I disagree. From reading the article, neither the author nor Bennett is arguing that these objects are actually the mechanism or cause to which these events oc

I disagree. From reading the article, neither the author nor Bennett is arguing that these objects are actually the mechanism or cause to which these events occur. To rephrase their underlying worldview, Bennett seems to find intellectual and epistemic merit - or at least interest - in exploring the notion that some objects have properties which make them more or less likely to initiate or augment human, natural or other actions, on or around those objects. From my reading of the article, this isn't someone trying to explain causal relationships but rather someone highlighting the benefits of different modalities of thought, as they relate to the intellectual and cognitive experience of the reader.