Dylan Vaughan

This article reinterprets Jean-François Lyotard's informational-energetic materialism through a constructive comparison with Denis Diderot's eighteenth-century materialism, with the goal of demonstrating that Lyotard's materialism supports a positive, speculative use of metaphysics rather than a merely critical one. I argue that, beneath their different idioms, both develop a de-substantialist monism in which necessity and chance are co-constitutive, producing materialisms in which non-teleological material processes are governed by blind law yet exposed to cosmological (and "cosmolocal") chance. I then extend these metaphysical dynamics to their respective philosophies of mind, foregrounding their shared commitment to the materiality of the mind, the primacy of memory, and the aleatory event of thought. The result is a reframing of several familiar Lyotardian themes-including infantia and Nachträglichkeit-as well as a clarified view of the roles of both Diderot and speculative metaphysics within Lyotard's overall philosophical trajectory.

This article reinterprets Jean-François Lyotard’s informational-energetic materialism through a constructive comparison with Denis Diderot’s eighteenth-century materialism, with the goal of demonstrating that Lyotard’s materialism supports a positive, speculative use of metaphysics rather than a merely critical one. I argue that, beneath their different idioms, both develop a de-substantialist monism in which necessity and chance are co-constitutive, producing materialisms in which non-teleological material processes are governed by blind law yet exposed to cosmological (and ‘cosmolocal’) chance. I then extend these metaphysical dynamics to their respective philosophies of mind, foregrounding their shared commitment to the materiality of the mind, the primacy of memory, and the aleatory event of thought. The result is a reframing of several familiar Lyotardian themes—including infantia and Nachträglichkeit—as well as a clarified view of the roles of both Diderot and speculative metaphysics within Lyotard’s overall philosophical trajectory.

Abstract:The central inquiry of this article concerns the ethical orientation within post-structuralism, specifically questioning its potential affinity with deontology. While the “philosophers of difference” offer divergent perspectives on the doctrine of judgment, Jacques Derrida folds it within Deconstruction as a nomo-aporetic transcendental horizon. To understand this operation and its potential ethical significance, I suggest Jean-François Lyotard offers the best counter-model with which to compare against Derrida’s. Amongst their direct and indirect exchanges with each other is a dialogue concerning the law and its fundamental ground. Through their respective readings of Kafka – Derrida’s reading of “Before the Law” and Lyotard’s reading of “In the Penal Colony” – both attempt to delineate how the specific nature of the ground of the law determines the way in which an individual becomes subject to the law. Despite the enigmatic nature of their discourses, their comparison reveals converging and diverging trajectories in their ethical reflections as they push toward thinking the limits of lawfulness. Through such a comparative study of their texts, this exploration aims to unveil the shared fugitive vector of their ethical contemplations within the post-structuralist framework.