DIACHRONIC ONTOLOGY AND COMPLEMENTARITY BADIOU LARUELLE

For me the major problem is one of diachronic ontology. I think that John Ó Maoilearca is on the right track in his attempt to temporalise Laruelle’s philosophy by importing Bergson’s multiple durations into it. Badiou sees the problem, and one of the uses of his “maoism” is to dialectise, and so to temporalise, his quasi-neoplatonic set theoretical ontology. For the moment we need both Laruelle and Badiou. In Badiou’s own terms Laruelle’s nonphilosophy alone is “too sceptical”, and Badiou’s scientistic maoism alone is “too pious”. This is why Laruelle seeks to incorporate quantum thinking (but he could just as fruitfully incorporated category theory), and Badiou  incorporates anti-philosophy.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

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