Karen Barad’s Ontology and the New Grounding of the (Post)Humanities

The philosophical reinterpretation of the ontological and epistemological foundations by Karen Barad has been analyzed through the integration of the principles of quantum physics developed by Niels Bohr, particularly the phenomenon of diffraction. It is shown that, according to Barad’s approach, matter and meaning constitute an inseparable unity, while phenomena emerge through intra-actions—interactions that do not presuppose independently existing objects and observers but rather constitute them. The study consistently examines such aspects as the critique of the classical subject–object division, the assertion of the interconnection between ethics, ontology, and epistemology, and the shift from anthropocentrism to posthumanist approaches, in which knowledge is understood as material participation in the configuration of the world. It is argued that the philosophical significance of Barad’s conceptual framework lies in the synthesis of three key aspects of her ontology. First, the ontological dimension involves a transition from static matter to dynamic intra-actions, where phenomena emerge through relations rather than existing a priori. Second, the epistemological dimension redefines knowledge as active participation in the material configuration of the world rather than passive reflection of reality. Third, the ethical dimension affirms the responsibility of the researcher, rejecting the myth of the neutral observer in favor of an understanding of scientific practice as inherently entangled with processes of world-making. Barad’s philosophy is thus presented as one of the possible trajectories within (post)humanities, opening new perspectives for interdisciplinary research in the context of technoscientific transformations of the twenty-first century.

EDN IIABRB

References
[1] Barad K. Meeting the Universe Halfway: Quantum Physics and the Entanglement of Matter and Meaning. Durham, London, Duke University Press, 2007, 525 p.
[2] Pavlova D.A. Antichnost i sovremennost v filosofii Khanny Arendt [Antiquity and modernity in the philosophy of Hannah Arendt]. Vestnik razvitiya nauki i obrazovaniya, 2019, no. 2, pp. 175–181.
[3] Paramonov A.A. Agentnyy realizm Karen Barad i kontseptualizm Nilsa Bora [Agential realism of Karen Barad and Niels Bohr’s conceptualism]. Filosofskiy zhurnal — Philosophy Journal, 2022, no. 3, pp. 100–112.
[4] Walther M. Heraclitus’s onto-stories: Impossible appointments and the importance of the encounter. In: Diffractive Reading: New Materialism, Theory, Critique. Lanham, Rowman & Littlefield, 2021, pp. 51–70.
[5] Barad K. Agentnyy realizm. Kak materialno-diskursivnye praktiki obretayut znachimost [Agential realism. How material-discursive practices come to matter]. In: Opyty nechelovecheskogo gostepriimstva: Antologiya [Experiments of inhuman hospitality: Anthology]. Moscow, V-A-C Press, 2018, pp. 42–121.
[6] Foucault M. Surveiller et punir: Naissance de la prison. Gallimard, 1975 [In Russ.: Fuko M. Nadzirat i nakazyvat: Rozhdenie tyurmy. Moscow, Ad Marginem Press, 2018, 416 p.].
[7] Butler J. Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. New York, Routledge, 1990 [In Russ.: Batler Dzh. Gendernoe bespokoystvo: Feminizm i podryv identichnosti. Moscow, V-A-C Press, 2022, 272 p.].
[8] Barad K. Posthumanist performativity: Toward an understanding of how matter comes to matter. Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 2003, vol. 28, pp. 801–831.
[9] Moran S. Decoherent reading: On the constitutive exclusions of diffractive reading. In: Diffractive Reading: New Materialism, Theory, Critique. Lanham, Rowman & Littlefield, 2021, pp. 71–92.
[10] Thiele K. Ethos of diffraction: New paradigms for a (post)humanist ethics. In: Diffracted Worlds — Diffractive Readings: Onto-Epistemologies and Critical Humanities. London, New York, Routledge, 2018, pp. 38–52.
[11] Barad K. Diffracting diffraction: Cutting together-apart. In: Diffracted Worlds — Diffractive Readings: Onto-Epistemologies and Critical Humanities. London, New York, Routledge, 2018, pp. 4–23.
[12] DeLanda M., Harman G. The Rise of Realism. Cambridge, Polity Press, 2017, 240 p.
[13] Sosna N.N. Isklyuchennaya «agentnost». O (ne)perenosimosti nekotorykh estestvennonauchnykh modeley na materiyu sotsial’nykh nauk [Excluded “agency”. On the (non)transferability of some natural science models to the matter of social sciences]. Mezhdunarodnyy zhurnal issledovaniy kultury — International Journal of Cultural Research, 2021, no. 3, pp. 77–90.
[14] Geerts E., Carstens D. Ethico-onto-epistemology. Philosophy Today, 2019, vol. 63, no. 4, pp. 915–925.
[15] Hegel G.W.F. Phänomenologie des Geistes. Hamburg, Meiner, 1807 [In Russ.: Gegel G.V.F. Fenomenologiya dukha. Moscow, Nauka Publ., 2000, 495 p.].
[16] Braidotti R. Kriticheskaya postgumanitaristika, ili Otnosyatsya li media-prirody k prirodo-kul’turam tak zhe, kak zoe — k bios? [Critical posthumanities, or do media-natures relate to nature-cultures in the same way as zoe relates to bios?]. In: Opyty nechelovecheskogo gostepriimstva: Antologiya [Experiments of inhuman hospitality: Anthology]. Moscow, V-A-C Press, 2018, pp. 24–41.