Are there any good critiques of differential ontology?

[Anonymous No.14614701]

The ghost of Deleuze keeps coming into my room at night and demanding I deterritorialize my self-identity as such. How do I refute him so he'll leave me alone?

[Anonymous No.14614727]

>>14614701
>How do I refute
Follow the Straight Path, brother. Revert to Islam.

[Anonymous No.14614732]

>>14614727
How come we don't talk about Gueeug and Nonnon on here? They were at least half as based as Guenon himself

[Anonymous No.14614740]

>>14614701
By going back to calculus 101 and realizing that differentiation and integration are inverse operations of the same process:
https://www.religion-online.org/article/influence-as-confluence-bergson-and-whitehead/
>for Bergson, calculus is more than just a handy metaphor or analogy, but rather, he indeed aimed at framing an approach to the organicist world hypothesis that employs the calculus as its actual method of discovery (i.e., differentiation) and explanation (i.e., integration), and that every discovery is the inverse of an explanation and every explanation the derivative of a discovery. And I take it as established that Hausman has shown a means whereby we can understand Bergson’s approach as both metaphorical and rational
These also correspond to two reference-frames of relational change: instantaneous change in an ever-present, and cumulative change through time.
To integrate one's self-identity requires finding something to integrate it with, to become demonically possessed by some proposition one finds unavoidable that becomes one's identity. The task is simultaneously to resist such possession while pursuing it, which inevitably leads one to compulsive adventures with ideas.

[Anonymous No.14614772]

>>14614740
>Bergson
Retroactively refuted (and even humiliated) in almost every work of the Upanishadic Master René Guénon (pbuh).

[Anonymous No.14614778]

>>14614727
>>14614772
Based!

[Anonymous No.14614784]

>>14614740
>to become demonically possessed
>compulsive adventures with ideas
All I shall say is "pseud. cringe.".

[Anonymous No.14614787]

>>14614740
This sounds profoundly Jungian desu. As a sidenote I don't see much about Jung on here, which is surprising considering he has both the mysticism to appeal to the posturing faggots and a massive corpus that tackles both philosophical and psychological issues.

He talks about integration (individuation in his own terms) and a "circumambulation" of the self, which is a sort of becoming-yourself that takes place through time and consists of continually dissolving and reintegrating constituent parts (that have their own identity) of yourself. There's a parallel to draw somewhere in his work on individuation to what you said but I'm not verbal enough to properly explain it.

[Anonymous No.14614790]

>>14614787
>Jung
>mysticism
was all btfo'd by Guenon (pbuh).

[Anonymous No.14614799]

>>14614790
You forgot:
>physchology
>becoming

[Anonymous No.14614805]

>>14614790
>>14614799
Witness how the cancerous cell divides

[Anonymous No.14614837]

>>14614805
>cell
>duality
Refuted by Shaykh Guenon (pbuh).

[Anonymous No.14614856]

>>14614837
>>14614799
Based fellow guénonians.

[Anonymous No.14614974]

Where do I start with guenon?

[Anonymous No.14614982]

>>14614974
Just follow this list, friend.

[Anonymous No.14614997]

>>14614982
Based. Thank you for guiding me, friend.

[Anonymous No.14615074]

>>14614997
No problem, bro. Fixed your image.

[Anonymous No.14615411]

>>14614727
based.

[Anonymous No.14615655]

Bump.

[Anonymous No.14615713]

>>14614701
https://discord.gg/uqt6A77

[Anonymous No.14615726]

>>14614727
Inshallah

[Anonymous No.14615729]

poo philosophy posters have ruined this board

[Anonymous No.14615730]

>>14614856
>man titties

[Anonymous No.14616277]

>>14614701
Bump. Also interested in this.

[Anonymous No.14616326]

Guys, how do I start with Deleuze?

[Anonymous No.14616386]

>>14616326
read Twilight of the Idols, have a basic grasp of Spinoza's substance (ethics), have a basic grasp of psychoanalysis... then start working on A Thousand Plateaus

[Anonymous No.14616530]

is Dugin redpilled on Deleuze we he calls him satanic and the true philosopher of post-liberalism, when we move from the individual to the dividual?

[Anonymous No.14616533]

>>14616326
Get your Nietzsche, Marx, and Freud down, along with some of their contemporaries and predecessors. Read Deleuze's works on other philosophers to get a sense of how he's using their terminology.

[Anonymous No.14616536]

>>14616326
grow some mint in a pot

[Anonymous No.14616537]

>>14616386
>psychoanalysis
>>14614837

[Anonymous No.14616542]

>>14616326
read Based Deleuze

[Anonymous No.14616628]

>>14616326

Watch L'abecedaire, read Desert Islands (a collection of Deleuze's short texts from the 1953-1974 period), read Dialogues with Claire Parnet and then Nietzsche and Philoophy and Spinoza: Practical Philosophy.

The Dosse biography of D&G is also good but with those books (and video) I mentioned you can get an intro of Deleuze by Deleuze. Then go wild: Capitalism & Schizophrenia, Difference and Repetition, secondary sources, your own close readings, whatever.

(And of course it helps having read Nietzsche, Marx, Spinoza, Bergson, Kant, Reich, Laing, Freud, Bergson, having a familiarity with the French intellectual scene in the 60's, etcetera)

[Anonymous No.14616676]

>>14616386

I'd actually suggest 'Human, All Too Human', Genealogy and 'The Will to Power' are fundamental Nietzsche works for Deleuze, more so than TotI

[Anonymous No.14616843]

>>14616326
Logic of Sense

[Anonymous No.14616907]

>>14614701
Badiou and Zizek critique it but best bet is to swear off french and germans and read ancients only

[Anonymous No.14617129]

>>14616907
i think Zizek is just butthurt about them offending his daddy Lacan, he gave some talk where was swallowing most of Deleuze delicious concepts whole but then nitpicking at some small issues he had