Rocco Gangle’s book DIAGRAMMATIC IMMANENCE: Category Theory and Philosophy contains a very interesting synthesis of his ongoing work on Peircean pragmatics, semiotics and logic of abduction, Spinozan and Deleuzian immanent relational ontologies, the heuristic ramifications of diagrammatic method, and on the ontological pertinence of mathematical research, in particular of category theory.
Gangle’s book is very useful in allowing us to distinguish the semiotic turn from the linguistic turn. The diagrammatic semiotics that he proposes in this book and elsewhere has the advantage of not being limited by the constraints of any particular language, nor by those of language in general. Gangle argues in effect for the pragmatic fecundity of a “diagrammatic turn”.
A promising undercurrent of his book is the creative and inclusive way in which Gangle combines influences from Deleuze, Badiou, and Laruelle without indulging in the childish exclusivism that many partisans of each of these philosophers (especially the Laruelleans) display towards the others.
Another interesting feature is the silent rejection of the recent ideological re-writing of philosophical history which attempts to establish by arbitrary assertion that relational ontology has had its day, and that it is to be rejected because it “cannot explain change”. The absurdity of this claim is evident when we recall that “relations” are not inherently static, but include kinetic and dynamic relations (faster and slower, greater and lesser acceleration, etc.).
What relational ontology does is to pluralise the arrows of relation and multiply their diections, what it rejects is a priori “one-way” arrows:
‘Immanence’, roughly, names then any metaphysical position or
method rejecting the notion that the ultimate structure of reality
may be investigated independently of its real content in the way
that Kant’s, for example, does. Immanence disallows ‘one-way’
arrows from metaphysics to ontology, or from logical grammar to
This rejection of methodological uni-laterality (Laruelle), the great Outdoors (Meillassoux) and ontological withdrawal (OOO) is a necessary complement to the repudiationtion of the falsified history of Continental Philosophy which would make of a fictitious correlationism a general structure of error invalidating all previous philosophies and requiring a radical rupture, that so far has produced only gross conceptual simplifications.
Gangle does not want to break with relational ontologies but to take one step further along the path of immanence that they make possible.