iiinova — where your digital self keeps evolving

Jonathan Basile @jonothingeb.bsky.social · 23/09/2026

Quite honored to be part of such a line-up!

Reposted by Jonathan Basile

Jean-Thomas Tremblay @jttremblay.bsky.social · 10/09/2026

My new essay—on prosopopoeia, late liberalism, nuclear colonialism and imperialism, and sexual difference—is out in the Sept. issue of @differences.bsky.social. With readings of Albert Serra's Pacifiction, Anohni's Hopelessness, and an ecodrama by Ontroerend Goed. A taste of the big-book-to-come.

read.dukeupress.edu

Calamity as Defacement

Abstract. Prosopopoeia defines legal and discursive efforts to cognize, and to exempt ourselves from, extinction. The figure of the Anthropocene, for instance, fits a human mask onto the modulation of...

02412

Jonathan Basile @jonothingeb.bsky.social · 23/09/2026

Folks in Toronto - I'll be talking about my new book with Denis Walsh and Jean-Thomas Tremblay Oct. 7th, 4-6 PM. I'd love to see you there! (full details below)

NATURAL LECTION
Cultures of Evolution
JONATHAN BASILE
Book Launch Event and Discussion
Author Jonathan Basile (UofT)
Speakers Denis Walsh (UotT) and
Jean-Thomas Tremblay (York University)
October 7th, 4-6 PM
University of Toronto, Northrop Frye Building,
Room 009

063

Jonathan Basile @jonothingeb.bsky.social · 16/09/2026

I examine how materialist claims undermine themselves in readings of Margulis and Sagan’, Myra Hird, Elizabeth Grosz, and Deboleena Roy, and return to Peggy Kamuf and Judith Butler on deconstruction and gender studies, to show the pertinence of biodeconstruction for feminist theory

020

Jonathan Basile @jonothingeb.bsky.social · 16/09/2026

These interpretations are not gleaned from the things themselves or their empirical study, as Margulis and her new materialist acolytes claim. Nor do they work toward a single, coherent political goal; thus, a deconstructive reading is necessary.

110

Jonathan Basile @jonothingeb.bsky.social · 16/09/2026

I argue this undecidability of traditional/conservative and liberatory/progressive notions is unavoidable — it is the reason materialist theories and all theory is inadequate to grapple with these scenes of sexuality (or anything else).

120

Jonathan Basile @jonothingeb.bsky.social · 16/09/2026

Numerous feminist theorists have argued that these bacterial sex changes can expand our conceptions of sex and gender. Nonetheless, this depends on the imposition of a markedly conservative definition: male as active and female as passive in a sex act.

110

Jonathan Basile @jonothingeb.bsky.social · 16/09/2026

Bacteria trade genes in a process sometimes referred to as sex, where the cell giving genes is described as male and the recipient as female. The genes that make a cell a donor are also exchanged, so “female” bacteria can become “male” (doi.org/10.1215/1040...; I'm happy to share a PDF!)

doi.org

New Material for the Old Ceremony: Lynn Margulis and Dorion Sagan's Sexual Science

Abstract. This essay reconstructs and reconsiders a lineage of work in feminist sts and new materialism that inherits from Lynn Margulis and Dorion Sagan's writings on microbial sexuality. Several fem...

110

Jonathan Basile @jonothingeb.bsky.social · 16/09/2026

I have an new essay in differences - my first in a journal of gender studies! “New Material for the Old Ceremony” is a deconstruction of Lynn Margulis’s Origins of Sex, her downright weird writings on politics, and new materialists who see liberatory potential in microbiology

Abstract

This essay reconstructs and reconsiders a lineage of work in feminist sts and new materialism that inherits from Lynn Margulis and Dorion Sagan's writings on microbial sexuality. Several feminist and queer theorists have argued that our conceptions of sex and gender could be expanded or liberated by learning new sexual possibilities from bacteria. These projects surreptitiously impose traditional sexual categories in order to claim that bacteria escape them; they show the oppressive and liberatory positions to be nonoppositional. This article turns to deconstruction to think through the consequences of this nonoppositionality. A deconstruction of life science and sexual difference challenges the pretense of “new materialist” research to receive from nature, matter, or life what depends on the active intervention of a reading. Nonetheless, this deconstructive practice of reading also destabilizes the foundations of “poststructuralist” accounts of sex and gender, such as Judith Butler's, which argues that culture “produces” nature.

160

Jonathan Basile @jonothingeb.bsky.social · 15/09/2026

Bruce Clarke reviews Cary Wolfe's Jagged Ontologies - a brilliant overview of his use of systems theory and deconstruction. I particularly appreciate Clarke's nuancing of Wolfe's critique of sympoiesis (drawing on Scott Gilbert's eco-evo-devo) olrsupplement.com/2026/09/15/c...

olrsupplement.com

Cary Wolfe's Reality Principle - The OLR Supplement

Bruce Clarke situates Cary Wolfe's new book in the context of his and others' work on systems theory and deconstruction, while using Margulis to nuance Wolfe's view of sympoiesis

030

Jonathan Basile @jonothingeb.bsky.social · 12/09/2026

I got to speak with Cary Wolfe, Giuseppe Longo, and Adam Nocek about our new books - very excited to share this with you all!

030

Jonathan Basile @jonothingeb.bsky.social · 03/09/2026

I responded to Mike Fortun's essay about my review of Harden's book. I did not feel that Fortun had responded to any of my substantive criticisms of her work, nor did he evince a careful reading of Harden's book or research.

062

Jonathan Basile @jonothingeb.bsky.social · 03/09/2026

So excited to share it with you, Dez!

000

Reposted by Jonathan Basile

Dez Miller @dezmiller.bsky.social · 03/09/2026

Got this in the mail today. Excited to read it @jonothingeb.bsky.social!!

131

Jonathan Basile @jonothingeb.bsky.social · 25/08/2026

This is the closest thing I've found (still very interested in any suggestions others might have): www.dianebpaul.com/uploads/2/3/...

dianebpaul.com

000

Jonathan Basile @jonothingeb.bsky.social · 25/08/2026

Can anyone think of a short-ish (twenty or so) pages text that could introduce students to the history of debates/controversies that have followed from the work of Darwin? A broad overview of things like the Modern Synthesis, eugenics, the Scopes Trial, sociobiology...

112

Jonathan Basile @jonothingeb.bsky.social · 04/08/2026

We'd love it if you wanted to submit an abstract for the ACLA seminar we're proposing on Science and Ideology! Come think about Marxism, the sciences, and french theory with us: www.acla.org/seminar/bdff...

The prospect of a critique of scientific ideology (or a critique of ideological science) can seem inherently contradictory according to a doctrinaire interpretation of Marx’s conception of science and ideology. In the words of Canguilhem, “Science authenticates itself, [Marx] argued, by tearing the veil that is ideology’s only substance. Hence scientific ideology is a contradiction in terms.” If ideology, for Marx, was contrasted with true (Marxist) economic science, what could it mean to designate certain sciences as ideological?

How can one take account of the historicity of the sciences and critique their contingent, outmoded, and often indeed deluded and deluding forms while leaving room for that true scientificity that Marxism is meant to represent? Many of Althusser’s writings presented a confrontation with these questions, in part by building upon Bachelard’s concept of “epistemological break,” and his formulation of the science/ideology dichotomy informed the work of Georges Canguilhem, Michel Foucault, Dominique Lecourt, and remains influential in continental science studies, for example on the work of Hans-Jörg Rheinberger. This tradition also informed the work of certain Marxist scientists, such as dialectical biologists Richard Levins and Richard Lewontin. At the same time, Jacques Derrida, in his seminars of the 1970s (two of which have been published since his death), deconstructed this opposition by asking how the entire system oriented by the progress from ideology to science must be changed if models or metaphors cannot ultimately be replaced by true and literal concepts.

We are interested both in papers that interpret and build upon this tradition by making use of its guiding concepts to intervene in present debates in Marxist theory, French theory, and science studies, as well as contributions that would think the limits of this framework and how subsequent developments of science and its economic and political contexts may ask us to reconfigure these concepts and the analyses this tradition put them to. To give just one example, both Althusser and Canguilhem turn to the genetics of their day as the primary representative of a true, nonideological science—a representation of genetics that is increasingly placed in question by biologists today, and which could well be understood as the fetishizing attribution of social and economic relations to things themselves.

What does a Marxist critique of scientific theory and practice look like today? As Marx and Engels often pointed out, the concepts they left us with responded to the conditions in which they wrote, and would need to be renovated with every passing generation. It is in this spirit that we invite contributors to think with and against this tradition, reawakening its spirit of radical critique.

050

Jonathan Basile @jonothingeb.bsky.social · 11/07/2026

Thank you! I'd love to hear your thoughts about it

010

Jonathan Basile @jonothingeb.bsky.social · 25/06/2026

Our roundtable on Geoffrey Bennington's Scatter project continues with Peggy Kamuf's reflection on translating and inheriting from Specters of Marx: olrsupplement.com/2026/06/25/o...

olrsupplement.com

On the Scattered Legacy of Specters of Marx - The OLR Supplement

Peggy Kamuf on the thought of legacy in Derrida's Specters of Marx and Geoffrey Bennington's Scatter project

010

Jonathan Basile @jonothingeb.bsky.social · 23/06/2026

I wrote this essay to correct recent obituaries of Craig Venter, which overstate the significance of his human genome sequencing work, repeating the hype and exaggerated promises of his own self-promotion, which was designed to fuel speculative investment in his biotech companies

0229

Jonathan Basile @jonothingeb.bsky.social · 14/06/2026

Very much so! Sorry I haven't replied to your last messages yet - I'm traveling this weekend. More soon!

110

Jonathan Basile @jonothingeb.bsky.social · 12/06/2026

...he ends up relying on the model or metaphor of a writing system to do so (writing is on the scene already)

110

Jonathan Basile @jonothingeb.bsky.social · 12/06/2026

...consider it to be unmarked, but that doesn't mean it begins as writing-in-the-traditional-sense) -- the example of Freud, in my essay and in Derrida's "Freud and the Scene of Writing" is meant to demonstrate something like this. When Freud tries to picture the internal, spontaneous psyche...

100

Jonathan Basile @jonothingeb.bsky.social · 12/06/2026

Oh, I find Pattee very interesting -- it sounds like there is a lot of agreement between the different ways we are describing this. When you describe intentions beginning outside of us or from who knows where, that's basically what Derrida means by writing, self-exteriority (so he wouldn't...

120

Jonathan Basile @jonothingeb.bsky.social · 12/06/2026

...between language and writing, or language and image for example. That does not mean that they are all the same though. It is a matter of trying to confront the differences among them without relying on these metaphysical oppositions

110

Jonathan Basile @jonothingeb.bsky.social · 12/06/2026

Derrida would say that the differences among these different configurations (of machine, prosthesis, writing, etc.) cannot be rigorously treated in opposition to a spontaneous and purely interiorizing/idealizing psyche, nor can they be distinguished on the basis of a classical distinction...

110

Jonathan Basile @jonothingeb.bsky.social · 12/06/2026

Absolutely - and part of what keeps the system in motion, if I can put it like that, is that we always draw such lines, even if they are inevitably fragile, fabulative, displaceable, and so on

100

Jonathan Basile @jonothingeb.bsky.social · 12/06/2026

...it is part of a process that always includes a relay through heteronomy or externality, and thus is not rigorously distinct from the machine, even though we can draw endless distinctions or differences within and among this or that living or thinking thing and this or that machine

010

Jonathan Basile @jonothingeb.bsky.social · 12/06/2026

The Derridean reading I'm trying to put to work here does not try to do away with intentions (as a strictly structuralist reading would have to) but does try to change our concept of what it is to intend or have an intention...

300

Jonathan Basile @jonothingeb.bsky.social · 12/06/2026

...in the mind prior to its being signified in some way

120

Jonathan Basile @jonothingeb.bsky.social · 12/06/2026

I don't know if my response to your previous question, and specifically the notion of generalized writing, changes your intuitions here at all - not sure what you have in mind by the unwritten? The point of Derrida's intervention is to dislodge the metaphysical notion that a pure idea exists...

120

Jonathan Basile @jonothingeb.bsky.social · 12/06/2026

writing in the Derridean sense is a much broader concept than in the traditional sense - it certainly wouldn't be limited to language (in the traditional sense)

110

Jonathan Basile @jonothingeb.bsky.social · 03/06/2026

I was lucky enough to take a class with her as an undergrad - a transformative experience

010

Jonathan Basile @jonothingeb.bsky.social · 03/06/2026

These are the more practical conclusions: I argue that we arrive at a more robust critique of 'AI', and a more thorough understanding of artistic and linguistic production (from human and machine), when it is not based on intentionalist theories of meaning

The LLM is no more a self-conscious subject than we are, but this removes one commonplace stopgap for critiques of ‘AI’. Its statements can no longer be claimed as meaningless, or its artworks as devoid of aesthetic quality, simply because it lacks the intentions of a subject. Our own language has never depended on our intentions for its meaning (as we can see, machine writing remains legible—so much so that at times it is difficult to distinguish or prove its provenance—even if we may tend to read it differently than human writing, when we know or think we know its origin). A structuralist view might conclude that language, as a system unto itself, not only does not depend on such intentions but is the matrix in which they are generated, that all the effects we attribute to our own subjectivity or initiative are effects of language, misrecognized. Derrida was never satisfied by such notions of the ‘death of the author’:

Rather than oppose citation or iteration to the noniteration of an event, one ought to construct a differential typology of forms of iteration, assuming that such a project is tenable and can result in an exhaustive program, a question I hold in abeyance here. In such a typology, the category of intention will not disappear; it will have its place, but from that place it will no longer be able to govern the entire scene and system of utterance.

In other words, intention does not disappear from the scene once it is deconstructed—it is just that it, like everything else, is written and read. It cannot govern the meaning of a statement (we argue over presumed intentions or can dispute explicit intention-claims, can dissimulate intentions and even be at odds with ourselves over them, and can see further possibilities of interpretation or reading beyond a given intention, etc.). It follows from deconstruction not that intentions and statements of them are meaningless and not that language or writing univocally masters the scene, creating a meaning of and unto itself that forecloses all others, but that intentions are textual. In other words, we know them by that relay described above, understanding our own through language, the world, and the other. They exist for us or an interlocutor or witness only to the extent that they can be inscribed (implicitly or explicitly), which means that they are not the origin of language or action, but rather a participant in the scene of writing.

Then, our own ‘intentions’ can be transformed by inserting a novel writing machine into our circuits, and that machine may produce intention-effects just as we do, by displacing those relays, by taking part in the self-exteriority of textuality. That certainly does not mean that we ought to treat the writing of LLMs just as we do writing from other sources (except in the sense that both must be read, one way or another), it only means that the linkage we try to form between text and context is insecure in both cases.

Nor do we need to seek out our inner light to dismiss the artistic productions of ‘AI’. While it is often said that some form of genius, sympathy, or suffering sets apart human artistry, we should recognize that whatever self-relation we accomplish through art-making (a) necessarily subjects itself to established and iterable art-forms, genres, etc., even or especially when it attempts to exceed their limits, and (b) first comes to itself in a relay with such formulaic art (life imitates art, etc.). Again, it is what we have in common with writing machines that allows us to read them otherwise. Context plays a nonprogrammable role in how we read anything, including an artwork. The stories we can tell about a work and its author, the history and tradition within which we contextualize it, and the environing scene in which we situate it all play some role in how we interpret and relate to the work. This context does not determine or constitute reading any more than intention does (nor is it a simple given what counts as context); context participates in the scene. So, anyone is free to imagine that the products of ‘AI’ emerge from a thinking and feeling computer consciousness that they then relate to in an identificatory fashion (as they would any other artist—but perhaps not exactly so), or to see such works as the lazy detritus of a human machine-user or prompt writer, worthy of no more of the reader’s effort than was put into their creation.

even if we share a disdain for the type of poetic or artistic work thus far created with ‘AI’, we should not try to theorize its deficiency by claiming that all automated or programmatic processes are inimical to creativity. As Derrida often wrote, it is necessary to think ‘the event with the machine’. Invention or the unanticipatable is not only possible as a repetition that changes contexts, but every invention takes place this way. Long before LLMs, we had poets and artists making use of much simpler algorithms, and even before the computer, combinatoric processes were used to bypass the censors of consciousness; moreover, processes of recontextualization (such as found art or poetry) demonstrate the interrelation of invention and iterability. Even if such artistic practices remain matters of taste, I would argue against dismissing them on the grounds that art ought to emanate from the mystical font of pure creativity; if ‘AI’ art disgusts us today, if there is a truly visceral reaction against it, that is perhaps not because of its reliance on machine or iterability (always already the case), nor because of its uniquely bad aesthetic quality (the average and majority of human composition has been similarly slop-like, but may evoke a different reaction); rather, the context and story surrounding this technology is part of our aesthetic experience. That it is dismantling the economic possibilities for human artists and many others, forced upon us by a capitalist system fundamentally hostile to life and nature, serving as the fun-and-innocent front of an ideological campaign building infrastructure and ideological support for ever more totalitarian forms of surveillance, warfare, and governance, all for the benefit of eminently mediocre man-children (too lacking in taste to even appreciate what they are destroying, except for perhaps a barely conscious resentment), this shapes aesthetic experience in a manner that a theory of intentionalism can only obscure.

3157

Reposted by Jonathan Basile

Felicity Callard @felicitycallard.bsky.social · 03/06/2026

Really looking forward to reading this

031

Jonathan Basile @jonothingeb.bsky.social · 02/06/2026

Is Firefox suddenly acting really buggy for anyone else? Anyone found a way to fix this?

100

Jonathan Basile @jonothingeb.bsky.social · 02/06/2026

Sounds fascinating! Absolutely - we'd have a lot to discuss

010

Reposted by Jonathan Basile

University of Minnesota Press @uminnpress.bsky.social · 02/06/2026

Two new books out in the world! #PubDay The Home of the Drowned, a novel by int'l prize-winner Elin Anna Labba, translated by Elizabeth Clark Wessel. Natural Lection: Cultures of Evolution by @jonothingeb.bsky.social opens a novel terrain of scientific and political possibility.

Book cover for The Home of the Drowned: A Novel by Elin Anna Labba, translated by Elizabeth Clark Wessel. An illustration of a blue lake surrounded by mountains under a red sky and yellow sun. A white hare jumps in the foreground. Text in black and gold.

Book cover for Natural Lection: Cultures of Evolution by Jonathan Basile. White background with a drawing of a macaque reading a book in its hands while sitting on top of the large black title letters.

011

Reposted by Jonathan Basile

Will Beaman @greenbackbetter.bsky.social · 02/06/2026

Finally something smart written about AI from a humanistic perspective that isn’t just a diatribe about plagiarism and five million other things condensed into one master sign. Highly recommend these excellent reflections!!

181

Jonathan Basile @jonothingeb.bsky.social · 02/06/2026

I'm very excited to share my book, Natural Lection, with you all! A deconstruction of "cultural evolution" and notions of nature/culture that circulate in the sciences and the humanities:

0194

Jonathan Basile @jonothingeb.bsky.social · 02/06/2026

The link preview didn't work, this is the book I'm responding to:

040

Jonathan Basile @jonothingeb.bsky.social · 01/06/2026

I wrote an essay exploring how structuralism and deconstruction have informed recent theory around 'AI' and 'LLMs' including @leifw.bsky.social's Language Machines: olrsupplement.com/2026/06/01/w...

olrsupplement.com

1348

Jonathan Basile @jonothingeb.bsky.social · 26/05/2026

Simon Glendinning considers the role of moralism in academic political theory and politics more broadly, in dialogue with Geoffrey Bennington's Scatter project: olrsupplement.com/2026/05/26/o...

olrsupplement.com

On the Genealogy of Moralism - The OLR Supplement

Simon Glendinning reads with and against Geoffrey Bennington's Scatter project, reflecting on political theory and contemporary politics

040

Jonathan Basile @jonothingeb.bsky.social · 20/05/2026

I'm thrilled to be co-editing this collection, Dialectical Biology Today: Legacies of Richard Levins and Richard Lewontin, an outgrowth of the conference we did last year, bringing historians and philosophers of biology and evolutionary biologists to reflect on these influences in their own work

0211