top of page
  • Writer's pictureBjørn Ekeberg

Turbulent Thoughts of a Peaceful Mind

Updated: Jun 3, 2019

- in memory of Michel Serres (1930-2019)

"Who am I? A vortex. A dispersal that comes undone."

Michel Serres, The Birth of Physics

An extraordinary philosopher of science has passed away.

Michel Serres was an Henri Bergson for the fractal age. He combined a precise grasp of the sciences with a philosophical appreciation of its lacking understanding of time and history.

His philosophy may have seemed 'incomprehensibly French' to an Anglo-analytic eye but Michel Serres was a true polymath in a classical vein that has gone extinct in a world of institutional specialization.

He was a philosopher of science who eschewed the dominant languages of both philosophy and science, and for this reason he was more incisive and relevant than most.

"When philosophy is trapped and enclosed in academia, it doesn't move much. What continues perenially is the institution whose function remains the reproduction of obedient young people. One could say it imposes a method."

In Conversations, with Bruno Latour

Deeply erudite in mathematics, physics, history, philosophy, and literature, Serres witnessed two scientific revolutions first hand that transformed his thinking. In mathematics, the invention of topology, in physics, quantum mechanics and later cybernetic systems.

At the turn of the 1900s, Henri Bergson tried to speak across an emerging divide between philosophy and science, but half a century later Serres realized the widening gulf had make such a task impossible. Philosophy was fundamentally unable to account for the new directions of science and science no longer had any use for philosophy (unless it served a legitimatory function). He had to blaze his own trail.

One of Serres' key insights was that both philosophy and science were stuck in a framework of thinking in terms of subject and object relations: representation vs reality, theory vs experiment or observation, scientist vs nature, etc.

He tried to show a 'third', usually invisible element at work any such relation, a mediator, or an excluded middle. Serres proposed philosophy in terms of prepositions rather than subjects or objects, theorizing relations between beings rather than beings themselves.

From this arose influential concepts like quasi-objects - exemplified by a football in a game, which is neither subject nor object but rather confers subjectivity on the player who has it. A quasi-object is a relation that structures the game. Serres' ingenuity of thinking inspired, among many things, the development of actor-network theory in science and technology studies.

In The Parasite, he weaves together fable, history and science to describe a logic not definable as subject or object, or within a certain space, but in terms of a host-guest relation. As a hidden 'third' actor, the parasite works as an operator of change, "a thermal exciter," on all scales, including humanity itself and its relation to the environment.

"History hides the fact that man is the universal parasite, that everything and everyone around him is a hospitable space. Plants and animals are always his hosts; man is always necessarily their guest. Always taking, never giving."

The parasite is intrinstic to the system as an operator of change, a disruptive tendency, a chaotic variable introduced to a smooth flow. In The Birth of Physics, Serres shows how the same logic is found at the heart of an ancient idea of Lucretius and Archimedes.

"There is only a laminar flux. The world is a multiplicity of flows, each inclined in relation to the others. And every stream runs its slope. The ensemble of fluencies forms a cycle, by a generalized inclination to the global state of the materials of nature. These circulations are not circles, precisely on account of inclination. A circumference plus an angle, however small it may be, produces a spiral. ...Neither circle nor line, everything is stable and unstable at the same time."

In the vortex, Serres finds a leitmotif of nature and thought itself.

What is readily apparent in rivers and clouds is also present in all dynamic behavior, from the double helix of DNA via parasitical disruptions, to cosmic scales. For what are spiral galaxies if not vortices of force?

As I show in my own work, inspired by Serres, the metaphysics of the vortex resurfaces constantly in the history of science, as an early cosmology (Descartes), as atomic ether theory (Thomson), as implosive dynamics (Schauberger) and in other forms.

But this qualitative understanding of the relation between energy and matter is always eclipsed by a framework of quantification, mechanistic or probabilistic, that tries to purge the chaotic element from the system. Despite its explanatory simplicity, the vortex remains 'but a metaphor' to the physicist, who has inherited a certain language of science introduced in the era between Archimedes and contemporary chaos theory.

Serres' abandonment of the traditional languages of both philosophy and science came at the price of not always being understood. His distinctive style resisted academic jargon and used ordinary language (playing with the French in the way Heidegger played with the German, often making him eminently untranslatable into English). He combined a poetic sensibility with the logical precision but erratic (and sometimes frustrating) swiftness of a brilliant mathematician.

If he does not leave behind a school of thought, his legacy is consonant with his style of philosophy: inspiring unorthodox thinkers and opening new pathways across divides.

"I can do nothing about the vortex that brought my birth, and whose unfolding will bring my death. The science of time, that of things and of the world, teaches me that existence is disorder and disordered destruction. Through it, my time escapes me and death is near."

But inspiration still flows, and the vortex keeps spinning.

Rest in peace, Michel Serres.

409 views1 comment

Recent Posts

See All

1 Comment

Aug 13, 2021

Let me start with this idea, "Serres proposed philosophy in terms of prepositions rather than subjects or objects, theorizing relations between beings rather than beings themselves."

Paraphrasing, in a certain sense quantum mechanics is a science of "relations between objects rather than objects themselves". Yes, we have a standard model of elementary particles; but even the key object quanta of mass, charge, spin, and particle vs antiparticle are not certain. We do not know what intrinsic spin is; and have measured it directly for only a few of the elementary particles. For the rest, the spin values in the standard charts of elementary particles are theoretical. Yet it is a useful framework.

The problem is that we pretend that each…

bottom of page