Resumen: Este escrito aborda la interpretación deleuziana de la sustancia spinozista. Su objetivo es mostrar que el núcleo fundamental de dicha interpretación reside en el señalamiento del carácter único y a la vez múltiple de la sustancia, carácter que Deleuze conceptualiza a través de la categoría de distinción formal, tomada de Duns Scoto. Con este propósito, se caracterizan las nociones de univocidad y de expresión, que nos conducen a plantear que la sustancia, por ser a la vez única y múltiple, (...) consiste en el desarrollo de una contradicción. Esta condición nos permite concluir que la interpretación deleuziana, más allá de su propósito manifiesto, enfatiza una arista del trabajo de Spinoza que lo acerca a la filosofía de Hegel. Lo cual implica que la propia producción de Deleuze ofrece, también, aspectos que la aproximan a la del filósofo alemán.: This paper addresses the Deleuzian interpretation of the Spinozist substance. It aims at showing that the fundamental nucleus of this interpretation lies in pointing out the unique and simultaneously multiple character of the substance, which Deleuze conceptualizes through the category of formal distinction, taken from Duns Scoto. To reach this goal, the notions of univocity and expression are characterized. This leads us to affirm that substance, being both unique and multiple, consists of the development of a contradiction. This character allows us to conclude that the Deleuzian interpretation, beyond its manifest purpose, emphasizes a dimension of Spinoza’s work that brings it closer to Hegel’s philosophy. This implies that Deleuze’s own production also offers aspects that approach it to the German philosopher’s work. (shrink)

Šiame straipsnyje nagrinėjama pojūčio logika, Deleuze’o aptarta jau knygose Kanto kritikos filosofija ir Skirtis ir kartotė. Šiuo atveju pojūčio logika analizuojama pasitelkiant meno kaip eksperimentavimo plotmę, parodant, kad menas, ypač modernusis, pats būdamas nulemtas tam tikrų pojūčio logikos principų, tuo pačiu tampa vienu geriausių būdų šias sąlygas atskleisti. Deleuze’as meną apibrėžia kaip pojūčių kūrimą, padarant nematomą jėgą matoma. Tapsmo arba genezės plotmė kasdienei patirčiai yra neprieinama, negalima reprezentuoti, tačiau menininkų kuriami pojūčiai tam tikru būdu vaizduoja nereprezentuojamybę. Francio Bacono tapyba Deleuze’o (...) yra traktuojama kaip vienas geriausių reprezentacijos, buvusios svarbiausia klasikinio meno problema, įveikos būdų ir yra aptariama pasitelkiant kitų šiuolaikinio meno krypčių, tokių kaip abstrakti tapyba ir abstraktus ekspresionizmas, analizę. Diagramos, įvedančios chaosą ir turinčios suardyti klišes bei išlaisvinti pojūtį, naudojimo būdas apibrėžia kiekvienos tapybos krypties specifiką ir pojūčio sukūrimo sėkmę. Tokie Baconui būdingi tapybos aspektai kaip haptinės erdvės sukūrimas, analoginės kalbos naudojimas ir spalvos moduliacija nusakomi kaip geriausios pojūčio išgavimą lemiančios sąlygos. Bacono kuriamos Figūros, kurios nebėra siejamos su jokiu atpažįstamu objektu, geriausiai išlaiko pojūtį, nes jėga turi būti įtempta ant kūno idant atskleistų virtualios plotmės virsmą aktualia. (shrink)

Šiame straipsnyje interpretuojamos vandens ir plaukimo alegorijos, kurios leidžia sukurti ateities mokyklos projektą, pasižymintį glotnia erdve, apie kurią kalbėjo Deleuze’as. Deleuze’o įžvalgų užuomazgų randama kitų filosofų, inspiravusių Deleuze’o alegorines figūras, veikaluose. Minėtieji konceptai yra tiesiogiai ar metaforiškai susiję su ugdymo lauku ir mokymusi, t. y. pakartojimu ir kūrybiškumu, giliu nardymu ir plūduriavimu paviršiuje, atsipalaidavimu ir dėmesio sukaupimu, balansavimu tarp plataus ir lokalaus veiksmų lauko, skirtingų judėjimo trajektorijų pasirinkimo. Kitokia, atsinaujinti tinkama, mokyklos erdvė šiame straipsnyje įsivaizduojama kaip potvynio teritorija – tai (...) reiškia tam tikrą chaosą, daiktų padėties pasikeitimą. Visa tai leidžia deteritorizuoti erdvę nepažeidžiant jos ribų. Aptariami Deleuze’o išskirti keturi pavojai – baimė, aiškumas, galia ir šleikštulys, kurie paralyžiuoja kūrybinę potenciją ir inovatyvumą. Straipsnyje svarstoma, ką gi šie pavojai reikštų įsivaizduojamoje mokykloje, apimtoje potvynio, ir kaip jie keistų mokyklos veikėjų elgesį. (shrink)

This thesis seeks to understand the nature of and relation between science and philosophy articulated in the early work of the French philosopher Gilles Deleuze. It seeks to challenge the view that Deleuze’s metaphysical and metaphilosophical position is in important part an attempt to respond to twentieth century developments in the natural sciences, claiming that this is not a plausible interpretation of Deleuze’s early thought. The central problem identified with such readings is that they provide an insufficient explanation of the (...) nature of philosophy’s contribution to the encounter between philosophy and science that they discern in Deleuze’s work. The philosophical, as opposed to scientific, dimension of the position attributed to Deleuze remains obscure. In chapter 1, it is demonstrated that this question of philosophy’s contribution to intellectual life and of how to differentiate philosophy from the sciences is a live one in Deleuze’s early thought. An alternative, less anachronistic interpretation of the parameters of Deleuze’s early project is offered. The remaining chapters of the thesis examine the early Deleuze’s understanding of the divergence between philosophy and science. Chapter 2 gives an account of Deleuze’s metaphilosophy, alongside a reconstruction of his largely implicit early understanding of science. The divergent intellectual processes and motivating concerns that account for Deleuze’s understanding of the differentiation of science and philosophy are thus clarified. In chapter 3, Deleuze’s use of mathematical and physical concepts is examined. It is argued that these concepts are used metaphorically. In chapter 4, the association between modern science and the Deleuzian concept of immanence that has been proposed by some Deleuze scholars is examined and ultimately challenged. The thesis concludes with some reflections on the significance of Deleuze’s early work for contemporary debates concerning the future of continental philosophy and the nature of philosophy more generally. (shrink)

Straipsnyje nagrinėjama Kanto nužymėtos ir Deleuze’o eksperimentiniame mąstyme rekonstruotos vaizduotės kaip vieno iš trijų proto gebėjimų raiškos lauko alternatyvos. Siekiama atsakyti į paties Deleuze’o išsikeltą kantišką klausimą: kokia yra giliausia paslaptis? Aptinkamos kelios atsakymo alternatyvos. Šiame tyrime paaiškėjo, kad Deleuze’o atsakymai į paties išsikeltą klausimą „kokia yra giliausia vaizduotės paslaptis?“ patiria metamorfozes, kurios apsuka ratą. Nuo pradinės pozicijos, kai vaizduotė veikia tik paklusdama intelektui ar protui, ji juda link laisvo trijų nepriklausomų sugebėjimų – intelekto, proto, vaizduotės atitikimo, paskui – link (...) jų nedarnios dermės, jų kovos, kuri skatina kiekvienos naują atsiskleidimą, galiausiai – prie vaizduotės anihiliacijos, kuri leidžia užgimti naujai minčiai, taigi, ratas apsisuka ir grįžtama prie jų dermės naujame lygmenyje, moderuojant filosofiniam skoniui. Tačiau visas šias metaformorfozes jungia viena bendra Kanto suformuluota prielaida: vaizduotė niekada neišvengia triadinės priklausomybės, ji neveikia viena; ji galima tik santykyje su intelektu ir protu, t. y. kitais trimis jai paraleliais ir simultaniškais sugebėjimais. (shrink)

In this essay, I examine the ‘Postulates of Linguistics’ chapter of A Thousand Plateaus. In regard to this chapter, I aim to demonstrate something that has remained unrecognised about minor language in Deleuze and Guattari. I aim to show not only the characteristics of Deleuzian speaking in tongues that overlap with Foucaultian speaking-freely and with Derridean speaking-distantly, but also and more importantly, I hope to show how it is possible for us to make a language speak in tongues. Derrida's way (...) of speaking is made only by forming an enunciation that states a self-contradiction, which thereby makes the enunciation imply more than it says. Foucault's way of speaking is made only by forming an enunciation that states the truth directly and loudly, which thereby makes the enunciation do more than it says. And finally, Deleuze way of speaking is made only by forming an enunciation that states a command abstracted from its context, which thereby makes the enunciation proliferate. All three ways of speaking are made not for the benefit of the speaker, but ‘in favour of’ others. And perhaps this speaking ‘in favour of’ others will allow us to come to understand the true meaning of the phrase ‘capitalism and schizophrenia’. (shrink)

Dramatization has been conceived by some Deleuze scholars as ‘dramatizing’ the mode of existence of a subject. This paper argues, on the contrary, dramatization involves the very creation of a viewpoint on the world. The ethical significance of dramatization is not the ability to ‘evaluate’ certain subjective modes of existence, but to produce ways of unfolding the world in which we do not ‘imprison’ others and in which multiple perspectives are allowed to unfold. Love is incapable of such a truly (...) ethical comportment, because the lover is always thrown back onto their own world, trapped within subjectivity, unable to see from two viewpoints at once. A world is most precisely a set of signs, a set of relationships between ‘things’ and ‘meanings’ ; therefore, in order to produce more ‘ethical’ worlds, worlds in which we do not ‘explicate’ or imprison ourselves and others too much, we must turn to art. Art is precisely a ‘unity’ in which multiple perspectives are allowed to unfold at their own rhythm. Language perfects this insofar as the creation of new modes of grammatical relation in writing is nothing more than the unification of a multiplicity of relationships between meaning and things. (shrink)

The cosmology of Deleuze and Guattari emphasises the new. I raise the question of whether this emphasis cancels out two other political virtues, solidarity and heterogeneity, and thereby amounts to a fascism of the new. I reply that what Deleuze and Guattari say about cosmological unity and difference suggests that they can avoid this negative designation. I support this conclusion by considering their statements on ethics and politics and by translating their cosmological philosophy into the more immediate ethico-political context of (...) the alloplastic stratum. The latter effort is abetted by elaborating the two thinkers’ use of the term ‘voice’, for example, in Deleuze's statement that Being is the ‘single and same voice for the whole thousand-voiced multiple … a single clamour of Being for all beings’ or in the two authors’ notion of a ‘constellation of voices’ that makes up the ‘molecular’ or ‘unconscious’ collective assemblage of enunciation. This elaboration is pertinent because political ethics is essentially which voices are heard, and which not, or at least their relative levels of audibility in the alloplastic regime. I further clarify this treatment of Deleuze and Guattari's political ethics by linking it to the idea of parrhesia, courageous speech and hearing. (shrink)

Starting from the famous statement by Deleuze and Guattari in What Is Philosophy? that ‘[i]mmanence can be said to be the burning issue of all philosophy’, this article explores their claim of an ontology of immanence and/as relational ontology in quantum terms. The theme of this special issue allows for a rereading of the terminology of different/ciation, which Deleuze developed in ‘The Method of Dramatization’ and Difference and Repetition, and I here relate it to the question of consistency of the (...) plane of immanence, such as it is emphasised in the later work of Deleuze and Guattari. The article exemplifies the significance that the early issue of ‘dramatization’ as different/ciating passage has on an adequate understanding of both ‘immanence’ and ‘becoming’, and it shows their in/seperability for a relational ontology as onto-ethology. By making the Deleuze-Guattarian immanence resonate with Barad's agential realism, the article zooms in on the specific quality of the ‘passage’ in order to do justice to the claim of a ‘mature’ philosophy that thinks immanence as immanent only to itself. (shrink)

A standard approach to examining Deleuze's concept of difference in Difference and Repetition is to follow his critique of representation through an overturning of Platonism, which Deleuze finds to be the definitive task of philosophy after Nietzsche. While engaging this largely critical project, however, there is a tendency to overlook the dimensions of Platonism that Deleuze rehabilitates in a differential and immanent register. This paper aims to recover the essential dimensions of Platonism at the very heart of Deleuze's philosophy of (...) difference. This recovery is accomplished by distinguishing Nietzsche's overturning of Platonism through his evaluation of the reactive politics of the Idea from Deleuze's own reversal of Platonism through his evaluation of the active politics of simulacra. (shrink)

In taking up Deleuze's differential diagnosis by observing Masoch's literary practice and extracting his libidinal principles of imperatives, contracts, fetishism and rituals, I demonstrate Deleuzian libidinal symptomatology as a specific semiotics in the service of schizoanalysis. I shall argue that in Masoch the schizoanalytic curettage of the unconscious is executed as schizoid waiting where the fleeting outer symptoms of pain–pleasure reveal the masochist's desired inner splitting of the senses. Several critical-clinical inroads to the schizoanalytic project can be envisaged. Initially, Masoch's (...) visionary concept of sexualised world history is supported by his strategic move to the law of the oral mother, yet then extended by Deleuze's concept of maternal symbolic which speculates on the fantasised rebirth of a sexless or hermaphroditic man. Finally, the parodic enactment of eros and thanatos functions as technique of dialectical disguise within the masochist's scheme of practising libidinal liberation. Masochism considered as a state of bodily experimentation which turns the oedipal law upside down, emerges as a distinct literary genre in Deleuzian aesthetics. (shrink)

This article addresses the new conditions under which teachers are making the choice to teach. Our core contention is that the reorganisation of schools according to the logic of the corporation, as described in Deleuze's ‘Postscript’, is changing the flows and forces on the primary surface of ‘the classroom’. These changes block the usual movements of teaching to discipline, normalise and individualise, which was the role of the school as precursor to the factory. Blocked from repeating, or returning, teaching as (...) it has always been done, teachers must actively re-will to teach; teachers cannot use order words to name themselves and direct flows and forces as they have usually been done. While many choices to teach will be undertaken, the most popular being that of choosing to teach toward the corporation, the repetition of teaching toward enclosed spaces becomes less compelling. Like Nietzsche's Zarathustra, teachers, who have the courage to actively choose, face a new dawn in which teaching cannot be what it once was. In that moment they must choose to repeat that choice an infinite number of times, the choice of eternal return, and it is from here that new times might begin. (shrink)

How can Deleuzians make his philosophy as accessible as possible to political theorists and democratic publics? This essay provides principles to enter Deleuze's political vision, namely, to research the etymology of words, to discover the image beneath concepts, to diagram schemata using rigid lines, supple lines and lines of flight, and to construct rules that balance experimentation and caution. The essay then employs this method to explicate a fecund sentence about politics in A Thousand Plateaus and presents a case why (...) Deleuze deserves greater visibility in the political theory canon. (shrink)

This paper draws from resources in the work of Deleuze to critically examine the notion of organicism and holistic relations that appear in historical forerunners that Jung identifies in his work on synchronicity. I interpret evidence in Jung's comments on synchronicity that resonate with Deleuze's interpretation of repetition and time and which challenge any straightforward foundationalist critique of Jung's thought. A contention of the paper is that Jung and Deleuze envisage enchanted openings onto relations which are not constrained by the (...) presupposition of a bounded whole, whether at the level of the macrocosm or the microcosm. Openings to these relations entail the potential for experimental transformation beyond sedentary habits of thought which are blocked by a disenchanting ‘image of thought’ that stands in need of critique. Other examples of enchanted openings in Jung's work are signposted in an effort to counter their marginalisation in some post-Jungian critiques and to signal their potential value from a Deleuzian perspective. (shrink)

Gilles Deleuze (January 18, 1925–November 4, 1995) was one of the most influential and prolific French philosophers of the second half of the twentieth century. Deleuze conceived of philosophy as the production of concepts, and he characterized himself as a “pure metaphysician.” In his magnum opus Difference and Repetition , he tries to develop a metaphysics adequate to contemporary mathematics and science—a metaphysics in which the concept of multiplicity replaces that of substance, event replaces essence and virtuality replaces possibility. Deleuze (...) was also well-known for a number of important monographs he published in the history of philosophy (on Hume, Nietzsche, Kant, Bergson, Spinoza, Foucault, and Leibniz), as well as for his writings on the various arts, which include a two- volume study of the cinema, books on Proust and Sacher-Masoch, a monograph on the painter Francis Bacon, and a collection of essays on literature. Deleuze considered these latter works as pure philosophy, and not criticism, since he sought to create the concepts that correspond to the artistic practices of painters, filmmakers, and writers. In 1968, he met Félix Guattari, a political activist and radical psychoanalyst, with whom he wrote several works, among them the two-volume Capitalism and Schizophrenia , comprised of Anti-Oedipus (1972) and A Thousand Plateaus (1980). Their final collaboration was What is Philosophy? (1991). (shrink)