François Laruelle published ANTI-BADIOU in 2011, discussing Badiou’s philosophy from the point of view of his own “non-philosophy”. I have undertaken the sketch of a response, not by replying to the book itself, but by doing the same sort of thing: describing how Laruelle’s project appears when viewed through Badiousian spectacles. I hope to expand this sketch to the size of a full article. Any suggestions or objections are welcome.
My hypothesis is that Laruelle’s ANTI-BADIOU, published in 2011, can properly be understood as belonging with the initial responses to BEING AND EVENT (1988) published in the immediately succeeding years by Rancière, Desanti, Lyotard, and culminating in Deleuze and Guattari’s WHAT IS PHILOSOPHY? (1991).
Laruelle’s book functions as a time machine back to that period in that it does not take into account Badiou’s evolution since that time. In the intervening period Badiou undertook an immense work of extension, reformulation, and conceptual invention culminating in LOGICS OF WORLDS. During that period Badiou elaborated a theorisation of “antiphilosophy” in his seminars from 1992 to 1996, treating successively Nietzsche (1992-93), Wittgenstein (1993-94), Lacan (1994-95), and Saint Paul (1995-96).
None of this development is taken into account in Laruelle’s book. Yet, as Badiou’s recent book MÉTAPHYSIQUE DU BONHEUR RÉEL shows, this engagement with “anti-philosophy” has always been central to Badiou’s project and continues to be so today. These considerations are essential to his work in view of a third volume of BEING AND EVENT on subjectivation, whose tentative title is THE IMMANENCE OF TRUTHS.