Author: landzek

  • Tangent 5.16

    TANGENT 5.16 I figure it prudent and sensible at this time to take a tangent, aside from the direct Laruelle-nonphilosophical discussion. And back up.. What am I doing here in this blog, these posts? What am I addressing? I have said the basic issue is duality. But though this can appear as a beginning, at […]

  • Direct Tangent 4.28: What can I say ? Part 1.

    Its about time I get to the point. I have spent plenty of time talking around the issue. I have talked about Bad Faith and mentioned the issue, I’ve talked about aspects of the issue and indicated that all this has to do with the reason why Laruelle seems bogged down in jargon. I feel […]

  • Tangent 4.19: what gives? The possibility of Communicating.

    What gives? This is the question. In partial thanks to Mr. Adkins, his site translation of some of Laruelle’s writings, that these came up rather early in a Google search for ‘non-philosophy project’, as well his willingness to actually read a post of mine and then to comment on it, I am lead to more […]

  • Direct Tangent 4.13: A Particular Addressing.

    I have to admit, I had never encountered the understanding that I have come upon, nor this position from where I proceed into the world, in another author that is alive; that is until I came across Francois Laruelle and his non-philosophy. But I still have to wonder of authors. I myself am skeptical of […]

  • Tangent 4.12: Resonse to Mr. Adkins comment.

    * * * [This is an updated copy of my reply to Taylor Adkins comment on my previous post, Direction 4.10. Taylor Adkins has a WordPress site called “Fractal Ontology”‘ if anyone wants to check it out. There he has translated three or four of Laruelle’s essays on Non-Philosophy.] Right off, I am not totally […]

  • Direction 4.10: Jargon, Bad Faith… Part 2

    Since the previous post was rather long, and really could be seen as addressing different parts of the issue, I decided to re-post the second part of 4.5 as a part 2. This part continues with my question of academic jargon, and shows how the jorgonizers are making things much too difficult. I have then […]

  • Direction 4.5: Jargon, Bad Faith and a brief explanation of the non-philosophical project, its problems and shortcomings.

    The other problem with truth is that everyone already knows what is the truth. They encounter it everyday and what they know is sufficient for them to go through life with at least adequate contentment; the rest they can invest in church or their respective church-like elements of their lives. * I came off rather […]

  • Direct Tangent 4.4: science and faith.

    The main problem in finding the truth is that no one cares about the truth. And, even if one may, the usual outcome is that truth is located in two arenas of knowledge, found through their respective methodologies, science and culture, that reflect only a temporary-momentary truth called theory , or as a theory is […]

  • IDirection 3.20: The summary of Francois Laruelle’s Non-Philosophy, with further commentary.

    The Direct Tangents of Constructive Undoing deals with the explanation of non-philosophy. In regular circumstance, this link would have been posted at the beginning of Constructive Undoing, but this is highly irregular, so, here is the link ( or at least the address, since it may not have transcribed the active link) to Laruelle’s own […]

  • Direct Tangent: 3.14

    Somehow we have to get to the point of this whole matter. Physicists,I understand, have discovered the Higgs boson particle; which is, if I am correct, the ‘Higgs’ boson, as opposed to some other type of boson; I figure some guy named Higgs predicted that there should be this particular kind of particle – and […]