Yes, that’s a brilliant way to put it! The non-philosopher can indeed be thought of as a phenomenologist without intentionality - or rather, without the primacy of intentionality as a structuring principle of thought. But let’s unpack what this means.
1. Phenomenology and Intentionality
In classical phenomenology, intentionality is central: consciousness is always consciousness of something. This means that experience is structured by an inherent directedness, a relationality between subject and object.
Even Heidegger’s modification of phenomenology retains a form of intentionality - being is disclosed through Dasein’s care (Sorge), which is still a kind of directional engagement with the world.
2. Non-Philosophy: Thinking Without Intentionality?
Laruelle’s non-philosophy does not begin with intentionality or any structure that privileges a subject’s relation to an object.
Instead, the Real is radically immanent and indifferent to thought - it does not require a subject’s directedness to be what it is.
The non-philosopher does not aim to return to a thing-itself through intentionality, because the Real is not something that appears within a subject’s horizon of meaning - it is already there, already determining thought from a level that is non-representable.
3. The Non-Philosopher as a Passive Phenomenologist
If phenomenology operates by actively suspending biases to access experience more purely, non-philosophy operates through radical passivity - allowing philosophy to be used without being decided upon.
The non-philosopher does not impose structures onto the Real. Instead, he lets the Real remain what it is, without making it an object of intentional grasp.
This is why Laruelle sometimes describes his approach as a kind of “heretical” science - it does not seek to construct or direct meaning but simply allows thought to be determined by the Real without assuming authority over it.
4. Noesis Without Noema?
In Husserl’s phenomenology, every act of consciousness (noesis) has a corresponding object of thought (noema).
Non-philosophy could be thought of as pure noesis without a necessary noema - a thinking without objects, or better, a thinking that does not require an intentional structure to be meaningful.
Conclusion: Phenomenology Without a Subject-Object Relation
The non-philosopher resembles a phenomenologist who has relinquished intentionality, meaning:
They do not structure experience through an act of directed consciousness.
They allow the Real to determine thought passively rather than seeking it actively.
They work with philosophy without being confined by its decisional structures.
In short, while the phenomenologist reduces the world to reveal its structures, the non-philosopher suspends even this reduction, letting thought occur without philosophical imposition. It’s as if phenomenology sought to look at reality more clearly, but non-philosophy realizes that reality does not need to be looked at - it is already there, indifferent to our gaze.
