/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.14287890]

Halp. Is Deleuzean difference always absolute? I read Bergsonism and I was a bit confused about that. It differentiates between difference of nature and difference of degree, and then says that these two collapse into the same thing, but then it claims that each novelty is radically novel. Can someone help me wrap my head around this? The notion of difference being noumenal also probably comes into play.

[Anonymous No.14287921]

ngl I don't actually know this aspect of deleuze's thought at all but perhaps reading kierkegaard's repetition might help, your post reminded me of it + I think deleuze's own concept of difference was informed by it, especially the radically novel part I'm guessing

[Anonymous No.14288115]

>>14287921
My gut feeling says it might be tangentally relevant, but not ace 100% answer. I love Fear & Trembling and Either/Or, so I'll check it out for sure. Thanks for the rec.

[Anonymous No.14288751]

>The absolute, said Bergson, has two sides (aspects): spirit imbued with metaphysics and matter known by science. 57 But the point is that science is not a relative knowledge, a symbolic discipline that commends itself only by its successes or its effectiveness; science is part of ontology, it is one of ontology's two halves, The Absolute is difference, but difference has two facets, differences in degree and differences in kind. It can, therefore, be seen that when we grasp simple differences in degree between things, when science itself invites us to see the world in this way, we are again in an absolute

[Anonymous No.14288795]

>>14287890
Check out Based Deleuze, anon

[Anonymous No.14288809]

>>14288795
I've skimmed it. It was shit. I approve of the buggery but the author is cringe as fuuuuuuuuuuck.

[Anonymous No.14289563]

bumping for great justice and moderate fortune