[PT 13.

2 (2012) 156-166]
doi:10.1558/poth.vl3i2.156

Political Theology (print) ISSN 1462-317X

Political Theology (online) ISSN 1473-1719

S p e c u la tiv e R e a lism a n d P u b lic T h e o lo g y : E x p lo r a t io n s

John Reader1
Department of Theology and Religious Studies
University o f Chester, Parkgate Road
Chester C H I 4BJ, UK
drjohnreader@hotmail.co.uk

A bstra ct

The paper argues that ideas emanating from the speculative realists can
inform a new approach to public theology, one that is broadly consistent
with Christian realism and opposed to that of radical orthodoxy. Linking the
two disciplines through an exploration of the ethical consequences of speculative realism, it takes in particular the work of Latour, his concept o f the
gathering, his distinction between matters of fact and matters of concern,
and his questioning of the fact-value distinction, and through a lived exampie shows how the language of human and non-human offers a critique of
reductionist approaches to the political.
Keywords: Christian realism; Latour; public theology; radical orthodoxy;
speculative realism.
Things have to be gathered again (Latour)

Introduction
Can the world exist without us (or without our knowledge o f it)? Can we
exist without the world? Two brutal questions, the answers to which will
shape our understanding o f the relatedness or gatheringof hum an and
non-hum an life and indeed our ethical (and religious) responses to the
practical issues that we face. For instance, when notions such as the efficient markets hypothesis and homo economicus as a rational utility maximizing individual, shape economic and political responses to the global
1. John Reader is Rector o f the Ironstone benefice in the Diocese of Oxford; Honorary Senior Research Fellow with the William Temple Foundation, University o f Chester ;
and Visiting Scholar of the Oxford Centre for Ecclesiology and Practical Theology, Ripon
College, Cuddesdon, Oxford.
Equinox Publishing Ltd 2012, Unit S3, Kelham House, 3 Lancaster Street, Sheffield, S3 8AF.

Reader Speculative Realism and Public Theology

157

financial crisis, some o f us would want to argue that these are inadequate
and reductionist interpretations o f the gatherings o f human and nonhuman and that what is needed is a new language to better describe the
way things are. My instinct is that some o f the new language flowing
from the work o f speculative realists and their allies might just provide a
more adequate gathering o f those things.
So where does public theology currently stand in this debate?
O ne could argue that U K public theology has followed five main
routes over the last 25 years: that influenced by liberation theology until
it fell out o f fashion; the Roman Catholic natural law and common good
tradition; Christian realism as represented by the Manchester tradition o f
Ronald Preston, John Atherton, and recently Chris Baker, Elaine Graham
and John Reader; the radical orthodoxy o f John Milbank, Graham Ward
and other offshoots, sometimes related to the Christian communitarianism o f Stanley Hauerwas, Luke Bretherton and Sam Wells; a more consistent postmodern approach taking on board the linguistic turn drawing on
philosophers such as Richard Rorty.
Is there now though the possibility o f a further approach building upon
the writings o f speculative realism, identified with the works of Q uentin Meillasoux, Ray Brassier, Iain Ham ilton-Grant and Graham Harman,
each in their different ways rejecting the correlationism between the
human and non-hum an which has dominated Continental philosophy
and which has lent itself to theological appropriations (see Bryant, Srnicek
and Harman 2011, downloadable as an open access text, notably chapter 1
which introduces the development and key ideas).
Possible areas to be explored are:
W hether a realist philosophy coheres w ith the realism o f public theol8y-

H ow a greater respect for the autonomy o f non-theological disciplines

contributes to a more effective public engagement with political and economic issues.
W hether the thinkers now emerging, such as M anuel DeLanda and
Bruno Latour, provide helpful tools for social analysis.
What can be learnt from speculative realism and its engagement with
philosophy o f religion about the nature o f the postsecular.

Ethical Implications o f Speculative Realism

M y suggestion is that trying to work out the ethical implications o f speculative realism may provide a bridge or connection to public theology. Having already outlined some o f these in the introductory paper I will now
concentrate on the work o f Harman as it leads into a discussion o f Latour.

Equinox Publishing Ltd 2012.

158

Political Theology

D raw ing then on H arm ans w ork on an object-oriented philosophy in Towards Speculative Realism (2010), one can further establish the
argument for an independent external reality unrelated in any intrinsic way to hum an consciousness and take the position that there is no
relationship and no encounter between hum ans or between hum ans
and the non-hum an. Hence the independent reality o f both objects,
other hum ans, and indeed other (non-theological) disciplines has to
be respected. This would be in opposition to the arguments o f radical
orthodoxy which insists on subsuming everything under a theological
banner.
Taking this further and using Harm ans work on Latour which argues
that Latour is one o f the most important realists, one can develop this
argument for the autonomy o f the non-hum an and for other disciplines
and examine Harmans own categorization o f different philosophies as
either radical, conservative or in polarity, the latter being his version o f speculative realism, in which absolute gaps/dualities are respected
but also described according to hum an relationshipsanother type o f
blurred encounter or gathering.
Hence what is required is an ethics based on realism rather than nonrealism in its various forms and that eschews the forms o f communitarianism (Christian and otherwise) that posit a final purpose or grand
narrative o f hum an community or development characteristic o f radical
orthodoxy. Public theology, basing itself upon such an ethical approach,
m ust be o f the realist variety, respect the autonomy o f other groups and
disciplines while drawing upon them when appropriate, avoid setting up
arbitrary vision and goals, and acknowledge its limitations using reason in
the deployment o f what is best from its own traditions.

Some Gatherings Suggested by Bruno Latour

According to speculative realist philosopher Graham Harm an (Prince of
Networks: Latour and Metaphysics, 2009), Latour is the closest figure to what
he calls an object-oriented hero (2009: 156). By this he means that
Latour is a believer in the reality and the independent existence o f the plurality of concrete objects. Given that the central problem of metaphysics
(according to Harman) is the interplay of objects and relations (p. 159),
then Latour sheds more light on both o f these than any other contemporary thinker. This, in itself, is justification for taking Latours work as a
prime example o f a new form o f realist philosophy, and one which raises
important questions for the related concerns o f ethics and the critique o f
current practices in other disciplines.

Equinox Publishing Ltd 2012.

Reader Speculative Realism and Public Theology

159

Latour on Matters o f Fact and Matters o f Concern

In a paper published at the end o f 2004, Latour sets out his own particular understanding of critical inquiry. His basic argument is that the nature
o f critique itself has become divorced from its original path and intention
and that we are now being encouraged to fight the wrong enemies. The
problem is that we try to get away from facts whereas the real aim should
be to get closer to them.
What I am going to argue is that the critical mind, if it is to renew itself
and be relevant again, is to be found in the cultivation o f a stubbornly realist attitudeto speak like William Jamesbut a realism dealing with what
I will call matters o f concern, not matters o f fact (Latour 2004a: 231).
What critique has been doing is to move away from matters o f fact in
order to identify the conditions that made them possible, and the best way
to correct this is to focus instead on matters o f concern. Matters o f fact
are only partial and often very political renderings o f matters o f concern,
and only a subset o f what Latour terms states o f affairs. This requires,
amongst other things, a change in terminology. Rather than talking about
facts, Latour suggests that we adopt the word T H IN G , in the sense o f a
thing being a gathering, and thus able to represent more fully the complex
matters o f concern that should now demand our attention. This builds
upon but also extends the usage o f this term by Heidegger who talked
about it as the fourfold (Heidegger 1971:173); however Latour will not
limit the meaning in this mathematical way, but wants to use it to refer to
all the various factors and components that go to construct any particular
state o f affairs. Thus, for instance, the discussions surrounding the decision to go to war against Iraq in 2003was this gathering a tribunal, a
parliament, a command-and-control war room, a rich mans club, a scientific congress or a TV stage? At times it felt as though all o f these played
a part in that decision. And that is the way it so often is an investigation
that tried to coalesce, in one unifying, unanimous, solid, mastered object,
masses o f people, opinions and might (Latour 2004a: 235). There are
invariably multiple components in any such situation and it is a challenge
to identify them all let alone know how they fit together.
Using the examples o f both the Second G ulf War and indeed 9/11,
Latour shows how current approaches to critique descend into views that
these events did not really happen but were ju st staged for the TV, or perhaps that they were part o f some conspiracy perpetrated by the CIA and
the US government. We are now trained to be so suspicious o f every event
and the motives behind it that we lose sight o f the complex and contingent nature o f hum an and non-hum an activity. Nothing is what it seems,
so the idea that we can access a trustworthy reality has disappeared. Latour
argues that, instead o f this, things have to be gathered again, and that
Equinox Publishing Ltd 2012.

160

Political Theology

we have to be aware o f this before we can begin to set facts apart and start
to analyse. So critique has to involve construction before one can think
about deconstruction.
O ne o f the difficulties we all face in this, though, is our own lack o f
consistency when it comes to interpreting different aspects o f our lives. As
Latour says: we explain the objects we dont approve o f by treating them
as fetishes; we account for behaviours we dont like by disciplines whose
make-up we dont examine; and we concentrate our passionate interest on
only those things that are for us worthwhile matters o f concern (2004a:
241). So we are realists when it suits us and non-realists when it doesnt
suit. I think this is a major problem for any form o f critical inquiry.
In order to counter this, Latour proposes that we revive a realist approach, somewhat along the lines ofW hitehead (a link to process thought
and process theology therefore), who argued that we need to get closer
to facts and treat them with a respectful realist attitude. We tend to reduce
facts to what is immediately given in experience whereas what we should
do is to realize that matters o f fact are totally implausible, unrealistic, unjustified definitions o f what it is to deal with things (2004a: 244).
Latour also introduces into the discussion two further terms: association by which he means all the objects o f science and technology, and
Pickerings mangle o f practice, both o f which point towards the required
multi-disciplinary inquiries that are required to detect how many participants are gathered in a thing to make it exist and to maintain its existence.
So objects are simply a gathering that has faileda fact that has not been
assembled according to due process.
Once again, Latour makes it clear that the critic is not one who debunks, but one who assembles. All participants, all voices both hum an
and non-human, m ust be taken into account when considering matters o f
concern. It seems to me that this is not simply an empirical requirement
but also a moral one, and could be linked to the ethical approach o f someone like Habermas and his notion o f discourse ethics, which requires that
all those affected by a particular issue should have the chance to participate
in the ensuing debate and decision. Latour does refer to Habermas in this
context (Latour 2004b: 171).
The final implication o f this that needs to be noted is that we will always
be dealing with more rather than less. Instead o f reducing facts, subtracting from them in order to simplify and analyse, we are more likely to be
adding to them , acknowledging that it is very difficult to know where to
stop and draw the line when it comes to encountering matters o f concern.
Latour quotes Turing, responsible for the early computers, and suggesting that we are in for many surprises and unexpected consequences over
which we have a limited control and mastery. We will get more out o f this
Equinox Publishing Ltd 2012.

Reader Speculative Realism and Public Theology

161

process o f creation and technical innovation than we, as humans, have put
in. Once again, one might argue, this is a very realistic statement, and
one with moral implications. In order to cope with this multiplication o f
possibilities, Latour argues that what is needed is an experimental metaphysics, one that continues to allow for the unforeseen, unexpected, and
which goes beyond what we think we know and understand.

Latour on the Fact-Value Distinction

O ne o f the major divisions o f labour that dominates the relationship between ethical and practical concerns is that between fact and value.
Part o f Latours attempt to critique existing practice and to show that
other possibilities need to be taken into account is his questioning and
reconfiguring o f this relationship. As is consistent with the rest o f his
work, Latour is attempting to show that the reality o f dealing with matters o f concern is that separating out apparently different concerns and
approaches to them is artificial and misleading: they are all part and
parcel o f the human and non-hum an enterprise o f working out how to
respond to circumstances and to move matters forward.
The tidy way in which we have become accustomed to doing this is by
drawing a firm distinction between matters o f fact and matters o f value.
We have already seen that Latour recommends abandoning the notion of
matters o f fact and replacing them with matters o f concern, so it is to be
expected that this will have implications for the old notion that facts are
the realm o f scientists or researchers, and that values are to be left to the
politicians or moralists. Latour argues that establishing the facts o f a case
is only the final stage in a long process o f argument, research and discovery, and that many different people and indeed things are involved in the
earlier stages.
Apart from the recognized matters o f fact, we now know how to identify a whole gamut o f stages where facts are uncertain, warm, cold, heavy,
light, hard, supple; matters o f concern that are defined precisely because
they do not conceal the researchers who are in the process o f fabricating
them, the laboratories necessary for their production, the instruments that
ensure their validation, the sometime heated polemics to which they give
risein short, everything that makes it possible to articulate propositions
(2004b: 96).
As a result o f this, to use the word fact without making it clear exactly
where the boundaries between fact and value might be in a particular stage
o f the process is to freeze this dynamic activity and to ignore all the complex stages that are involved. It also has the effect of blurring the boundary between facts, theories and data, but that is an additional complication
that is o f less interest in this case.
Equinox Publishing Ltd 2012.

162

Political Theology

Parallel difficulties arise in the way that we normally refer to values in

this equation. Values always come too late into the process. If, in order to
bring about what ought to be, values require rejecting what is, the retort
will be that the stubbornness o f the established matters o f fact no longer
allows anything to be modified (2004b: 97). How familiar and how frustrating is that to those o f us who do wish to question and challenge and
indeed to suggest that there are real alternatives? In the wake o f the global
financial crisis, for instance, how often is genuine debate quashed by the
response that we have no choice but to make cuts and thus this is taken
as the accepted presupposition o f all subsequent action? Latour is surely
correct that, once the facts o f the case are supposedly established, then
proposed values can only intervene in a very limited and predetermined
direction. If it is the case that the harsh reality o f market forces is set
in stone before one even begins, then no values are likely to have m uch
impact upon the decisions to be made!

Latours N ew Models o f Change and Action

Instead o f making a distinction between subjects and objects, Latour says
that we should speak o f associations between humans and non-humans.
This term would then cover both the old natural sciences and the old
social sciences. Embedded in this are a num ber o f redefinitions central to
Latours argument, most notably the replacement o f subject and object
by human and non-human. The realist position, as it has normally been
presented, is based on the distinction between human beings (as subjects)
and everything else (as objects). The one thing that the speculative realists have in common is that they object to what they call post-Kantian
philosophy in its various forms, that assumes any external reality can only
be mediated through some version o f hum an consciousness. Thus if the
idea o f a world-in-itself, o f a realm o f phenomena subsisting independently o f our relation to it, is intelligible at all, it can only be intelligible as
something in-itself or independent for-us (Brassier 2007: 50).
W hat Latour attempts to do, by changing the language o f subject
object to hum an-non-hum an, is to get beyond this particular distinction
which has hampered philosophical progress for too long, and enable us
to talk about different forms o f relatedness. This discussion takes us deep
into the realms o f metaphysics and the newly emerging speculative realism. Religious beliefs and practice can then be acknowledged as a part o f
this gathering, not though in the imperialistic mode o f radical orthodoxy,
but with humility and integrity, as we struggle with others to respond to
the matters o f concern that we currently face. Speculative realism makes
it clear that the gathering is a permanent and unending task.

Equinox Publishing Ltd 2012.

Reader Speculative Realism and Public Theology

163

A Lived Example o f Latours Gatherings

Three days after I delivered this paper at the Chester conference I found
myself in the neo-natal department o f a major hospital in the N orth West,
nursing our younger sons 24-hour-old daughter. The baby was only five
pounds in weight and was diagnosed with a serious genetic disorder which
meant that she had a series o f serious physical conditions which made her
survival unlikely. She lived for a week. I was aware, through and beyond
our shared grief as a family, that this was a gathering o f a whole range o f
different components, both hum an and non-human.
We were surrounded by the most complex and sophisticated technical
equipm ent, tubes, computers and m onitors which constantly recorded
her every response, all in a sanitized environm ent to protect the babies
in the unit against infection. This felt like an amazing trium ph o f hum an
ingenuity through machines which would enable some o f these vulnerable hum an beings to survive. I have no idea o f the financial value o f
all this, but it has to be significant. At the same time, ju st as important,
were the staff on duty and their care for and sensitivity towards the parents present and their families. Just to be in that one nursery on the unit
was to be part o f a gathering o f humans and non-hum ans (in this case
the machines) in a remarkable combination. (The unit has subsequently
featured in a TV documentary, adding another layer o f gathering I
suggest.)
I am also aware now that I used new technologies in a very particular
way. To keep people informed o f what was happening I sent email messages to both friends, work colleagues and parishioners. I also used text in
some cases. But this was also a means o f keeping them all at arms length as
it meant I could avoid direct contact. By doing this one could both mobilize support and solidarity but also delay the painful process o f having to
explain to people what was happening and its immediate consequences.
Once again, the technology now available had changed the way in which
the situation was dealt with.
Then there are the background issues o f welfare resources and how
these are allocated. Clearly, the major hospital with state-of-the-art dedicated equipment and staff contrasted with the local hospital in which the
birth actually took place and which was simply not geared to handling this
sort o f emergency. Although the local hospital had done the right thing in
arranging a transfer to the specialized unit, we did have specific questions
about the standard o f care and treatment the family had received. Notably,
how the scans carried out had failed to identify some o f the very obvious
physical problems o f the baby, and the level o f midwife care which meant
that no one person had taken overall responsibility for the mother during
the pregnancy. It is significant that the couple have been told that, should
Equinox Publishing Ltd 2012.

164

Political Theology

there be future pregnancies, they will receive constant m onitoring and

care from the major hospital.
W ithout going into the specifics o f this it is clear that issues o f how
resources are allocated is central to the standards o f care availablea postcode lottery as it is sometimes described. This is about political and economic decisions made in a particular way and according to specific criteria,
therefore another very different dimension o f the gathering focused on a
51b matter o f concern. With questions now raging about reorganization o f
the N H S it is impossible to ignore the political angle o f what are very personai tragedies.
There was also a very powerful ethical dimension to this situation.
If the symptoms o f the baby had been picked up by the scans and subsequent examinations and a term ination been offered as a result, what
decision would my son and daughter-in-law have taken? As with similar conditions such as D ow ns syndromethis particular one is worse
and less commona termination is sometimes made available. The loss
is probably no less, but at least there is prior warning of a problem and the
possibility o f taking pre-emptive action. Is that what we would all have
wanted rather than the agony o f going through birth, meeting this baby, if
only for a few hours, but at least having encountered her and been able to
acknowledge her as part o f both families? I dont think we have a straightforward answer to this, but it does relate to a whole series o f issues around
the subject o f genetic engineering and, once again, the use o f the technology now available.
The fact remains that we did encounter this fragile life who had done
remarkably well even to be born alive, let alone to survive for seven days.
D uring that time there was opportunity for her parents to bond with her,
to focus their love and attention upon her, and for other family members
to do the same in their own ways. It was also the occasion for a considerable amount o f external support and solidarity, which includes others
sharing very personal stories o f their own grief through similar losses.
As such this has been a very powerful hum an experience which raises
the question o f what is really important in our lives our relatedness and
shared humanity. However painful, it feels as though her determination
to come to be with us has offered us some deep insights into matters we
take for granted. A termination could not have had that impact.
Then the really speculative dimension to this. It has struck me that
those o f us who make it through to existence are a small proportion o f
those who might have been or could besomething here about the difference between the virtual and the real perhaps? Once we exist, we take
it for granted that this is normal and meant to be. Staring down at this vulnerable and hopeless bundle o f humanity, I realized that existence at all
Equinox Publishing Ltd 2012.

Reader Speculative Realism and Public Theology

165

is the most remarkable thinga miracle even. I find this hard to articulate, but when people such as Latour, Harman and others talk about the
weirdness of existence, maybe this is something o f what they are struggling to put into words. W hether it is humans or non-humans, the fact
that we are here is itself the most inexplicable and strange phenomena,
because it could so easily be that none o f us come into existence. If one
could grasp this, then it would be possible to view what is in a very different light. Coming into beingin the case o f humans and other animals
through birthis incredible. That we cease to be, whether it is after 7
days or 70 years, is perhaps less important. Why should our value or significance depend upon how long we happen to exist let alone on what we
happen to achieve (in human or cultural terms) during whatever time
span is available to us? Call this religious, metaphysical or plainly obscure,
this small and limited life has opened a window onto other ways o f thinking about our world and human being within it.
Can that world exist without us or we without it? That anything exists
at all is perhaps the more remarkable thing.

Conclusion
I would argue that the work o f Latour as described above provides strong
evidence to support the view that speculative realism does indeed offer
resources for public theology. It does so by suggesting a new terminology to articulate the relationship between humans and non-humans thus
subverting the unhelpful distinction between subjects and objects, as
well as pointing to matters o f concern as being more appropriate than
matters o f fact when it comes to approaching ethical issues. The values
which form part o f every political, economic and ethical decision are
always already embedded in the discussions in the manner o f the gatherings which Latour describes. So this is a form o f realism which takes
the non-hum an seriously as having an independent but related existence.
This then leads into an understanding which requires that religious views
need to respect the autonomy o f other disciplines rather than subsuming them under an imperialistic theological banner. It also questions any
interpretation o f Christianity as proposing a definitive model o f community which can then be used as a criterion for evaluating other forms o f
life. The weirdness and extraordinary nature o f existence will preclude
any such predetermined outcome o f the human journey. When it comes
to facing the complexity of decisions and understandings o f the situations
as described in the example above, public theology can draw upon the
ideas o f Latour in order to counter the reductionist interpretations prevalent in our political culture and provide a means o f challenging limiting

Equinox Publishing Ltd 2012.

166

Political Theology

views o f what it is to be human and to exist in our gatherings with the

non-human. Coming into being at all is what should be the starting point
for our self-understanding.
B ib l io g r a p h y

Brassier, Ray. Nihil Unbound: Enlightenment and Extinction. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007. http://dx.doi.org/10.1057/9780230590823
Bryant, Levi, Nick Srnicek and Graham Harman, eds. 2011. The Speculative Turn: Continental Material and Realism. Melbourne: re-press, http://re-press.org/books/the-speculativ
e-turn-continental-materialism-and-realism
Harman, Graham. 2009. Prince ofNetworks: Latour and Metaphysics. Melbourne: re-press.
2010. Towards Speculative Realism: Essays and Lectures. Ropley, Hants: Zero Books.
Heidegger, Martin. 1971. Poetry, Language, Thought. New York: Harper & Row.
Latour, Bruno. 2004a. Why Has Critique Run O ut of Steam? From Matters o f Fact to
Matters of Concern. Critical Inquiry 30 (Winter 2004): 225-48. http://dx.d0 i.0rg/l0.10
86/421123
2004b. Politics of Nature: How to Bring the Sciences into Democracy. Cambridge, MA and
London: Harvard University Press.

Equinox Publishing Ltd 2012.

Copyright and Use:

As an ATLAS user, you may print, download, or send articles for individual use
according to fair use as defined by U.S. and international copyright law and as
otherwise authorized under your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement.
No content may be copied or emailed to multiple sites or publicly posted without the
copyright holder(sV express written permission. Any use, decompiling,
reproduction, or distribution of this journal in excess of fair use provisions may be a
violation of copyright law.

This journal is made available to you through the ATLAS collection with permission
from the copyright holder( s). The copyright holder for an entire issue of ajournai
typically is the journal owner, who also may own the copyright in each article. However,
for certain articles, the author of the article may maintain the copyright in the article.
Please contact the copyright holder(s) to request permission to use an article or specific
work for any use not covered by the fair use provisions of the copyright laws or covered
by your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement. For information regarding the
copyright holder(s), please refer to the copyright information in the journal, if available,
or contact ATLA to request contact information for the copyright holder(s).
About ATLAS:
The ATLA Serials (ATLAS) collection contains electronic versions of previously
published religion and theology journals reproduced with permission. The ATLAS
collection is owned and managed by the American Theological Library Association
(ATLA) and received initial funding from Lilly Endowment Inc.
The design and final form of this electronic document is the property of the American
Theological Library Association.