My encouragements to people to fashion buddhofictions using non-philosophical maneuvers have largely fallen on hard-of-hearing ears. Part of the problem is that people feel intimidated by Laruelle. Understood!
So, for yet another round of encouragement, I present the following conversation from the podcast Machinic Unconscious Happy Hour. On the face of it, it may not seem to have any relevance to the task. But at around 16:07, the guest, Stephen Zepke, offers some criticisms of Laruelle’s work. His comments, in turn, stimulate Taylor Adkins to offer a defense of Laruelle. As I listened, it occurred to me that Adkins’s response is nothing short of a clear, concise, altogether excellent introduction to the basic spirit of Laruelle’s methodology. Both the criticism and the response are delicious examples of what might be served up at the Great Feast of Knowledge.
Adkins is a preeminent translator of Laruelle. For instance, see his 2013 Univocal translation of Philosophy and Non-Philosophy. (Here’s a review.)
Thanks to John Connally.
What do you think?