Is there any merit to Deleuze?
Is there any merit to Deleuze?
Jaxson Thomas
Camden Fisher
He wrote the best secondary works on both Nietzsche and Kant I know of.
Jaxson Parker
A lot. He has more mindblowing concepts than any other contemporary philosopher despite constantly returning to the same themes. He's still a weirdo though.
Jose Stewart
Gavin Scott
Be sure to check out "Two Regimes of Madness", which is basically volume 2 for Desert Islands. If you like compilations there's also "Negotiations" and "Essays Critical and Clinical". "Dialogues" also kinda fits and is pretty accessible.
Wyatt Cox
Not really. D&G, once you get down to it, have no other solutions to say "Be a Yuppie artist." They seduce gullible philosophy students with their fancy terminology but it all amounts to nothing.
Be skeptical of anyone who participated in the 68 protests.
“If true desire is unconscious and still crushed by repressive codings, even in capitalism, how do the two authors know it exists? It is especially the delirious forms of schizophrenia that inform them, since these forms explode suppression in order to free true desire. In this delirium, all effective attitudes, all structural positions, all conceivable and inconceivable identifications appear juxtaposed, without exclusion or totalization of any kind, in perfect openness and readiness to accept constantly new forms....The authors certainly do not intend to exclude the Oedipus complex, at least at a certain moment in the critique, but they want to include it and absorb it on the samegrounds as everything and anything, dispelling its full import through an excessive inclusion, so to speak."
Angel Nelson
"Freud is everywhere in a legitimate and official capacity in those aspects of his work that are explicitly called upon because they can be used against the Oedipus complex or have been judged at least detachable from it. Deleuze and Guattari summon a good Freud, who in their eyes is better than the evil Freud of the Oedipus complex. They want to divide the great man against himself. But the expulsion of Freud by Freud never takes place. The work remains impregnated with Freud, especially where he is violently repudiated. The Freud chased out the front door slips in the window, so much so that at the end of this Freudian psychomachy he is entirely or almost entirely reinstated, a Freud in particles, perhaps even molecular, a Freud that is mixed and emulsified, but nonetheless Freud."
Brayden Sanders
>The Freud chased out the front door slips in the window
lol
Aiden Brown
>It is especially the delirious forms of schizophrenia that inform them, since these forms explode suppression in order to free true desire. In this delirium, all effective attitudes, all structural positions, all conceivable and inconceivable identifications appear juxtaposed, without exclusion or totalization of any kind, in perfect openness and readiness to accept constantly new forms....
So, they did LSD in the '60, named it "schizophrenia" and sold it as the next big philosophical thing?
Gavin White
Foucault did LSD in the desert and described it as marking a shift in his philosophy.