6/7 I.e. it belongs to the Buddhist tradition to question what "Buddhism" means (but you already presume to know what it designates, hence your term "x-Buddhism")
Hmmm... Laruelle thinks he can say what philosophy as such is (what its general identity is), such that he can call something "non-philosophy," and you do the same for Buddhism.
-
-
If you would like to discuss the merits of Laruelle, I can suggest a couple of excellent interlocutors, including his main English translator. I am only interested in using what I can of his ideas to my own interests and purposes.
-
And yes, part of the general non project is discerning the identity of a formation. A working hypothesis is that it's identity is never what the formation says of itself. For instance, x-buddhism presents variously as organon of things as they are, phenomenology, empiricism, (1)
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.