Study Architecture 
ProPEL 
Author(s): Samuel Bernier-Lavigne
Since the materialist interpretation of Gilles Deleuze’s work by Manuel DeLanda, the philosopherand author of Intensive Science and Virtual Philosophy, we saw raise the idea of a flatontology, where all objects obtain an equal ontological status.1 Suddenly, the hierarchicalclassification collapses in favour of an equality of “ontological dignity to each individuatedthing”, as explained by Tristan Garcia.2 Thus, “a cutting of acacia, a gene, a computergeneratedimage, a transplantable hand, a musical sample, a trademarked name, or a sexualservice [are becoming] comparable things.”3 In this context, where the objects are now sideby side, it still seems necessary to specify the terminology in order to develop a coherentdiscourse. First, we acknowledge an initial contrast between the non-material objects andmaterial objects.4 Among the elements of the latter group, we dissociate the natural objects,those generated by growth and evolution, from the artificial objects, created by man. Thispaper will mainly focus on the designed and fabricated objects; so-called material-artificialobjects. The distinction does not presuppose any superiority of inferiority in comparison tonatural objects, or even to non-material objects, but rather serves to distinguish the objectson which the discipline of architecture is based.
Volume Editors
Julie Larsen & Roger Hubeli
