly described as the ‘new materialisms’ ( Alaimo and Hekman 2008a