APPENDIX A Crash Course in Alain Badiou’s Philosophy ne of the most innovative and important voices in recent Continental philosophy, Alain Badiou has only recently begun to draw the atten- Otion his work deserves in the English-speaking world. Most of his work remained unavailable in English translation until the last few years. Yet even in translation, many of his texts remain largely inaccessible for nonspe- cialist readers. His philosophical writings are frequently complex and abstruse, with their own specialized and arcane vocabulary, much of which is drawn from mathematics. In this appendix, I hope to make Badiou a bit more accessible (and perhaps spur others to read him) by providing a brief introduction to his career and to those concepts from his philosophy that I deploy in this book.1 Badiou’s Philosophical Trajectory Born in 1937, Badiou is a younger contemporary of such leading lights of postmodernism and poststructuralism as Michel Foucault, Gilles Deleuze, and Jacques Derrida.2 Among Badiou’s early influences were the psychoana- lyst Jacques Lacan (whom Badiou has called “our Hegel”), and the structuralist Marxist Louis Althusser, with whom Badiou studied and worked in the late 1960s, but with whom he very publicly broke in the 1970s.3 In the turbu- lent late 1960s and 1970s, like many French intellectuals of his generation, Badiou was attracted to Maoist thought. He worked out his own philosophical take on Maoism in Théorie de la contradiction (Theory of Contradiction, 1975), De l’idéologie (On Ideology, 1976), and Théorie du sujet (Theory of the Subject, 1982), only the last of which has so far appeared in English translation.4 By the late 1970s and early 1980s, he had begun to move away from the categories and terminology of Maoism and to develop his own distinctive 146 O No Longer the Same philosophical voice.5 Nineteen eighty-eight saw the publication of what remains Badiou’s groundbreaking philosophical work, L’Etre et l’événement, which did not appear in English, as Being and Event, until 2005.6 In this work Badiou responds to the postmodern and poststructuralist currents that were then at the height of fashion.7 While he embraces their stress on plurality and multiplic- ity, he strongly opposes their rejection of the very possibility of universal truth, their equation of truth with coherence within a given symbol system, their consequent reduction of philosophy to a hermeneutics of the play of signifiers, and their tendency toward moral and political relativism. As Jason Barker writes, for Badiou philosophy remains “the means of seiz- ing truths.”8 Drawing his ontology from the set theory of Georg Cantor and later mathematicians, Badiou militantly asserts the existence of truths—indeed, and quite unfashionably, universal truths. Yet this is no modernist universal- ism, which amounts to the absolutizing of the experience and thought of a subset of humanity (usually European/neo-European and male). Instead, truth for Badiou is at once universal and contingent: it has to do with specific con- structs (situations) and is understood as that which “exposes the gaps in our understanding.”9 We will explore his notion of truth shortly. Suffice it to say at this point that Being and Event constitutes an ingenious and powerful antidote to the moral and epistemological relativism of much postmodern and poststruc- turalist thought. At nearly five hundred closely argued pages, it is no work for the fainthearted. Badiou’s arcane terminology, much of it drawn from mathematics, can be off- putting to nonspecialist readers. His more recent Ethics (2002) and Saint Paul (2003) offer somewhat more accessible treatments of the conceptual framework of Being and Event.10 Readers with a theological background may particularly appreciate his Saint Paul, which presents the apostle as a revolutionary bearer of a new universal truth—themes crucial to Badiou’s philosophy and Christian theology alike. (I should note that in recent work, most prominently Logics of Worlds [2009], Badiou has continued to develop his conceptual framework.11) In the following sections I will focus on some of the key concepts from Badiou’s Being and Event period. Situation and Void Badiou is a philosophical pluralist: he holds that reality is fundamentally multi- ple, infinite, and inconsistent—the last term signifying that there is no inherent unity or organizing principle in reality.12 He writes in his Ethics: “The multiple ‘without-one’—every multiple being in its turn nothing other than a multiple of multiples—is the law of being. Infinite alterity is quite simply what there is.”13 We do not, however, experience or interact with reality in terms A Crash Course in Alain Badiou’s Philosophy O 147 of infinite, inconsistent multiples of multiples. Rather, we experience sets or groupings of entities and qualities and happenings: books, housing develop- ments, jazz recordings, cats, religious systems, yucca plants, and so on. Badiou terms these sets situations. A situation is “a state of things, any presented multiple whatsoever.”14 Roughly equivalent to the mathematical concept of a set, a situation can be made up of “circumstances, language, and objects.”15 It is a collection of multiples selected out of the wider plural reality and, in Badiou’s terminol- ogy, “counted for one.” Indeed, the situation is this counting-for-one.16 Oliver Feltham and Justin Clemens provide a helpful explanation in their introduction to Badiou’s philosophy: The term “situation” [for Badiou] is prior to any distinction between substances and/or relations and so covers both. Situations include all those flows, properties, aspects, concatenations of events, disparate collective phenomena, bodies, mon- strous and virtual, that one might want to examine within an ontology. The con- cept of “situation” is also designed to accommodate anything which is, regardless of its modality; that is, regardless of whether it is necessary, contingent, possible, actual, potential, or virtual—a whim, a supermarket, a work of art, a dream, a playground fight, a fleet of trucks, a mine, a stock prediction, a game of chess, or a set of waves.17 One other aspect of the situation is very important: it stands on the distinc- tion between inside and outside—those elements that are counted as “belong- ing,” in contradistinction to those that are not. Any situation excludes some multiples.18 Badiou calls that which is deemed not to “belong” the void of the situation. The void is the “unnamed” and the “not-thought” in the situ- ation. It is not, however, a species of nonbeing, although it may appear to be “nothing” from within the situation. Rather, it is being that literally “does not count” according to the criteria that define the situation. Feltham and Clemens explain, “Badiou argues that, in every situation, there is a being of the ‘nothing.’ He starts by stating that whatever is recognized as ‘something,’ or as existing, in a situation is counted-for-one in that situation and vice versa. By implication, what is nothing in a situation must go uncounted. However, it is not as though there is simply nothing in a situation which is uncounted—both the operation of the count-for-one and the inconsistent multiple which exists before the count are, by definition, uncountable.”19 Peter Hallward puts it this way: “Every situation . has its ways of authoriz- ing and qualifying its members as legitimate members of the situation: the void of such a situation includes whatever can only be presented, in the situation, as utterly unqualified or unauthorized. It is precisely these unqualified or indis- cernible capacities that make up the very being of the situation.”20 148 O No Longer the Same Hallward’s comments point to another key feature of the Badiouan void. More than merely what is excluded, the void is also the situation’s ground of being. The void, that which is not “counted-for-one” in the situation, also con- stitutes the situation by the very fact of its exclusion. The situation cannot exist qua situation without that which is not counted as belonging to it. Badiou’s sense of the void as a situation’s ground of being draws upon the mathematical concept of the null (empty) set. In set theory it is axiomatic that each and every set contains the null set (symbolized as ∅). The null set is defined as that which has no elements in common with a given set.21 How- ever, ∅—that which is not part of the set—is also constitutive of that set. The relationship between situation and void is equivalent to that between any set and the null set. Badiou writes, “At the heart of every situation, as the foun- dation of its being, there is a ‘situated’ void, around which is organized the plenitude . of the situation in question.”22 Badiou also characterizes the void as “the almost-being which haunts the situation in which being consists.”23 As Feltham and Clemens put it, “for Badiou, every situation is ultimately founded on a void. The void of a situation is simply what is not there, but what is necessary for anything to be there.”24 The State (Governing Order) of the Situation. In order to be of any use, a situ- ation must be more than merely a jumble of elements; those elements must be ordered or organized. The operation of the count-for-one, which calls the situ- ation into being, merely sorts out what belongs (the situation) from what does not (the void); it does not order the elements within the situation. Ordering is accomplished by what Badiou calls the state of a situation, which I term the gov- erning order in this book.