380:
raised, it presents non-philosophy as exclusively and originally a notion of
Laruelle's , when in fact it had entered French philosophical discourse at least three decades earlier (if not before) with Merleau-Ponty's Collège de France lecture courses 1958-61 with titles including 'Our State of Non-Philosophy' and 'Philosophy and non-philosophy since Hegel'. Further, the only source other than Laruelle himself that is cited in support of claims concerning Laruelle's work is Ray Brassier, who has also severely critiqued the former, writing in Nihil Unbound that Laruelle's theory of non-philosophy "is too loose-cut to fit its objects; too coarsegrained to provide useful conceptual traction upon the material for which it is supposedly designed" (p.132). I will try to come back and add some of this into the page itself but frankly it's such a poor basis to work from that I'm not convinced it can be saved unless someone is prepared to do serious additional work on it. benimadimben 01:36, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
352:
uninterpretable is because, as explained, philosophy cannot grasp its decisional structure in the way that non-philosophy can" and "The decisional structure of philosophy is grasped by the subject of non-philosophy" only assert that non-philosophy grasps this structure but does not say how. Given that this seems a core concern, this information should either be given or it should be stated that non-philosophy is purely a critique of philosophical thinking that does not attempt to replace such thinking with anything else (which is what this grasping implies).
284:
268:
108:
21:
83:
170:
139:
180:
351:
Agreed. At least as the article is currently written, it seems to consist almost entirely of unsupported claims. The "decisional" critique of philosophy is interesting and fairly well described here. However, claims like "The reason why the axioms and theorems of non-philosophy are philosophically
336:
This article needs to be clarified for the continental philosophy scholar. As it reads right now, non-philosophy sounds like the blend of a more mundane / localized
Neoplatonist 'the One', Hegelian dialectics, and incredibly obscure jargon. What does it mean when the 'non-philosopher' is "for the
379:
Following what appears to be consensus that the article is both conceptually unclear as well as lacking supporting references, I've put the refimprove template on it. In my view it would also warrant a 'multiple issues' template - in addition to the conceptual unclarity and other issues already
316:
It would be interesting if the article would address the issue of whether radical immanence is in some ways compatible with religion. Certain contemporary philosophers such as Michel Henry would say yes because it is part of the phenomenological and sociological aspect of religion.
93:
441:
426:
63:(the only non-English one I'm competent to read). The article implies that this work is better known outside anglophone circles, does anyone know which language(s)? No vote as yet.
436:
446:
421:
431:
201:
on
Knowledge. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the
291:
153:
275:
149:
416:
238:
228:
411:
203:
358:
The function of the "Non-philosophy, Sans-philosophie" section is unclear. If nothing else, the quote can be moved to the opening summary.
338:
395:
193:
144:
365:
119:
89:
355:
The article's jargon needs to be explicated in order for this function in an appropriately encyclopedic entry.
342:
337:
world"? How will 'non-philosophy' investigate the radical immanence that philosophy can never seemingly have?
107:
369:
125:
53:
391:
383:
361:
82:
20:
185:
60:
387:
37:
283:
267:
405:
322:
27:
64:
52:
Keep, encyclopedic if quite specialist topic. I've cut this this back to a stub.
198:
175:
46:
33:
318:
373:
346:
326:
197:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to
45:
Keep, but cleanup. (177 Google hits for ""non-philosophy" laruelle".) -
169:
138:
59:
Comment: There are no corresponding articles that I can see in
30:
Jul 13 to Jul 23 2004, consensus was not reached. Discussion:
101:
77:
15:
282:
266:
249:
442:Low-importance Contemporary philosophy articles
427:Low-importance Continental philosophy articles
8:
437:Start-Class Contemporary philosophy articles
447:Contemporary philosophy task force articles
422:Start-Class Continental philosophy articles
105:
432:Continental philosophy task force articles
381:
246:
133:
135:
207:about philosophy content on Knowledge.
7:
191:This article is within the scope of
124:It is of interest to the following
417:Low-importance Philosophy articles
14:
213:Knowledge:WikiProject Philosophy
178:
168:
137:
106:
81:
19:
412:Start-Class Philosophy articles
233:This article has been rated as
216:Template:WikiProject Philosophy
88:This article was nominated for
312:Radical immanence and religion
92:on 7 June 2006. The result of
1:
347:05:03, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
463:
374:03:17, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
327:17:57, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
239:project's importance scale
290:
274:
245:
232:
163:
132:
40:05:18, Jul 13, 2004 (UTC)
67:21:19, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)
56:07:58, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)
49:07:26, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)
292:Contemporary philosophy
250:Associated task forces:
71:End archived discussion
287:
276:Continental philosophy
271:
194:WikiProject Philosophy
114:This article is rated
332:Exceptionally unclear
286:
270:
219:Philosophy articles
288:
272:
204:general discussion
120:content assessment
26:Article listed on
399:
386:comment added by
364:comment added by
309:
308:
305:
304:
301:
300:
297:
296:
186:Philosophy portal
100:
99:
76:
75:
454:
376:
257:
247:
221:
220:
217:
214:
211:
188:
183:
182:
181:
172:
165:
164:
159:
156:
141:
134:
117:
111:
110:
102:
85:
78:
61:French Knowledge
54:Charles Matthews
23:
16:
462:
461:
457:
456:
455:
453:
452:
451:
402:
401:
359:
334:
314:
255:
218:
215:
212:
209:
208:
184:
179:
177:
157:
147:
118:on Knowledge's
115:
12:
11:
5:
460:
458:
450:
449:
444:
439:
434:
429:
424:
419:
414:
404:
403:
339:70.138.217.107
333:
330:
313:
310:
307:
306:
303:
302:
299:
298:
295:
294:
289:
279:
278:
273:
263:
262:
260:
258:
252:
251:
243:
242:
235:Low-importance
231:
225:
224:
222:
190:
189:
173:
161:
160:
158:Low‑importance
142:
130:
129:
123:
112:
98:
97:
94:the discussion
86:
74:
73:
69:
68:
57:
50:
24:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
459:
448:
445:
443:
440:
438:
435:
433:
430:
428:
425:
423:
420:
418:
415:
413:
410:
409:
407:
400:
397:
393:
389:
385:
377:
375:
371:
367:
363:
356:
353:
349:
348:
344:
340:
331:
329:
328:
324:
320:
311:
293:
285:
281:
280:
277:
269:
265:
264:
261:
259:
254:
253:
248:
244:
240:
236:
230:
227:
226:
223:
206:
205:
200:
196:
195:
187:
176:
174:
171:
167:
166:
162:
155:
151:
146:
143:
140:
136:
131:
127:
121:
113:
109:
104:
103:
95:
91:
87:
84:
80:
79:
72:
66:
62:
58:
55:
51:
48:
44:
43:
42:
41:
39:
35:
29:
25:
22:
18:
17:
382:— Preceding
378:
360:— Preceding
357:
354:
350:
335:
315:
234:
202:
192:
154:Contemporary
126:WikiProjects
70:
36:
31:
150:Continental
116:Start-class
47:Sean Curtin
406:Categories
388:Ben.hjorth
210:Philosophy
199:philosophy
145:Philosophy
366:66.41.7.8
96:was keep.
396:contribs
384:unsigned
362:unsigned
90:deletion
237:on the
65:Andrewa
122:scale.
28:WP:VFD
32:Huh?
392:talk
370:talk
343:talk
323:talk
34:Rick
319:ADM
229:Low
408::
398:)
394:•
372:)
345:)
325:)
256:/
152:/
148::
390:(
368:(
341:(
321:(
241:.
128::
38:K
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
