iiinova — where your digital self keeps evolving

Jeremy R. Smith @en-demic.bsky.social · 03/09/2026

Thanks to @bencenanay.bsky.social’s recent and fantastic book on Musil, I’m now considering writing a way of thinking “without qualities” in both Musil and Laruelle, less as a comparative study, but more towards a practical relation to thought. Hegel will be the foil.

000

Jeremy R. Smith @en-demic.bsky.social · 31/08/2026

Yet here, it is not the body that resists being one with the flow, but the flow that resists being one with the body.

010

Jeremy R. Smith @en-demic.bsky.social · 31/08/2026

Non-philosophy is like swimming underwater with a breaststroke movement. The pull outward, the glide forward dividing the stream, and maintaining that direction as if the body was itself identical to the motion.

220

Jeremy R. Smith @en-demic.bsky.social · 13/08/2026

My latest theory: while Laruelle’s “Homo ex machina” definitely is dealing with the theoretical conjuncture of thinkers he associated with, a figure I did not think of considering in this way was Hans Jonas, whose 1979 Das Prinzip Verantwortung deals with similar themes.

020

Jeremy R. Smith @en-demic.bsky.social · 11/08/2026

Woke 2: broke 2 Broke 2: woke 2 Bespoke 2: Bespoke 2

000

Jeremy R. Smith @en-demic.bsky.social · 23/07/2026

Borges is a symptom of the non-Borgesian labyrinth that is lined with philosophy, literature, the fictional, the mythological, and human imaginary. What I produce then is a philo-fiction or, better yet, a phicción.

010

Jeremy R. Smith @en-demic.bsky.social · 23/07/2026

Using this method, I’m going to work through a couple of Borges’ short stories (“Tlön,” “The Library of Babel,” “The Book of Sand,”) not to speculate on what Laruelle would or might say, but to envision a non-Borgesian way of reading that makes the labyrinthian traversable.

110

Jeremy R. Smith @en-demic.bsky.social · 23/07/2026

Instead of textual deconstruction or the bifurcation of the baroque, both of which draw from Borges and the labyrinth, I’ve come up with an alternative method, or at least the idea of it: labyrinthanalysis.

110

Jeremy R. Smith @en-demic.bsky.social · 23/07/2026

While I haven’t exactly gone to suggest the former yet, the only way to make this possible is to also free oneself from Borges: All of Borges’ stories are narrated by Borges and his fictional personae. All who read Borges, therefore, *are* Borges.

110

Jeremy R. Smith @en-demic.bsky.social · 23/07/2026

I’m fascinated by this because it can go into one of two directions for non-philosophy: either one may posit the reading and Shakespeare as being identical in the last instance alone, or can bind those who read Shakespeare into superior unity.

110

Jeremy R. Smith @en-demic.bsky.social · 23/07/2026

It seems that Borges’ short story, “Tlön, Uqbar, Orbis Tertius,” can give us a clue. In the fourth footnote of the story, we read the following: “All men who speak a line of Shakespeare *are* William Shakespeare.”

110

Jeremy R. Smith @en-demic.bsky.social · 23/07/2026

I began writing a speculative account, but one that doesn’t say “Laruelle would say this or that,” or what he might say. Rather, I’ve gone on to look at Borges to draw some hypotheses of what may be a non-Borgesian reading of Borges.

110

Jeremy R. Smith @en-demic.bsky.social · 23/07/2026

So, I’ve started writing on Borges and non-philosophy. Turns out that Laruelle’s essay on Borges, which a few years ago I was told was never published in German, is in fact in French in the archives. Since I won’t be able to access the archives in at least a few years, I came up with a fun idea.

130

Jeremy R. Smith @en-demic.bsky.social · 16/07/2026

I decided to write an abstract for the Media Theory conference in Naples where I am taking both Hottois and Laruelle together in conversation on similar themes with respect to technical objects, sciences, and metaphysics. I titled my abstract, “The Degauss of Philosophy.”

000

Jeremy R. Smith @en-demic.bsky.social · 13/07/2026

It has to do with pedagogy, what Laruelle calls the Unteachable, and how it relates to theoretical approaches such as generic epistemology that invite democratic invention.

000

Jeremy R. Smith @en-demic.bsky.social · 13/07/2026

I finished the essay a couple of days ago, sent it off to a publisher to consider for publication as a short book, and now I have figured out what I’m doing in terms of research as a whole!

110

Jeremy R. Smith @en-demic.bsky.social · 08/07/2026

Also the homo ex machina and Species Technica can reflect this relationship!

000

Jeremy R. Smith @en-demic.bsky.social · 07/07/2026

Almost done with the extended essay, I have one more thing to focus on, and then I’m going to edit for clarity and flow. Next up: Hottois and Laruelle, techno-science and techno-metaphysics/black transcendence and black universe.

100

Jeremy R. Smith @en-demic.bsky.social · 07/07/2026

Some of what I wrote today, what is remaining, and the inspiration from Laruelle’s Le principe de minorité (1981), p.81.

000

Jeremy R. Smith @en-demic.bsky.social · 28/06/2026

Once I’m done with the first, I’ll be sure to send it your way!

010

Jeremy R. Smith @en-demic.bsky.social · 28/06/2026

Beyond what I am writing now, on the bio-technics of philosophy, something that ought to be written is a scholarly investigation between Gilbert Hottois' techno-sciences and François Laruelle's techno-metaphysics, and how the two compliment one another as to the primacy of technics over theory.

100

Jeremy R. Smith @en-demic.bsky.social · 07/06/2026

I am connecting this essay to bio(-)political parallelism, techno-science/techno-metaphysics, anthropo-logical difference, amongst readings of Henry, Hottois, Foucault, Derrida and Deleuze, as a means of breaking from intra-philosophical critiques of sufficiency towards the non-philosophical proper.

230

Jeremy R. Smith @en-demic.bsky.social · 07/06/2026

Without engaging in Laruelle’s “Homo ex machina,” I argue in this essay, a non-philosophical practice is inconsequential.

100

Jeremy R. Smith @en-demic.bsky.social · 07/06/2026

I’m working on what may be the best thing I’ve written since my dissertation. It suggests a turning point in my thought and opens up things that I think will be important for future research into non-philosophy.

110

Jeremy R. Smith @en-demic.bsky.social · 14/05/2026

The novellas are: What Moves the Dead, I Who Have Never Known Men, You Should Have Left, and Spread Me.

000

Jeremy R. Smith @en-demic.bsky.social · 14/05/2026

Teaching Vandermeer’s Annihilation as the class novel next term, starting with Goss’ “Professor Berkowitz” and Pflug’s “The Lonely Planet Guide to Other Dimensions” as introductory, and pairing some novellas for group study.

120

Jeremy R. Smith @en-demic.bsky.social · 12/05/2026

It’s been a few months since my translation came out, and I’m surprised nobody has reviewed it yet!

000

Jeremy R. Smith @en-demic.bsky.social · 08/05/2026

So this omission, which is a precious thing in Brassier’s prized interpretation of Le principe de minorité, just makes the criticism rather weak, unless the man of empirico-transcendental parallelism is the one subject to liquidation, which it isn’t.

000

Jeremy R. Smith @en-demic.bsky.social · 08/05/2026

The fact that he does not engage in this discussion does not legitimate the criticism of nominating the man as real, for it is arguable that lacking a distinction between finitude and minority makes Laruelle’s whole theory fall back into the same issues of Henry’s egology, Heidegger’s Dasein, etc.

100

Jeremy R. Smith @en-demic.bsky.social · 08/05/2026

It is as though the only interest that Brassier finds from Laruelle is the “scientistic” uni-lateralization of non-materialism or the critique of hyletic materio-logy.

100

Jeremy R. Smith @en-demic.bsky.social · 08/05/2026

Huh, went through Alien Theory to see if Brassier engages the distinction between relative and absolute finitude as presented by Laruelle’s Le principe de minorité, only to be severely disappointed that the object of Brassier’s critique is untouched.

100

Jeremy R. Smith @en-demic.bsky.social · 07/05/2026

Guess I need to save up for a Switch 2 to play Star Fox.

010

Jeremy R. Smith @en-demic.bsky.social · 04/05/2026

Such as, why does Laruelle seek to break from philosophical sufficiency? Why does he privilege “man” despite speculative materialism’s principles? What are the invariants anthropo-logical difference or onto-theo-politics? These are explicitly addressed in Laruelle’s work, barely at all in secondary.

000

Jeremy R. Smith @en-demic.bsky.social · 04/05/2026

Brassier’s criticism in Nihil Unbound seems, at least to me, to be constitutive of Meillassoux’s work, significantly different from his dissertation on Laruelle, and simultaneously indicative of the same problems in existing secondary scholarship to not deal with the objects of criticism in non-phi.

100

Jeremy R. Smith @en-demic.bsky.social · 04/05/2026

Rather, it is the uni-lateral relationship between the subject as finite and its being-determined by the cause (of) the One as last-instance. Finitude is, so to speak, “cleansed” (Wittgenstein) of the philosophical baggage of limited knowability and infinite moral guidance of Reason.

100

Jeremy R. Smith @en-demic.bsky.social · 04/05/2026

This is vastly problematic when you read works such as A Biography of Ordinary Man and Le principe de minorité to understand that finitude no longer designates the limitations of being-in-the-world nor empirical limitations of cognizing the world.

100

Jeremy R. Smith @en-demic.bsky.social · 04/05/2026

What I’ve found in writing is that the latter’s notion of minoritarian finitude has been wrongly interpreted by Brassier as being ensconced within the same problematic that Heidegger dealt with in the analytic of finitude.

110

Jeremy R. Smith @en-demic.bsky.social · 04/05/2026

I started writing a new article, “Factiality and Minority,” where I grapple both of the principles that Meillassoux and Laruelle put forward in the context of the critique of post-Kantian finitude and Reason.

100

Jeremy R. Smith @en-demic.bsky.social · 13/04/2026

This is so far a fantastic read. I am really enjoying how Lynes is recontextualizing deconstruction in the framework of anti-correlationism and speculative realism via Derrida’s Blanchot-Heideggerian writings on the Thing, situating it on the basis of nature/physis and environmentalism.

000

Jeremy R. Smith @en-demic.bsky.social · 06/04/2026

Submitting this abstract to a conference on phenomenology and politics.

000

Jeremy R. Smith @en-demic.bsky.social · 05/03/2026

In a Theory Session presentation I gave in 2020 with my department, I conceived of an invariant, soterio-logical parallelism, so I think this might be useful to return to.

000

Jeremy R. Smith @en-demic.bsky.social · 05/03/2026

I wonder what another text on non-theology would be like if it took as occasions Scholem, Eliade, Rosenzweig, Corbin, and Hans Jonas. Not so much in the vein of Laruelle’s non-Christology and future mysticism or Grelet’s non-religious gnosis, but maybe through the lens of redemption.

120

Jeremy R. Smith @en-demic.bsky.social · 30/01/2026

Yesterday, I presented on my research and my translation of Laruelle’s work with Lacan in Scotland. I’ve uploaded the transcript online, and the video should be available soon. You can read it here: www.academia.edu/161242859/En...

academia.edu

En-Joui Your Symptom: On Non-Psychoanalysis and the Philo-Analytic Complex

The transcript for my presentation with Lacan in Scotland regarding the work of François Laruelle and my translation of his 1995 book, Theory of Strangers: Science of People, Democracy, and Non-Psycho...

030

Jeremy R. Smith @en-demic.bsky.social · 30/01/2026

Today is the publication day of my translation of François Laruelle’s Theory of Strangers: Science of People, Democracy, and Non-Psychoanalysis, published by Edinburgh University Press. I’m very excited to see readers engage with the book! edinburghuniversitypress.com/book-theory-...

140