>How much are you reading per week? One section per week. This averages out to about 100 pages >What if I can't keep up? Don't worry - we're going to look at the work holistically and discussion will extend beyond the four week reading >What if I don't understand anything? Again, don't worry. We're going to do our best to work through it together and explain difficult concepts to one-another. Reading in a group is the best way to understand AO >Why are you in a discord? Why can't we just post here? Because the discussion is quicker. Because we can identify people who know more about Spinoza, Freud, Lacan, and the G&D's previous work. Because it allows us to have an easy repository of secondary sources to help us better understand the book. Because I said so.
I will continue to post these threads for those who do not wish to join the discord but who would still like to join in with the discussion anyway
You don't want to read the most iconic book by the most iconic duo?
Kayden James
>But having his own amazing sex life wasn’t enough for Felix. Felix, who was always creating political groups and committees, created a group of “erotic kamikazes” whose goal was to “root out couples representing ‘horrible conjugality.'” Guattari’s boss at La Borde recounts:
>When any couple got together, they sent in a kamikaze within a week to break them up because love was capitalistic.
based
Hunter Robinson
nobody understands this bullshittery. Its all the worst parts of "continental philosophy" distilled into a single, meaningless gesture.
Aaron Flores
is it true that D&G were rightwingers and hated actual schizos? what will i get from reading this book otherwise? sounds interesting to follow the threads but i won't join the Discord thing probably
Camden Watson
Except it fucking isn't and it's some of the most prophetic and lucid pieces of philosophy that came out in the XXth c. Just don't expect to understand it if you haven't read any philosophy at all.
Henry Garcia
>is it true that D&G were rightwingers How the fuck does that matter? Do you need a label on everything to fit into your confirmation bias or what?
Elijah Barnes
I have an MA in philosophy, kiddo. That's why I know its chralattan, pseudo-intellectual fuckery of the lowest order. It was an in-joke when it was released.....now you guys are taking the meme seriously. "lol"
Jaxson Cook
I want to buy that Penguin Classic version of that book so much.
Mason Nelson
>Do you need a label on everything to fit into your confirmation bias or what? i am not trying to confirm anything beyond what i explicitly asked
William Ross
I know man, books are hard.
Leo Parker
Guattari literally helped two far-left philosophers from Italy to flee the country
> is it true that D&G were rightwingers and hated actual schizos?
Did I miss opposite day or something?
Josiah Rodriguez
Most of you are too stupid to discuss D&G
Sebastian Williams
Start with "Nietzsche and Philosophy" by Deleuze.
Jack Butler
How about you stop giving pleb advice and stop telling people to “start” with a certain text. Just read Deleuze, that’s all you need to do.
Josiah Anderson
Deleuze is pretty difficult though. I've even read posts on here telling people to start with Difference & Repetition or The Logic of Sense which is retarded since they were Deleuze's most difficult works, he even admitted that they were hardgoing and too concept heavy.
Connor Bennett
more like deloser and gaytari
Julian Diaz
His stuff on Nietzsche develops some of the concepts talked about in AO in a less bat-shit crazy way. It's a stepping stone. Nothing plebian about sensible development - a literary cursus honorum - THE patrician process.
Robert Richardson
Nah, bruh, you’re a pleb qua pleb
Justin Russell
What's this book about?
Jayden Roberts
hating your father
Grayson Long
>30 posts >absolutely no discussion about the book
Is it true this book is meaningless?
Camden Anderson
Check the discord if you want discussion
Kayden Morales
Who said he was hard to understand?
Nicholas Richardson
Any more redpills to drop, sir?
Carter Gutierrez
not sure, how much have they already read from the book? OP doesn't say
Ryan Ramirez
From the introduction: >Last but not least, the major enemy, the strategic adversary is fascism (whereas Anti-Oedipus' opposition to the others is more of a tactical engagement). And not only historical fascism, the fascism of Hitler and Mussolini-which was able to mobilize and use the desire of the masses so effectively-but also the fascism in us all, in our heads and in our everyday behavior, the fascism that causes us to love power, to desire the very thing that dominates and exploits us.
Nice try commie, but I'm redpilled
Jace Jones
You have to use these boards to entice rather then defend, otherwise you're not selling me on this yet.
What reason does a person need to read this? What influence did it have and what books and what authors specifically deal with the subjects after it?
What purpose does this have except to fixate you on your intellectual superiority to all others?
Nicholas Sanchez
You could google all that stuff I would say most people are still on the introduction or the first pages of the first part of the book. The first part is only like 50 pages or so. You could easily catch up if you want.
Jack Sullivan
>Redpill >Can't maintain frame while reading books
Nice in tact boundaries you have there Redpill man. Pretty sure this qualifies you for a purple heart.
Justin Torres
lmao
Join if you're interested in reading the book - don't if you're not. It's not my job to convince you. I'm just posting here because a lot of people want to read this and I think its beneficial to do this as a group. I am not trying to demonstrate any "intellectual superiority". On the contrary, I believe that I will not understand this book well enough should I read it alone. I believe I will get more out of it by discussing it with others, whose limited knowledge combined might make ample sense of the work. Lots of others feel the same way. If you don't, that's fine. Leave the thread.
Brayden Nguyen
If I were to read it alone I would have already done so, but reading as a part of a group discussion requires me to know the groups thoughts. I can understand why it's not important for any of you to question the initiation though, aesthetics being as they are and such.
Austin Evans
Will this book turn me gay?
Bentley Martinez
I like this pitch. But I'm looking for something that really sells me on it, like pretend I'm a Dad with four kids and you're trying to describe the safety features of a minivan.
Also, do you have any pictures of what this discussion might look like? Will I retain the memory for ages, such as sun and beach and bare breasted woman in warm frothy ocean waves?
Brandon Lewis
No. You'll have ass and mind warped by gay French degenerates.
Juan Powell
The introduction says it is to psychoanalysis as Neitszche's The Antichrist was to Christianity. Whatever that means, Idk.
Oliver Bell
When are you starting OP?
Oliver Ramirez
its proportionality they use it alot. like 1/x=100/30 if you can solve that you can get the analogy. what is maintained is proportionality.
Jeremiah Baker
can i get something worth from it if i don't believe in psychoanalysis on the first place? i may read it at some point just to learn on what kind of drugs Nick Land runs
Luis Baker
How do you know you don't believe it until you've read it
Chase Thomas
i've read about psychoanalysis, this user more or less said it's a critique of psychoanalysis which i already don't take seriously
Thomas Sullivan
>Christianity >ANTI-Christ >Oedipus complex, one of the key formulations of psychoanalysis >ANTI-Oedipus hmm, what could this mean...
Caleb Sanchez
I want to read this but I'm a brainlet, should e gather more experience or just join the group anyways? Currently looking for a Mobi version of this
Jaxson Perry
This is going to have less than three people by week 4.
Jackson Gutierrez
Both Read the introduction of the pdf
Julian Martinez
oh, it's another >faggot who discovered Nick Land, and now thinks he's hot shit over his Anti-Oedipus