Deleuze's Transcendental Empiricism Against Speculative Realism: How Deleuze's Hume Avoids the Challenge of Correlationism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Speculative realists claim that almost all post-Kantian philosophy suffers from what they call correlationism. Correlationism, they claim, originated with Kant's response to Hume. However, one of the major figures associated with the speculative realist movement, Levi Bryant, has argued that Gilles Deleuze's transcendental empiricism is able to confront the challenge of correlationism. My central claim is that while Bryant is correct not to label Deleuze as a correlationist, his analysis does not go far enough in that it takes speculative realism on its own terms and does not move beyond the logic of correlationism. Drawing from the recent literature on Deleuze's transcendental empiricism and Deleuze's first book on Hume, I argue that Deleuze does not read Hume to produce a non-correlationist ontology, but rather develops a non-ontological constructivist philosophy. Transcendental empiricism, as he later comes to call it, conceives of philosophy in such a way that not only avoids the problem of correlationsism, but reveals that the speculative realist project itself fails to move beyond the logic of correlationism.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".