THE PLURALIST « NON-« : Laruelle and Bachelard

The basic principle of François Laruelle’s « non-philosophy », a pluralising rather than a negativist use of the prefix « non-« , can be traced back to Gaston Bachelard’s « philosophy of non-« .

Laruelle’s work does not embody Bachelard’s knowledge of science nor his elegance of style. However, unlike Bachelard, Laruelle has knowledge of structuralism and of the early works of post-structuralism and tried at first to create a new synthesis from them, and then to go off on his own road.

Laruelle does occasionally discuss contemporary fellow thinkers such as Deleuze and Badiou, but his readings of these followers are demonstrably erroneous. So his scientific scholarship is wanting, as is his practice of dialogue with his contemporaries, but his tenacity in following his own path is admirable. Not everyone can be at the forefront.

We must therefore construe Laruelle’s treatment of rival figures as not constituting an objective representation of the real philosophers, but as the dramatised deployment of a set of conceptual characters.

Laruelle considers that these other thinkers have failed to attain immanence, whereas he has succeeded. In fact the thinkers that have been objects of his critique are not « rivals » but authors of alternative systems, achieving some of his goals in different ways.

Despite Laruelle’s anxiety of influence, his tenacious scientism, and his misreadings of the works of other French thinkers, the appeal of his own work lies in its exemplarity.

Laruelle is a great reader of contemporary French philosophers who created his own critical synthesis of  their ideas, and then went on to create his own system of thought, and whose thinking continues to evolve.

His path is a good model for anyone who is interested in recent French philosophy. It is exemplary of someone who, after absorbing the influence of the structuralist and post-structuralist nebula in his earlier years, went on to deconstruct his way out of it and to speak in his own name.

For more details see

Cet article a été publié dans Uncategorized. Ajoutez ce permalien à vos favoris.

Un commentaire pour THE PLURALIST « NON-« : Laruelle and Bachelard

  1. landzek dit :

    How many philosophers does it take to make a “proper”, “ Objective” Reading of another philosopher?

    If there is an objectively true reading of another philosopher, then why are we still discussing all these philosophers meanings?

    I don’t think there is an objective Lee true reading of any philosopher, and that the polemical semantic conditions between True objective and false subjective, or true subjective and false objective, is a mistaken condition of being. It speaks to a limit that is overcome through an operative faith in one’s subjectivity. I don’t think “objectivity“ is the correct term to designate or describe what is really occurring and philosophy anymore.

    But it is useful to make some sort of ideological statement about how the ideology is functioning within its confines, Which is to say, a theological apology for an intact cosmology, or wet some critical theorists have called and “intrinsic mythology”.

    And that’s OK. I think the issue now is for people to be aware and honest of just what their undertaking as a philosophical venture. For example, if we are attempting to place a subject properly within an ideal logical cosmology, or whether we are attempting to see what the human being is as a universal object.

    One does not have a more true position than the other, but rather each speaks into its own as a Laruelluan non-philosophical unilateral duality.

    Aimé par 1 personne

Votre commentaire

Entrez vos coordonnées ci-dessous ou cliquez sur une icône pour vous connecter:


Vous commentez à l’aide de votre compte Déconnexion /  Changer )

Photo Google

Vous commentez à l’aide de votre compte Google. Déconnexion /  Changer )

Image Twitter

Vous commentez à l’aide de votre compte Twitter. Déconnexion /  Changer )

Photo Facebook

Vous commentez à l’aide de votre compte Facebook. Déconnexion /  Changer )

Connexion à %s