While the recent proliferation of sociological engagements with postcolonial thought is important and welcome, central to most critiques of Eurocentrism is a concern with the realm of epistemology, with how sociology comes to know its objects of study. Such a concern, however, risks perpetuating another form of Eurocentrism, one that is responsible for instituting the very distinction between epistemology and ontology, knowledge and reality. By developing a sustained engagement with Boaventura de Sousa Santos's work, as well as establishing possible connections with what has been termed the 'turn to ontology' in anthropology, in this paper I argue that in order for sociology to become exposed to the deeply transformative potential of nonEurocentric thinking, it needs to cultivate a decolonial imagination in order to move beyond epistemology, and to recognise that there is no social and cognitive justice without existential justice, no politics of knowledge without a politics of reality.

Abstract. A theorem of Godefroy and Shapiro states that non-trivial convolution operators on the space of entire functions on C n are hypercyclic. Moreover, it was shown by Bonilla and Grosse-Erdmann that they have frequently hypercyclic functions of exponential growth. On the other hand, in the infinite dimensional setting, the Godefroy-Shapiro theorem has been extended to several spaces of entire functions defined on Banach spaces. We prove that on all these spaces, non-trivial convolution operators are strongly mixing with respect to a gaussian probability measure of full support. For the proof we combine the results previously mentioned and we use techniques recently developed by Bayart and Matheron. We also obtain the existence of frequently hypercyclic entire functions of exponential growth.

Expanding on the recent call for a 'critical medical humanities' to intervene in questions of the ontology of health, this article develops a what we call a 'speculative' orientation to such interventions in relation to some of the ontological commitments on which contemporary biomedical cultures rest. We argue that crucial to this task is an approach to ontology that treats it not as a question of first principles, but as a matter of the consequences of the images of nature that contemporary biomedical research practices espouse when they make claims to evidence, as well as the possible consequences of imagining different worlds in which health and disease processes partake. By attending to the implicit ontological assumptions involved in the method par excellence of biomedical research, namely the randomised controlled trial (RCT), we argue that the mechanistic ontology that tacitly informs evidence-based biomedical research simultaneously authorises a series of problematic consequences for understanding and intervening practically in the concrete realities of health. As a response, we develop an alternative ontological proposition that regards processes of health and disease as always situated achievements. We show that, without disqualifying RCT-based evidence, such a situated ontology enables one to resist the reduction of the realities of health and disease to biomedicine's current forms of explanation. In so doing, we call for medical humanities scholars to actively engage in the speculative question of what nature may be capable of.