This commentary is a response to James Ash’s ‘Flat Ontology and Geography’, one of the first serious efforts to make use of the philosophy of Tristan Garcia for social science purposes. After reviewing some key distinctions between different kinds of flat ontology, I suggest that both Ash and Garcia make a step forward while failing to strike the desired balance between interconnected networks and autonomous units.
HarmanG (2013b) Undermining, overmining, and duomining: a critique. In: SutelaJ (ed.) ADD Metaphysics, Aalto: Aalto University Design Research Laboratory, pp. 40–51.
12.
HeideggerM (1998) What is metaphysics? In: McNeillW (ed.) Pathamrks. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 82–96.
13.
LatourB (1999) Pandora’s Hope: Essays on the Reality of Science Studies. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
14.
MüllerMSchurrC (2016) Assemblage thinking and actor-network theory: conjunctions, disjunctions, Cross-Fertilisations. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers41: 217–229.
