<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes"?><oembed><version><![CDATA[1.0]]></version><provider_name><![CDATA[Larval Subjects                              .]]></provider_name><provider_url><![CDATA[https://larvalsubjects.wordpress.com]]></provider_url><author_name><![CDATA[larvalsubjects]]></author_name><author_url><![CDATA[https://larvalsubjects.wordpress.com/author/larvalsubjects/]]></author_url><title><![CDATA[Reid on Non-Philosophy]]></title><type><![CDATA[link]]></type><html><![CDATA[<p>Reid over at Planomenology has an excellent&#8211; genuinely excellent &#8212;<a href="http://planomenology.wordpress.com/2009/02/11/the-limits-of-realism-correlationism-and-the-principle-of-sufficient-philosophy/">post</a> up outlining the contours of Laruelle&#8217;s non-philosophical engagement with philosophy.  Note how Reid outlines non-philosophical engagement with philosophy in the clearest of terms, drawing minimally on Laruelle&#8217;s own dense language.  This is how it&#8217;s done.  Hopefully Reid will write a similarly clear account of concepts such as One-without-unity, determination in the last instance (this one particularly irks me), how Laruelle arrives at a radically immanent one anterior to philosophical operation, etc.</p>
]]></html></oembed>