For those interested in infusing posthumanist theories in qualitative research, the use of the term “phenomena” within the long-standing tradition of phenomenology and Barad’s agential realism creates a tricky linguistic tangle. Barad is adamant that any association with phenomenology is unwanted, yet the particulars of how agential realist phenomena and phenomenological phenomena are different can be difficult to parse. In this piece, we seek to offer some clarity by interrogating how Barad and phenomenologists inspired by Husserl’s body of work engage with the concepts of phenomena, (non)mediation, intentionality, and experience. Through following these concepts around in primary and secondary texts, we begin to envision what a posthumanist phenomenology might entail.
AhmedS. (2006). Queer phenomenology: Orientations, objects, others. Duke University Press.
2.
BaradK. (2007). Meeting the universe halfway: Quantum physics and the entanglement of matter and meaning. Duke University Press.
3.
BaradK. (2012). On touching—The inhuman that therefore I am. differences, 23(3), 206–223.
4.
BennettJ. (2010). Vibrant matter: A political ecology of things. Duke University Press.
5.
BraidottiR. (2013). The posthuman. Polity Press.
6.
ButlerJ. (1990). Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity. Routledge.
7.
ButlerJ. (1993). Bodies that matter: On the discursive limits of sex. Routledge.
8.
DahlbergH.DahlbergK. (2020). Phenomenology of science and the art of radical questioning. Qualitative Inquiry, 26(7), 889–896.
9.
DahlbergK.DahlbergH.NyströmM. (2008). Reflective lifeworld research (2nd ed.). Studentlitteratur.
10.
FoucaultM. (2012). Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison. Vintage.
11.
FreemanM. (2021). Five threats to phenomenology’s distinctiveness. Qualitative Inquiry, 27(2), 276–282.
12.
GuentherL. (2020). Critical phenomenology. In WeissG.MurphyA. V.SalamonG. (Eds.), 50 concepts for a critical phenomenology (pp. 11–16). Northwestern University Press.
13.
HarawayD. J. (2016). Staying with the trouble: Making kin in the Chthulucene. Duke University Press.
14.
IhdeD. (1990). Technology and the lifeworld: From garden to earth. Indiana University Press.
15.
IhdeD. (1995). Postphenomenology: Essays in the postmodern context. Northwestern University Press.
16.
IhdeD. (2003). Postphenomenology-again?Centre for STS-Studier.
17.
JuelskjærM.PlauborgH.AdrianS. W. (2020). Dialogues on agential realism: Engaging in worldings through research practice. Routledge.
18.
LauerQ. (1958). Phenomenology: Its genesis and prospect. Harper & Row.
19.
Lenz TaguchiH. L. (2012). A diffractive and Deleuzian approach to analysing interview data. Feminist Theory, 13(3), 265–281.
20.
LuftS.OvergaardS. (2014). Introduction. In LuftS.OvergaardS. (Eds.), The Routledge companion to phenomenology (pp. 1–14). Routledge.
21.
McGregorK. (2020). Toward a phenomenology of the material. Qualitative Inquiry, 26(5), 507–513.
22.
McGregorK. (2021). Necessary spaces: Thinking school bathrooms with a phenomenology of the material. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global.
23.
Merleau-PontyM. (2012). Phenomenology of perception. Taylor & Francis Group.
24.
MoranD. (2000). Introduction to phenomenology. Routledge.
25.
ØsternT. P.JusslinS.Nødtvedt KnudsenK.MaapaloP.BjørkøyI. (2023). A performative paradigm for post-qualitative inquiry. Qualitative Research, 23(2), 272–289.
26.
PerneckyT. (2016). Epistemology and metaphysics for qualitative research. Sage.
27.
SokolowskiR. (2000). Introduction to phenomenology. Cambridge University Press.
28.
VagleM. D. (2010). Re-framing Schön’s call for a phenomenology of practice: A post-intentional approach. Reflective Practice, 11(3), 393–407.
29.
VagleM. D. (2018). Crafting phenomenological research (2nd ed.). Routledge.
30.
VagleM. D.HofsessB. A. (2016). Entangling a post-reflexivity through post-intentional phenomenology. Qualitative Inquiry, 22(5), 334–344.
31.
Van ManenM. (2014). Phenomenology of practice: Meaning-giving methods in phenomenological research and writing. Routledge.
32.
ZeilerK. (2020). Why feminist technoscience and feminist phenomenology should engage with each other: On subjectification/subjectivity. Feminist Theory, 21(3), 367–390.
