Repository | Journal | Volume | Articles

My remarks in this brief commentary focus on Chris Calvert-Minor’s (2014) article on Karen Barad’s philosophical writings, and are only indirectly relevant to an assessment of Barad’s work. I have limited acquaintance with Barad’s writings, and even less with Nils Bohr’s. Barad explicitly borrows from Bohr’s theoretical writings when developing her version of feminist epistemology. Barad’s recruitment of Bohr to support her philosophy creates a dilemma for me and other readers who are not conversant with Bohr’s physics/philosophy. To my understanding, the general lessons that Barad draws from Bohr about physical phenomena seem roughly in line with Husserl’s conception of phenomena or Merleau-Ponty’s account of “the intertwining,”1but it seems clear that neither Bohr nor Barad explicitly draws from transcendental or existential phenomenology. Barad also has developed her own vocabulary (as expressed with key terms such as “agential realism” and “intra-action”), and she provides a...

DOI: 10.1007/s10746-013-9297-6

Full citation: