in "The Logic of Sense" Deleuze writes about the notion of time as Chronos
and Aion.
in his other books "Cinema 1 & 2 he also talks about the notion of time from
Nietzsche's perspective,
namely the "eternal return".
ali,
>From: Paul Gallagher <[log in to unmask]>
>Reply-To: Film-Philosophy Salon <[log in to unmask]>
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: Deleuze and Kierkegaard
>Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 01:02:17 -0500
>
>Julie wrote:
>>
>> Just a short question...
>>
>>
>> What fundamental concepts of time do Deleuze and Kierkegaard present
>> to us and how do they differ from other understandings?
>>
>> Julie G
>
>Here are two papers that might offer some clues.
>
>Kierkegaard wrote about the timelessness of God in relation to the
>individual, who exists in existential time.
>
>Penelope Palmer describes Kierkegaard's views in her review of Mark C
>Texzon's "Kierkegaard's Pseudonymous Authorship. A Study of Time and the
>Self." (Philosophical Quarterly, Apr. 1977, p177-180):
>
>"SK's fundamental category is that of the individual; it is hardly
>surprising that Taylor should choose to elucidate-and very competently--the
>theme of the self in the pseudonymous works. What is more unusual, and
>extremely welcome, is his attempt to bring to light an intimately related
>theme of time. In The Concept of Dread SK argued, with maddening brevity,
>that the traditional concept of time was inappropriate to human existence.
>Taylor, aided by Aristotle (Phye. IV), engages in an honest attempt to
>understand in detail what SK was criticizing. Briefly, SK questioned that
>view of time which derives from our understanding of space; consists in
>'visualizing time instead of thinking it' (op. cit.); upholds an
>indissoluble connection between time and the motion of bodies; sees time as
>a line composed of an infinite series of points (the successive 'present'
>points dividing past from future). SK calls the 'now' of this 'spatialized
>time' an 'atomistic abstraction'-from past and future. He doubts whether
>one can even speak of tenses of time from within the standpoint of
>spatialized time. In Taylor's words: 'If only the present is, and the past
>and future are consistently excluded from the present, it is difficult to
>see how one could become aware of the past and of the future.' SK does not
>think an individual can stand outside the time continuum in which he
>exists, and thus become aware of time as tensed. A concept of 'life-time'
>related to individuals' lives rather than to objects in space, is, Taylor
>claims, inherent in SK's pseudonymous works, and closely bound up with his
>view of the structure and possible development of the self..."
>
>Nathan Widder describes Deleuze's conception of time here:
>http://www.huss.ex.ac.uk/politics/research/readingroom/WidderTime&Discontinuity.pdf
>"Against the common or ordinary conception of time as the number or measure
>of movement, this work follows Deleuze and others in treating time as the
>unchanging form of what changes or moves. Following this route, time
>becomes associated with a transcendental structure or synthesis of
>differences, which Deleuze calls a 'disjunctive synthesis' or a synthesis
>of differences through their difference."
>
>Paul
>
>*
>*
>Film-Philosophy Email Discussion Salon.
>After hitting 'reply' please always delete the text of the message you are
>replying to.
>To leave, send the message: leave film-philosophy to:
>[log in to unmask]
>For help email: [log in to unmask], not the salon.
>**
*
*
Film-Philosophy Email Discussion Salon.
After hitting 'reply' please always delete the text of the message you are replying to.
To leave, send the message: leave film-philosophy to: [log in to unmask]
For help email: [log in to unmask], not the salon.
**
|