READING LARUELLE’S CHRISTO-FICTION (1): ATHEISTIC “QUANTIC-ORIENTED” NON-THEOLOGY

Desuturing Christ from theology

Our basic equation is: Christ = science of Christ = gnosis, along with its corollary gnosis vs theology or Christology. That Christ is simply the name of the science of Christ, that its other name is gnosis, that “gnostic theology” thus signifies that theology is demoted, without being completely denied, as object of gnosis – nothing in these radical axioms stems from accepted Christianity” (my translation).

Thus begins the first chapter of Laruelle’s new book “CHRISTO-FICTION: Les ruines d’Athènes et de Jérusalem” (Fayard, 2014), preceded by a programmatic preface and a methodological introduction. Highlights:

PREFACE:

“If Christianity is the religion of the exit from religions, Christ is the exit from Christianity itself.”

Laruelle desires to invent the impossible coming of Christ, to “propose a christo-fiction, declared and affirmed as such”, by means of “renewed procedures of a scientific type” combined with “ancient theological models of a philosophical type”.

(Note: in desuturing Christ from theology Laruelle proposes another suture, with science, thus maintaining his habitual scientism).

Laruelle wants to escape belief and its categories, to invent new categories that correspond to a fidelity, and to “craft a fiction capable of supporting this fidelity”. He wants to create a fiction that is also “rigorous”, and that nevertheless “does not reproduce … an already accepted truth”.

According to Laruelle, The Principle of Sufficient Theology cannot think the Christ-in-person of the faithful, as opposed to the Christ of the believers.

(Note: One cannot help being struck by the similarities with another “non-philosopher”, Bruno Latour, who in his book REJOICING seeks to free Christianity from the sufficiency of “Double-Click” literalism, and who argues that religion has nothing to do with belief).

Laruelle wants to promote a fictional Christ that would be more authentic than the legends and the histories, to invent a fictional or fictionalising fidelity, to set out a non-theology that is atheistic and “quantic-oriented”.

(This orientation towards the quantum is no doubt more satisfying intellectually than recent “object-oriented” ontologies, but it continues Laruelle’s vice of scientism).

Christo-fiction as opposed to standard theology is characterised by “the suspension of the belief in its [standard theology’s] religious and theoretical, i.e. philosophical, aspects”.

Opposing the faith of the faithful to the belief of the Christians, Laruelle regards his own Christo-fiction not as a new dogma or thesis, but as a thought-experiment, or better as a “faith-experiment”: “a practice of non-philosophical or non-standard writing which presents and produces its axioms and its rules in the course of their application”.

(This is the case, according to Jean-François Lyotard, for any philosophy worthy of the name. It is not unique to Laruelle).

This fiction is to be distinguished from historical accounts and belief traditions in that it is a “formalisation” based on scientific knowledge. Against unfounded yet sufficient belief, Laruelle defends a “generic and scientifically modelised faith”.

Laruelle invokes a “new kerygma”: “belief is the sufficience of God but faith is the non-sufficience of Christ, and thus of the humans who demote the sufficience of God”.

The preface ends with the contrast between the Principle of Sufficient Theology and Laruelle’s “necessary but non-sufficient faith”.

Comment: the preface is relatively clear and pedagogical, and the overall argument is easy to grasp. De-suturing faith from belief, tradition, history, and theology and ascribing it to another mode of existence is a familiar move, but Laruelle’s way of making this move is quite stimulating.

The major problem lies in his repeated appeals to a scientificity that for the moment, in this preface, is limited to formalisation, an axiomatic approach, and a hinted real and non-metaphorical relation to quantum theory. There is thus an unresolved tension in this text between Laruelle’s appeals to non-standard thinking and writing and a regressively standard scientism.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to READING LARUELLE’S CHRISTO-FICTION (1): ATHEISTIC “QUANTIC-ORIENTED” NON-THEOLOGY

  1. landzek says:

    So did u just translate the preface? Is the book in English yet? Because you may wish to read my essay ‘on the Big Story; an aphilosophical non philosophical philosophical rendition’. It seems, from your essay, that somehow L and I have come accross the same thing; but I don’t presume it can be made into a ‘science’. I think the historical suture cannot be undone in reality; only ironically. The nature of humanity in reality does not change: faith is always the appropriate method for coming upon the world. In this, I think L is a bit ‘conventionally faithful’ in that he makes such an assertion.

    Like

    • landzek says:

      You know, I just been thinking about your post more. Perhaps Laruelle is opening a means to eventually talk about what I call the ‘scenario of the romance’. First we would need a ‘step’, a way to ‘remove the offense that founds faith’; perhaps this is his ‘science’. I would be eager to hear your thoughts on this.

      Like

      • inthesaltmine says:

        I am very glad to see you and Terence in dialogue, or else I hope to see you both in dialogue. It seems to me that your approaches, especially vis-a-vis Lyotard and the Differend, converge in many places. Best wishes to you both.

        Like

      • landzek says:

        Cool. But who is Terrence ?

        Like

  2. landzek says:

    You conclusion expresses mine also. But I put it: to make a science out of this situation merely repeats and reifies that history was indeed substantial and real, that his meaning of gnosis is denied in its positing.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s