On 11/08/12 16:29, David Bircumshaw wrote:
> given
> Deleuze's supposed credentials) like contemporary bourgeois managerial
Capitalism will always adapt ideas to suit it's needs, even Marx gets
drawn into this. I recently heard a research paper on accounting that
used Marx. The imperial nature of capitalism. Beware of, and this is not
an insulting term, crude materialist and simple empiricist observations.
This Marx warns again, esp after his break with Aristotle, end of Cap
Vol 1 Ch 1.
Deleuze doesn't write for a supposed socialist future, that would be
Utopian. He is writing for the time and takes Marx seriously when Marx
says all philosophy is idealist. The virtual is Idea or ideal or I. It
is also D's transcendental, which is not a priori, since virtual comes
after, hence his importance since her was the first to develop this
logic. (The analytic philosopher read and use him, as do quite a few
scientists.)
I can't understand Dominic's comments, they appear to be returning to
Aristotle's categories, which I know he doesn't intend, maybe this is a
consequence of DeLanda? Also, not being able to take into account
difference. Don't trust DeLanda, Zizek or oter writers on Deleuze, they
are doing their own thing, rather then explaining Deleuze. I would say
the same of Badiou who is concerned with Virtual as monist.
Deleuze has a cruel rigorous logic so there is little to gain by
attempting to break it.
Zekek in notorious for his misreading and his understanding desire as
idealist marks his own idealism, which he mistakes as materialism.
However many philosophers writing today do use Deleuze for their own
writing. This is not unusual. Ray Brassier has a question which he
thinks Deleuze slides over too quickly and is working on this.
Deleuze uses Kant's critique in his discussion of dx (DR) which is not
derived from x (differntial mathematics derives it proof from X ) and
the problem and Idea in Kant. Philosophers don't solve a problem and
move onto the next one, the problems remain with the question.
I may paste a discussion of the virtual and actual, from Difference and
Repetition, into my blog on narrative POV, after checking, but fear it
is very heavy going.
Unfortunately there is no easy way to understand Deleuze then to closely
read the texts. Not an undertaking to take lightly, Especially
Difference and Repition, Logic of Sense and A Thousand Plateaus.
The below url is a transcipt of D's lecture on Kant... (He wrote the
text book)
http://www.webdeleuze.com/php/texte.php?cle=66&groupe=Kant&langue=2
|