I literally finished re-reading this chapter 30 minutes ago, made dinner, and i see your video! I guess I’m watching this while eating. Thank you in advance.
There's a lot of material on these two already, so I might focus on smaller topics for a while, or older books like NAP/E&S. Not sure yet, I'll ask for requests and suggestions in the next video
@@deleuzephilosophy NAP is Deleuze at his most lucid. Its a good entry point, then his analysis of Hume was a step up in difficulty. In fact after years of studying DnR and LoS, Ive finally found his most challenging work in The Fold. To get a sense of how impenetrable it is, I went back to revisit certain passages from AO & AtP which seem too straightforward and build upon the hard foundations that he has already laid out on the 60s. The Fold really contains some of the most beautiful passages Ive read from Deleuze about the two levels of the monad - the ground floor with separate rooms of the senses leading up to a windowless attic of the soul that receives the senses.
You did justice to what is probably one of my favorite Deleuze's chapter. It's him at his most complex, and complete form. And so much of his latter works are inexplicable without this chapter, whether it's the third synthesis of consumption in AO, the BwO, also the plateaus on becoming, even his work on Francis Bacon, or WIP. I think it's even more important than the stuff on Ideas (mainly because after logic of sense differential calculus and structuralism take a step back, diff calculus is still there but it doesn't feel as central) whereas his theory of intensity remain unchanged up until the end of his life. It's still really important to understand his image of thought. When I first read it, it really was unthinkable to me. It just hardly made sense. It forced me to think. It was like a waking up from a dogmatic slumber but Deleuze wake you up with a whiplash ! And I had to figure out what the fuck thermodynamics was about, or information theory, and cybernetics and that's how I've discovered Simondon. Thanks to him I did research on a topics I never knew could be so interesting. That's why he can seem so complex and difficult at time he want to force us to think about stuff, and not just read. He is not difficult for the sake of being obscure he is just demanding with his reader. Wich is why I can say he is one of the only philosopher fun to not understand and be lost in his text. Great vids! and thank you for this series!
Thank you very much! I completely agree on the "whiplash out of the dogmatic slumber", the way he opened philosophy up to virtually all fields of thought (without reduction) is quite unique, and probably also quite inevitable for the future of philosophy. I also agree on the trajectory of his thought, intensities remain central (and I think series as intensities may be one his most important contributions). It could be that his later texts can be approached as "meditations" on the third synthesis, Eternal Return, in several of its modalities. It appears to be clearly the case, as you say, in his collaboration with Guattari, as well as in the books on Cinema (which are so underrated imo). Thanks again for watching!
@@deleuzephilosophy agree with you on the third synthesis of the eternal return although he doesn't mention it often after logic of sense it's still there, he doesn't have to talk about the eternal return because after difference and repetition he is already in it. Now that I've thought about it it's also important for his reading of Spinoza. What's interesting to him about Spinoza isn't so much substance but the way Spinoza thought substance and finite mode correlate. And precisely they correlate in intensity, finite mode is a degree of power expressing the infinite power of the substance. Which gave him his model for thinking how partial object and the BwO would correlate, again in intensity. The egg is the intensive spatium, but it is also the BwO, and the egg is also the spinozist substance. The cinema's book are the only major Deleuze's work I haven't read (with the Proust's book) so I have to believe in you. I'll try looking up the books on cinema latter this year
Very good reflection. I like this description of Deleuze being demanding of the reader. I went down a similar path where he forced me to think very hard, almost to the point of paralysis. There was a limit where I realized this and brought thought back into the realm of action, so to speak, or reconnected it to my life. Either way, he definitely does give a good motivation to try and bring all these fields under a philosophical lens. I didn’t realize that’s what exactly what was happening but you put it very well
![Difference and Repetition [part 9] Conclusion](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/ugyYpO1GYac/mqdefault.jpg)
![Difference and Repetition [part 9] Conclusion](/img/tr.png)
![Difference and Repetition [part 7] Ideas and the Synthesis of Difference](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/DtBpW8gzszw/mqdefault.jpg)
![[#2024MAMA] G-DRAGON - 무제(Untitled, 2014)+POWER+HOME SWEET HOME+뱅뱅뱅+FANTASTIC BABY | Mnet 241123 방송](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Ox29z5Nf1Uk/mqdefault.jpg)
I literally finished re-reading this chapter 30 minutes ago, made dinner, and i see your video! I guess I’m watching this while eating. Thank you in advance.
the greatest work ever written
So true...
thank you for making this series, i have been using it as a reader while engaging with the text
Very glad to hear! Thank you for watching
was reading this chapter when you uploaded!!
I was listening to the audiobook of chapter five from your channel as I was reading the chapter myself. Thank you for that!
@@danayaseen647 of course!!!
6:32 the abyss that looks back at us but has no eyes
Will you do a series on AO and Atp?
There's a lot of material on these two already, so I might focus on smaller topics for a while, or older books like NAP/E&S. Not sure yet, I'll ask for requests and suggestions in the next video
hopefully u cover E&S and The Fold. His readings of Hume and Leibniz helped me in understanding both thinkers better
@@Spiritchaser93 Same--both are on my radar, as well as NAP
@@deleuzephilosophy NAP is Deleuze at his most lucid. Its a good entry point, then his analysis of Hume was a step up in difficulty. In fact after years of studying DnR and LoS, Ive finally found his most challenging work in The Fold. To get a sense of how impenetrable it is, I went back to revisit certain passages from AO & AtP which seem too straightforward and build upon the hard foundations that he has already laid out on the 60s. The Fold really contains some of the most beautiful passages Ive read from Deleuze about the two levels of the monad - the ground floor with separate rooms of the senses leading up to a windowless attic of the soul that receives the senses.
You did justice to what is probably one of my favorite Deleuze's chapter. It's him at his most complex, and complete form. And so much of his latter works are inexplicable without this chapter, whether it's the third synthesis of consumption in AO, the BwO, also the plateaus on becoming, even his work on Francis Bacon, or WIP. I think it's even more important than the stuff on Ideas (mainly because after logic of sense differential calculus and structuralism take a step back, diff calculus is still there but it doesn't feel as central) whereas his theory of intensity remain unchanged up until the end of his life. It's still really important to understand his image of thought. When I first read it, it really was unthinkable to me. It just hardly made sense. It forced me to think. It was like a waking up from a dogmatic slumber but Deleuze wake you up with a whiplash ! And I had to figure out what the fuck thermodynamics was about, or information theory, and cybernetics and that's how I've discovered Simondon. Thanks to him I did research on a topics I never knew could be so interesting. That's why he can seem so complex and difficult at time he want to force us to think about stuff, and not just read. He is not difficult for the sake of being obscure he is just demanding with his reader. Wich is why I can say he is one of the only philosopher fun to not understand and be lost in his text. Great vids! and thank you for this series!
Thank you very much! I completely agree on the "whiplash out of the dogmatic slumber", the way he opened philosophy up to virtually all fields of thought (without reduction) is quite unique, and probably also quite inevitable for the future of philosophy. I also agree on the trajectory of his thought, intensities remain central (and I think series as intensities may be one his most important contributions). It could be that his later texts can be approached as "meditations" on the third synthesis, Eternal Return, in several of its modalities. It appears to be clearly the case, as you say, in his collaboration with Guattari, as well as in the books on Cinema (which are so underrated imo). Thanks again for watching!
@@deleuzephilosophy agree with you on the third synthesis of the eternal return although he doesn't mention it often after logic of sense it's still there, he doesn't have to talk about the eternal return because after difference and repetition he is already in it. Now that I've thought about it it's also important for his reading of Spinoza. What's interesting to him about Spinoza isn't so much substance but the way Spinoza thought substance and finite mode correlate. And precisely they correlate in intensity, finite mode is a degree of power expressing the infinite power of the substance. Which gave him his model for thinking how partial object and the BwO would correlate, again in intensity. The egg is the intensive spatium, but it is also the BwO, and the egg is also the spinozist substance. The cinema's book are the only major Deleuze's work I haven't read (with the Proust's book) so I have to believe in you. I'll try looking up the books on cinema latter this year
Very good reflection. I like this description of Deleuze being demanding of the reader. I went down a similar path where he forced me to think very hard, almost to the point of paralysis. There was a limit where I realized this and brought thought back into the realm of action, so to speak, or reconnected it to my life. Either way, he definitely does give a good motivation to try and bring all these fields under a philosophical lens. I didn’t realize that’s what exactly what was happening but you put it very well
As a nstive English-speaker who doesn't live in the USA, I am laughing at your miles and gallons. 😅
Sucking up to the impotent?
Thank you!