It might seem that non-philosophy and phenomenology share a common impulse - both involve a kind of bracketing (epoche), and claim to return to a more fundamental layer of experience. However, Laruelle’s project is fundamentally different from phenomenology in its aim, method, and ultimate implications.
1. Non-Philosophy vs. Phenomenology: The Bracketing of What?
Phenomenology (Husserl, Heidegger, Merleau-Ponty, etc.): Phenomenology brackets empirical and metaphysical assumptions to return to the things themselves, i.e., the structures of lived experience. This reduction is supposed to reveal the essential structures of consciousness or being.
Non-Philosophy (Laruelle): Non-philosophy does not merely bracket empirical assumptions but suspends the authority of philosophy itself - what Laruelle calls the “philosophical decision”. Philosophy, according to Laruelle, operates by always splitting the world into a duality (subject-object, being-thought, transcendence-immanence, etc.) and positioning itself as the arbiter of truth. Non-philosophy brackets this entire decisional structure, refusing to let philosophy govern thought.
2. Phenomenology Still Decides, Non-Philosophy Doesn’t
Phenomenology still makes a decision about what counts as fundamental: it assumes that consciousness (or being) is the basis of access to reality.
Non-philosophy, in contrast, refuses to make such a decision. It doesn’t say, “this is the foundation” (whether consciousness, being, language, etc.). Instead, it sees all philosophy as already taking a stance that it treats as absolute, and non-philosophy aims to work with philosophy from the outside, without reinforcing its structure.
3. The Thing-Itself?
Phenomenology aims at the thing-itself, but it still interprets what that means within the frame of philosophical reflection.
Non-philosophy, by contrast, operates from what Laruelle calls the One or the Real, which is not something that can be accessed, represented, or structured by philosophy. The Real is radically immanent - always already there, indifferent to philosophy’s attempts to grasp it.
4. Non-Philosophy as a Science of Philosophy
Laruelle often describes non-philosophy as a “science of philosophy“ rather than a philosophy itself. While phenomenology stays within philosophy, refining its methods, non-philosophy treats philosophy as raw material, something to be worked with rather than obeyed.
Conclusion: A More Radical Suspension
If phenomenology brackets in order to clarify experience, non-philosophy brackets to neutralize philosophy’s authority altogether. Phenomenology still plays the game of philosophy, refining it from within, whereas non-philosophy steps outside the game entirely, seeing philosophy itself as something to be used rather than followed.
So while there’s a superficial similarity in the method of bracketing, the stakes are entirely different. Phenomenology refines philosophy; non-philosophy dismantles its structure.
