[...]e --> focus on values and morality
•debate frame --> balance-as-bias: dedicating half of the frame to counter-evidence of climate change --> fundamental paradox of collective action @Chloe2 --> tragedy of the commons @Nicolas
•risk framing --> forgrounding the endemic nature of the problem --> a logic of translatability : ‘risk خطر ==> commensurability توافق’
•war frame (turf wars of positions) --> a problem framing that rhetorically amplifies climate change --> logic of outsideness : ‘climate change = an enemy that is fought against’, (drawing from) emergency logic ==urge==> single-shot unified geotechnical solutions
•crisis frame --> emotional framing --leverage--> temporal logic : a climax point (peak oil, peak carbon, etc.) points to the narrowing window of opportunity to act -->
•catastrophic framing --> (using emotional language) locates the frame in the aftermath of a climate changed [<-- a popular public framing of the problem]
•super wicked problem --> temporal logic of time running out --pointing-->
◦irrational future disounting
◦lack of a central organizing authority
◦
•anthropocene --> temporal logic + pervasive spatiality ==> situating the category in deep time + planetary scale [<-- a frame used by organizations]


[*]problem: analytical techniques that lend themselves to core framing tasks of “what, who, why, when, where” of a particular issue (<-- ‘research problem’ is a foundation of this technique)

define boundaries of climate change --to-->
•focus on who is responsible
•ask why is it happening
•identify when is it happening
•locate where

(Campbell's) meta-observation ==> more each field discovers about climate change ==> category expansion (the more it seems to grow in scale)

*what Campbell finds in the discursive evolution of climate change*: a manifestation of (what the philosophical movement known as speculative realism criticizes as) [*]correlationism: we only ever have access to the correlation between thinking & being, a means to temper the real, to constrain it such that is becomes thinkable to human categories (yoke thinking & being together : we cannot think the unthought without relating it to existing correlates) }--Meillassoux--> never able to get out of the relation being thought and being to distinguish between an object & properties belonging to the subjective access to the object --> bad idea of epistemology ==> recuperates climate change within categories that make it seam manageable =/= (Campbell claiming) *climage change : ontological world* ==> it is everywhere and nowhere, present at all levels and yet absent as a distinct “thing” we can point to


Meillassoux --> how difficult it is to think anything without in some way introducing a qualification that one cannot know it without rendering it “for-us” though our framing = *it cannot be known absolutely*

(problem of access:) anti-realism within continental tradition of philosophy ==> the idea that reality is inaccessible in-itself =/= Meillassoux's attempt to ***fuse reality with speculation in a logical manner***

to deploy speculative leap to defuse the problem of access --> *weird realism* to avoid the paths of analytic thought, positivism, scientism (~?!=> religion, faith, conspiracy theory, paranoia, ,,)

correlationism ==> despite repeatedly showing that it creates massive sudden fluctuating geologic singularities, climate change is still folded back into known organizational coordinates
}--> *interactional openness* (+ temporal boundedness) (@apass) ==> negotiation complexity, high technical policy instrument, multiplication of actors,  multiplication of negotiation tracks
}==> *solutions shift from a field-endogenous catalyst of institutional change --to--> a mechanism of field maintenance*
}--Campbell--> framing of climate change ==dictate==> the organizational structure to address it ==> misrecognize what it is
=/= ***a world [=/= a problem] ==generates==> problems (that no current organizational form can address)***


correlationism (--> prevailing belief that human reason cannot attain certainty in metaphysical, religious, moral matters) ==Meillassoux==> fear of dogma/absolute (deep-seated desire to be non-dogmatic) ==> *knowledge becomes a matter of belief* ==>{ reason undergoes a process of religionizing : ‘reason = a means to buttress claims based on faith’ =/= aiming to capture absolute knowledge itself, condemning irrational claims upon it }==> ***discourage hierarchies of reason (always to slightly disblieve waht we believe) [<-- happens in apass!]


speculative realism ==>
1. *organizational research* (@Chloe2) in the future must be deidicated to finding the right categories to account for a new worl (and not for a superwicked problem)
2. enables us to approach climate change from the *widest rational angle*
3. (‘climate change = world’ ==>) we can begin to theorize the escalation and absolutization of ethics that is necessary to authentically occupy it --Campbell--> bleak optimism: acceptance of ecological collapse + begin the necessary work to organize within the new world of climate change (@Inga)


dialectical process of critique and reassessment <-- absorbed by organizations
•strategic agenda
•framed as an opportunity
•how climate change is always conceived as something “outside” that needs to be internalized by the organization


(Campbell thinking with Meillassoux) laws of nature changing (~ *forms of emergence without precedent* [three cases/advents --> *radical discontinuities rupture the fabric of what has come before*]):
**world of material =/= world of life =/= world of thought**
1. matter: reducible to what can be theorized in physico-mathematical terms
2. life: (understood more specifically as a set of terms:) affections, sensations, qualitative perceptions, etc. (--> cannot be reduced to material processes)
3. thought: understood as a capacity to arrive at the ‘intelligible content’ bearers of eternity (--> cannot be reduced to life processes)
}--> ****n the transition from non-life to life : the laws of biological life were not contained in the pre-life world --> they emerged ex nihilo (they were not immanent in [nor emerged from] the previous laws)****
--> (Meillassoux:) reality can generate advents on its own =/= the idea of vitalism: the idea that reality contains a hidden organization guided by transcendent intervention


to think of an ontological core for climate change where it is regarded as a world (in the Meillassouxian sense) --> situate climate change as a discontinuity --> *new world will create novelty in organization that exceeds thinkability today*

(from the position of speculative realism) what is important is (the “=/=” of) ‘holocene =/= anthropocene’ (and not the anthropocene)
•what did the world look like at the beginning of holocene?
holocene ==created==> epistemological categories that lasted thousands of years and became the most fundamental modes through which we understand & organize:
◦birth of language
◦birth of religion
◦concept of resources
◦concept of exchange
◦concept of exchange
◦invention of all known technology
◦development of agriculture
◦domestication
◦urbanization
==(by this metric)==> ‘climate change = world’ marks the end of organization as we can think it 😱


(let's widen rationality rather than abandoning it)

speculative realism --Campbell--> (a strategy for thinking at the) widest rational angle

example of speculative realism --> Meillassoux's spectral dilemma: [theist] resurrection of the dead (to provide justice for unjust deaths) + [atheist] inexistence of God (to absolve God of past injustices ~ meaningless deaths) ==> it is possible that God might emerge in the future --> complete justice has an ontological & real basis }-->
•the possibility of living according to *absolutizating thoughts* (one of Meillassoux's main tactics is to raise the stakes extremely high to show that *ethical commitments are either absolute or not* [--Campbell--> to speak in absolutizating ways about climate change]) (=/= focus on rthical dilemmas as epistemological conundrums and escalation of ethics to the status of a universal absence of justice ==> despondency + cynicism)

(the problem of) critical philosophy wants to avoid dogmatism, but it also incubates dogmatism because in abandoning any ratinoal access to the absolute (the[...]