ANTI-LARUELLE: there is a real problem with a thought that espouses democracy and performativity, and that performs the exact opposite of democratic exchange. Laruelle’s vision is structuralist: he fixates on the structural aspects of the philosophies that he examines, e.g. the philosophies of Deleuze and of Badiou. However, he ignores the vagueness, heterogeneity, ambiguity, and fluidity of the philosophies he depreciates as faling to attain the real.
For François Laruelle we are immersed in separate closed incommensurable philosophical structures, or “worlds”, unbreachable except by trauma. Even if over time Laruelle has attenuated his scientism, his structuralism has remained intact until his quantum turn.
Laruelle’s scientism is merely one instantiation of his more englobing structuralism. It is this structuralism combined with his thesis of unilaterality, and with a monistic doctrine of the One outside the structures, that undercuts his superficial invocations of democracy.
Quite a good start to say the least, much appreciated, I wish that post went on and on… That said, Laruelle is much more than a structuralist nevertheless… Accusing him of structuralism would be reducing his non-standard philosophy to a merely reactive enterprise, which is not the case…
LikeLiked by 1 person
I am “accusing” Laruelle’s previous non-philosophy of being structuralist. This is a way of saying what I find good in his non-standard philosophy is that it acknowledges the problem and provides a promising way of overcoming it. The Anglophone Laruelleans refuse to recognise the problem, and when they do they plagiarise me.
LikeLike
Pingback: LARUELLE’S NON-PHILOSOPHY: principles of a metaphysical research programme | AGENT SWARM