This work considers what ontology might be after the deconstruction of arché in Reiner Schürmann's and Giorgio Agamben's thinking. It addresses the question by reading Schürmanns historical deduction of the categories of presencing in his book Heidegger On being Acting: From Principles to Anarchy. This deduction is at the heart of his thought in that it tries to manifest what it means to live the transition from arché to an-arché, from a life under principles and why's, to a life without why, and the principle of anarchy. This transitional thought rests on what he calls the hypothesis of closure of the metaphysical field. The deduction is therefore a question of a relation between the first beginnings end as an other beginning. He shows this by establishing categories that are both conceptual- and sensible form. This reaches its full articulation in what he calls the categories of transition; categories in which the distinction between category and intuition seems to collapse – that are its own gaze or eye, that sees both the past and the future at the same time. This is a question regarding relationality: the transition from a causal relationality to an anarchic relationality, from a substance ontology to relational ontology. What is the relational status of the transition itself and its categories? This question lead to the main one: is the transition between arché and an-arché a relation between the two? The overall purpose is to explore this question in order to open, in the end, a path between him and Agamben. The later has pointed out that the key problem to live truly anarchic is a critique of the ontological relation because language presuppositional structure manifests in it, which takes its “full” form in his work The Use of Bodies. Here, perhaps – which we only can point to – Schürmann's thought can meet Agamben's in the caesura between arché and an-arché. Can anarchy ever be in a position of principle? In the end we will have to point to the notion of oikonomia as an area of further research to understand the question of anarchy between Agamben and Schürmann.