Laruelle expresses “disappointment in the philosophies of difference” (as conceived in the 19th and 20th centuries, so Nietzsche, Deleuze, Derrida, and Heidegger) and is instead enchanted by the Absolute “as such.” From reading Laruelle, it is interesting to consider the way in which his Absolute admits difference “deeply” as an "in-One." It seems that for Laurelle, as he points out, that ontological difference is not relative but is continuous among and between multiplicities such that multiplicities are not “static” but are always immanently “in relation” in-One. From these comments I am inspired to read more about Laurelle’s criticisms of Deleuze especially (see here: https://ndpr.nd.edu/news/44829-franois-laruelles-philosophies-of-difference-a-critical-introduction-and-guide/)
For Laruelle, the One is without unity save for difference; it is “beyond” Being
– and taking that step beyond Being we go not into the emptiness of difference but a “beyond
filled” with the multiplicity of difference. Against this notion philosophies of difference only provide “relative” multiplicities
however, contained within hypostases of Being, of the Idea. What we need then is a “new” philosophy of difference, one free
of the same false promises and enslavement to multiplicities traditionally
conceived.
About Laruell’s deep monistic-pluralism Terry Blake writes “The
Absolute is not won through to by active and willful negation, but is attained
more passively and patiently, by letting go, allowing oneself to be convinced,
letting oneself be enchanted…” In the
words of Laruelle, “Consenting at last to the One as to that which keeps the
multiplicities beyond Being itself.”
Enchantment is central for his project in terms of how one is to grasp the sort of difference he wants to portray.
“Relative pluralism,” so says Laruelle, is not enough. One must consider instead a “non-relativist
essence of Multiplicites.” Philosophical
thought, or better, “non-philosophical thought,” is “thought of the multiple and of
becoming, of dispersion and of dissemination” and it is at work in the “contemporary
hopes of an overflowing…Representation” with a “thought of the Absolute … a
thought of the One, but of the One without unity, beyond the Idea, the Logos,
even of Being.”
This pluralism is more deeply committed to a deeper sense of
ontological difference and relation found among and between multiplicities; it
seeks non-philosophically to consider a deeper general essence that is, in some
sense, “beyond” the multiple “in-One” as a generality of Being.
This seems to be a greater sense of true generality that is in-One or in-different, perhaps the One as such
as multiple difference.
For more thoughts on Laruelle's non-relativist plural monism see Agent Swarm on "The Renunciation of the Mentors" HERE and "Non-Philosophy, Disappointment, and Enchantment" (HERE).
In a post from last year I've posted some introductory materials about Laruelle HERE.
