Excuse me for the untimely intervention...
yes it is somewhat of a shame that noology gets neglected with Deleuze. First
the neglected critique of ideology opened by Deleuze and further the absolute
idealism of Deleuze's system is passed by.
But then isn't everything lost when one neglects the Foucault book as a
conceptual personae, connecting to the probe head in the face plateau in ATP,
here, by way of further explanation, at least in Deleuze's terms, and which
refers to the fold of Kant's a priori transcendental as an a posteri
transcendental referring back to immanence which poses the
conceptual problematic of how an absolute can be a relation.
Anyways, apologies again for this quick comment. Ongoing debilitating ill
health and a very wonky X server prevent more detailed and one
would hope more fluent prose. An interesting discussion, especially since
vitalism as a new type seems to be in contention and I do agree somewhat with
Deleuze's understanding of the new definition Foucault provides for
epistemology which after Foucault can no longer be understood in the old
sense perhaps anymore then vitalism can be, despite the vitalist terrorism
Badiou so objects to in certain church of Deleuze style followers as if
Deleuze were a new human god. I find Badiou's use of this concept interesting
as a way of resolving how a relation can be absolute (referring to Badiou's
concept of Number as an ordered transitive empty set) and so the absolute
void is endowed with vitalism rather then being a dead void. Of course,
Deleuze's conception of univocal difference in itself which is shared by
Badiou cannot be passed over or neglected with this concept o outside forces
of the fold.
anyways, many best wishes and I do remain curious as to this new vitalism and
interested in reading further comments. My way of reading Deleuze is also a
sort of question rather then prescription... if you can follow it. For
Deleuze poetry would have to be univocal and an outside force... it is sort
of Platonic modernism in that poetry is not at the heart of philosophy but
expelled as a force of the outside????????
Chris Jones.
On Tue, 21 Mar 2006 02:03 am, Edmund Hardy wrote:
> Out of all the possible tags to be extracted from Deleuze, what a pity that
> rhizome, nomad, fold have taken on, but not noology… It might result in
> more Teilhard de Chardin floating about and less going back to Hegel’s
> adventures of consciousness. I think Deleuze’s account in his Foucault
> monograph is a good deal more subtle than you say – The microphysics of
> power acting on that which has an inside etc. – Though if you think he
> basically re-writes F, which is sort of his procedure in all his History of
> Philosophy monographs, have you tried his one on Hume! Your
> characterisation would fit more easily to what others have extracted from
> Foucault through a filter named Deleuze, specifically Hardt and Negri’s
> multitude etc.
>
> Edmund
|