Monthly Archives: March 2012

Along with the annihilation of regional ontologies, the homogenising of multiplicities, and the placing of inventive procedures under the commensurating hegemony of truth,  Badiou’s thesis on Being, which seems to engage him in dialogue with the philosophical tradition, amounts to … Continue reading →

Badiou postulates, as usual he has no real argument, four “truth procedures” that provide the conditions for any philosophy worthy of the name. Once again his intellectual practice goes against the stated aim of elaborating a pluralism capable of illuminating … Continue reading →

We have seen that in the name of the multiple Badiou elides the pluralism of regional ontologies and proposes his absolute thesis “mathematics is ontology”. Being just is multiples of multiples, all the way down. He presents this as the … Continue reading →

“You must not let yourself be intimidated” (Laruelle on Badiou) In a very interesting exchange between Badiou and Lyotard, published in May 1989, Badiou accuses Lyotard of not being faithful to what has become “a sort of axiom of contemporary … Continue reading →

In a series of leading questions addressed to Lyotard that turn around the notion of pluralism Badiou declares: “The only ontology faithful to the Multiple is the mathematics of the pure Multiple” (Badiou, Témoigner du différend, p113). Badiou’s dogmatic monist … Continue reading →

Feyerabend has often been seen as a purely negative thinker and his self-designations as “anarchist”, “Dadaist” and “relativist” have seemed to confirm this impression definitively. However, for those who actually read Feyerabend’s works a quite different image prevails – his … Continue reading →

Meaning is an ambiguous concept, and part of Zizek’s problem with Deleuze lies in the Slovenian philosopher’s desire to confine meaning in Deleuze to a manageable domain. The complexity of the opposition and interplay between meaning and causality leads Zizek … Continue reading →

“How far away is the “other”? If we can no longer be sure that we remember who we are, where do we make the cut between “me” and “not-me”?” (James Hillman, A Psyche the Size of the Earth) I have … Continue reading →