/lit/ - Literature

Hello I would like to read postmodern philosophy because it sounds interesting to me. Where should I start?

I don't see how anyone could say that being is superior to becoming or deny the notion of a fact.

For becoming to even exist, it needs to have an identity that unites it and gives it its distinction as "becoming." If it did not have this identity, then there would be no predicate which would unite all that which we call "becoming." Since becoming is reliant on identity to form itself and create coherance, is not identity prior to it and thus, it's origin? Without some sort of identity, it is completely undifferentiated and might as well be non-existent. It is even before Chaos, since Chaos itself would be an identity.

I still have yet to see how anyone can justify a statement like "there are no facts, only interpretations" when that statement posits itself as a fact. Is it not self refuting?

I am not trying to turn this into some "tradition vs progress" political debate. Simply from a pure metaphysical viewpoint, I am confused as to how such a concept is arrived at.

I'm halfway through Anti-Oedipus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia and I extremely confused. This has been harder for me to grasp than Hegel.
Anyone have any tips or luck with this? Am I just a brainlet?

How exactly does a machine differ from a flow in the philosophy of Deleuze? Correct me if I'm wrong, but they are both processes that connect with each other and form larger meta structures like rhizomes. Why are they differentiated with different terms?

Imagine what he couldve done with blockchain metaphors at his disposal

what the FUCK are lines of flight

>mom found the rhizomes

>>13570555
Maybe schizo is good?

Why did Deleuze an hero?

What is the first and foremost literature I should read of Deleuze?How does he decide how subjectivity is formed?

https://books.google.com/books?id=B-HCgapfvP4C&pg=PA3#v=onepage&q&f=false

how do you think he took it?

who are the other members of the new meme trilogy

can we have a thread about deleuze?

>The self is a relation which relates itself to its own self, or it is that in the relation that the relation relates itself to its own self; the self is not the relation but that the relation relates itself to its own self.

What the fuck is this even supposed to mean?

What should I read to get what this fella's saying.

stemfags need not apply

>>10385416
Deleuze

I'm in contact with a steppe warlord and his army of wolfhead-wearing warriors. They see this man as their God. They want revenge on Capital.

Deleuze = Guattari. That's why nobody has ever seen both of them in the same room. It's part of that goofy difference > identity thing he had going on.

Where do I start with Deleuze?
Some anon yesterday said he's somewhat stoic so that's his field of work I'm interested in.

i underline in a lot of books and want to save the quotes outside of the book. anyone have a good method for doing this?

pic related

>forehead
>bergson

who are some other people that deserve a memeing?

which authors have taken psychedelics? not looking for people who made it their whole identity or even wrote about it—thinking more like shakespeare with pot.

is this remotely accurate:

http://highexistence.com/hidden-psychedelic-influence-philosophy-plato-nietzsche-psychonauts-thoughts/

What are the prerequisites to reading Deleuze? I've picked up Difference and Repetition and his stuff with Guattari a bunch of times but put it down because it was incomprehensible. I know there are people far better read than I am (Chomsky) who dismiss it as total horseshit, but I really want to understand his stuff if at all possible.