Object
An animus, an energy cluster held together by a dominant will, perceived as individuated.
Expanded explanation
An object in this framework is the same kind of thing as a person, which is what the definition accomplishes by identifying it with an animus. An energy cluster held together by a dominant will describes a rock, a person and a nation equally, and the last clause, perceived as individuated, marks the separateness as a perception rather than a fact about the cluster. A will has to be exerted to bind a macroscopic object together, and that will need not be under conscious or emotional control, which is how a rock can be. What this rules out is the subject and object relation as a description of reality. Subjects and objects are a very particular feature of endoreality, and in an exosocial world an interaction with a thing is a two-way euphoric interaction rather than a subject regarding an object, which is why a home can fill someone with euphoria and why an instrument that belonged to a loved person is interacted with rather than used. Marsh reads Hegel's account as a description of the endosocial case, since the endo-ideal became a subject through reflection by another while the reflectors and negative image became objects. Objects also carry anima, so a euphoric object may produce euphoria in those linked to it, apathy in those with no connection and terror in enemies. The endoself relation to objects is the failure case. An endoself cannot enjoy an object they do not possess, and may covet a neighbour's couch and hate it until they own it.
In Heather Marsh’s words
Marsh identifies objects with animus, which puts a rock and a person in the same category and makes separateness a perception.
“Subjects and objects are a very unique part of endoreality”
The Creation of Me, Them and Us
Examples
- A rock has a will
- Binding a macroscopic object together requires will, though not conscious or emotional will, which is what puts objects in the same category as selves.
- The same object, three responses
- A euphoric object produces euphoria in those connected, apathy in the unconnected and terror in enemies.
- Coveting and hating
- An endoself cannot enjoy what they do not possess, which turns the unowned object into an object of hatred.
How others use it
Object-oriented ontology, particularly Graham Harman's, holds that objects exist independently of human perception and are not exhausted by their relations, and actor-network theory grants agency to non-human actants. Both refuse the subject and object hierarchy Marsh refuses. Buber's I-Thou against I-It makes the same distinction phenomenologically. Physics has its own long argument about whether macroscopic objects are fundamental or emergent. Marsh's version is unusual in supplying a criterion that unifies persons and things, since an animus held together by a dominant will covers both without analogy, and in making individuation something perceived rather than something the cluster possesses.
Sources
Defined in the Binding Chaos series glossary, with the subject and object material set out in The Creation of Me, Them and Us.
Recommended reading path
Then read in full: Abstracting Divinity; The Creation of Me, Them and Us.
A suggested order for exploring this corner of the theory.