In August I will be live blogging my reading of Laruelle’s most recently published book TETRALOGOS An opera of philosophies. In my opinion it is his best book, and also his most Deleuzian. My first reactions can be found here:
Laruelle does discuss Deleuze in this latest book, but I think I have already proven both on this blog (AGENT SWARM) and in my more synthetic articles, that we can construe Laruelle’s treatment of Deleuze as not constituting the objective representation of a real philosopher, but as the dramatised deployment of a conceptual character.
This dramatised (or « operatic ») reading is not how the official Anglophone disciples of Laruelle read him, displaying as they do a deplorable tendency towards naive realism in their approach to their Master. For more information see: https://terenceblake.wordpress.com/2015/12/17/laruelles-predecessors-althusser-and-deleuze/
My own approach could be called « post-Laruellean pluralism », or « non-Laruellean non-philosophy ». To make the discussion more precise I list forty points of convergence and divergence here: https://terenceblake.wordpress.com/2019/02/02/pluralising-laruelle-non-laruellean-non-philosophy-and-many-visions-in-ones/
Such is my commitment to this process that I had a dream about my divergent reading of Laruelle, that I recount here: https://terenceblake.wordpress.com/2019/03/02/reading-laruelles-tetralogos-1-prologos-a-dream/
I am as far as I know the only philosophical commentator on Laruelle to give a clear and comprehensible explication of his « quarter turn » of philosophy, a rotation effectuated by way of the square root of minus one (√-1) , which plays a great role in TETRALOGOS: https://terenceblake.wordpress.com/2019/03/02/reading-laruelles-tetralogos-2-methodos-imaginary-numbers-and-quarter-turns/.
I have no doubt that this explication will be plagiarised, but don’t forget where you read it first: https://terenceblake.wordpress.com/2019/03/17/laruelles-quarter-turn-%e2%88%9a-1-cognition-and-estrangement/.
I have shown how we can diagramme Laruelle’s text, and so show simply the differences between philosophy, anti-philosophy, non-philosophy, and non-standard philosophy as Laruelle sees them: https://terenceblake.wordpress.com/2019/03/02/reading-laruelles-tetralogos-3-diagramma-generic-quantic-and-the-complex-plane/.
I have also briefly explained and commented on Laruelle’s discussion of Deleuze in TETRALOGOS: https://terenceblake.wordpress.com/2019/03/02/reading-laruelles-tetralogos-4-deleuzos/.
More to come in August.