I have already discussed philosophical ventriloquism as a form of re-marketisation. One reformulates, whether consciously or not, the insights of one philosopher in the language of another. In particular, I commented the case of OOO, and of speculative realism in general, as a re-marketisation of Badiou’s ontology. For details, see
especially the section BADIOU REMARKETISED: SET-THEORETIC REDUCTION FOUNDS OOO’S AFFECTIVE REDUCTION.
I have also commented on the sutural nature of Laruelle’s Anglophone appropriation:
« 35) Sutural Reductionism. Each of Laruelle’s Anglophone presenters writes under the dictation of a particular suture: religious, political, artistic, or scientific. Thus alongside clones of Laruelle’s own scientism we are confronted with religionism, aestheticism, and politicism ».
It should come as no surprise that this epistemological defect of Laruellean reductionism operates in favour of a re-marketisation of Badiou’s problematic. In sum, Laruellese is a ventriloquism.
This sort of annexing of a philosopher’s language to serve one’s own prior problematic can be called, in Babette Babich’s term, « reductive convergence »: this is the empiricist error of being blind to or denying incommensurabilities, a form of concept blindness and meaning blindness.
In my reading I follow Paul Feyerabend’s practice of counter-inductive divergence. When received readings converge on an interpretation perceived as an obvious fact I explore whether a counter-hypothesis can highlight previously unperceived aspects of the text’s problematics.
We must distinguish empiricist perceptual convergence, which dogmatically sees commensurability everywhere, and hermeneutic convergence, which does the work of reading and the further work of translating.
When physicists at first saw no difference between Lorentz-Fitzgerald contraction and Einsteinian relativity, because the corresponding equations were the same, that was a form of empiricist convergence.
When Schrödinger’s formulation of quantum theory was shown to be convergent with Heisenberg’s, that was a hermeneutic « reduction ». This convergence is not a strict equivalence at the heuristic level, as different formulations suggest different lines of research.