거대한 분절인가, 거대한 연결인가? ― 신유물론의 정치적 존재론

One of the most important topics in the humanities in recent years is a new ideological current called “New Materialism.” This school of thought, which advocates new concepts and positions on matter outside of Modern Materialism, is presenting a new paradigm not only in philosophy, but also in politics and sociology, art and science. Harman, one of the most prominent representatives of New Materialism, defines matter as an object that cannot be grasped and argues that it is a “Being” that cannot be understood by human perception. According to him, the entire universe is made up of random substances that cannot be synthesized into a whole. In contrast, there are attempts to view matter in terms of “Becoming.” Bennett and Barard recognize the continuity and change of matter through the “Great connection” and define materialism in relation to reality. The two theoretical attitudes of New Materialism have in common the separation of matter from Modern Anthropocentrism and a view of matter’s own existential qualities. However, they disagree over how matter relates to reality in the here and now, and what the meaning of events is. This debate over “how does matter work?” strongly suggests that the ontology of New Materialism is ultimately tied to its political interpretation. The purpose of this article is to examine the main paradigms of New Materialism from two directions: Fragmentation and Connection, in an attempt to reveal the political dimension of New Materialist ontology.