[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 51 KB, 900x506, F5B1AD2B-C5E1-440A-A7AA-DEDBF5157DF3.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18686987 No.18686987 [Reply] [Original]

what is the difference between deleuze’s virtual and the immanence of the whole in the immediate?

>> No.18687014

>>18686987
stop using words, and have sex

>> No.18687097
File: 64 KB, 500x378, F8D125F9-1DDF-4E00-B803-43632396ED21.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18687097

>>18686987
There’s 0 transcendence in Deleuze, it’s pure immanence, “an immanence immanent to itself.”

>> No.18687286

>>18687097
where is the transcendence in hegel? the absolute idea without finite objects is otherwise just abstract (thus not the True). is it because the immanent whole in Hegel’s case seems linear in its progression, whilst the virtual contains in it multiple determinations?

>> No.18687533

Hegel is such a phenomenal fraud detector

>> No.18687974

>>18686987
Ultimately: nothing. Reminder that if you manage to prove Hegel wrong, according to his dialectics you’re actually just proving him right. Hegel is literally the “everything-proof” shield of philosophy

>> No.18688711
File: 66 KB, 600x738, ABCAB9C5-1836-46A6-AE31-7E99AEDD28A7.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18688711

this word has gotten worse while i was gone

>> No.18688725

>>18688711
>word
board*

>> No.18690122

>>18687286
Bro come on

>> No.18690161

>>18686987
I know he spends some time on the virtual in D&R but I'd need to revisit it

>> No.18690411

>>18686987
Is the virtual abstract and the immanence concrete?

>> No.18691600

>>18686987
Go back to your cage, tranny: >>18691553

>> No.18692004

>>18686987
There is no difference. Trannistotle ruined Platonism

>> No.18693520
File: 39 KB, 750x420, 1533571729083.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18693520

>>18686987
I'm not that familiar with Hegel, but are you asking if the virtual is holistic? Because from what I understand it isn't, depending on your understanding of it, for several reasons. It's open so it can never be all encompassing, it's pluralistic so it never forms a totality and it's "ideal without being abstract" so each virtual relation is separate in some sense, it's universal singular even if we can classify it under a concept retroactively (every sea is a different sea, but they are all seas).

>> No.18693527

>>18686987
You might be interested in Zizek's book on Deleuze. "Organs without Bodies", I think it was. Goes into detail on precisely this.

>> No.18693535
File: 80 KB, 446x458, 1510434893954.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18693535

>>18693527
I like Zizek a lot, but he is pretty clueless when it comes to Deleuze. There are much better critics of his, such as Badiou and his cohort. Still worth a read though.

>> No.18693554

>>18693535
Yeah, I'd be inclined to agree. I think Zizek is far too obsessed with cramming the whole world into a Hegelian schema personally. In doing so he misses far too much of the nuance. But it is a book on the question OP asked. I wanna let him make up his own mind about it.