/lit/ - Literature

>>18700306
But that was Whitehead's point, wasn't it?

>>18700323
>For Plato things are constituted by what they are not too. The Sophist go into this issue about what Being and Non-Being are and what is their relation.
It's been ages since I read anything by Plato, but from what I can remember there is a certain asymmetry between Being and Non-Being going through Plato, where things closer to the Forms (Truth, Justice, Beauty) have more Being than those who do not or who are simulacra, pretending to be what they are not. Deleuze follows Nietzsche in going against this model with concepts such as the truth of the illusion (or the power of the false, which is different than just the effectiveness of the simulacra or of the lie). There still is however an asymmetry of Being and Non-Being in Deleuze which has Non-Being acting more as a mode of Being rather than its opposite.

As for Identity and Difference, nobody would state that you can simply have one without the other, that's not the point. Deleuze claims that Identity was given a privileged position in the history of philosophy even if unintentionally. Thinking pure Difference is conceiving of Being as a process of perpetual differentiation that precedes and makes Identity possible to begin with, even if the two go hand in hand afterwards (with a slight asymmetry). Of course one can always reintroduce Identity as a founding principle (by saying for example that Difference is Identity as a principle, all things differentiate), much like one can always ask when the very first Eternal Recurrence took place even if the very nature of circular time does not permit such a linear question.

>>14765983
The Palo Alto group were certainly interesting. I had a professor who was teaching them and some therapist affiliated with them called Milton Erickson, but at the time I hadn't made the connection to Deleuze (I knew very little about Laing at the time).

Should I read The Man Without Qualities tonight or go out with no friends?

>>14149904
Yes. Owning a cat is required.

>>12673832
>>12673832
He's really fashionable these days. He got translated later compared to Foucault and Derrida so they had a greater influence on American academia, but these days people got bored of them after so many decades so they aren't as visible on Youtube as Deleuze is. Also Deleuze was more of a materialist while many post-structuralists were more idealistic in their concerns (with society, signifiers, power relations etc.) so it's a novelty for most working on that era.

why do people on this board get so hostile whenever french theory is mentioned?

Trying this on /lit/ because his are intellectual larpers. I am looking for something on the history of the Canary Islands under Franco, particularly something on the Movement for the Self- Determination and Independence of the Canarian Archipelago. any book recommendations would be appreciated

why is everyone on this board a bunch of brainlets whenever it comes to french theory?

What would Nietzsche think of them?

This is probably not a good time to ask this given that there are a billion Deleuze threads being spammed, but is there an equivalent of the Youtube pasta (gonna post it below so you know which one I mean) for Derrida or Foucault or Baudrillard or others? Or at least some authors that dealt with their stuff at length and in a manner that's easy to understand like DeLanda does with Deleuze in video format?

Who did it better?

>>11676615

This is probley gonna be a bit of a more specific author request. Basiclly im looking for thinkers like Peter Sloterdijk and Richard Rorty people who are similar to them. People how have drawn from people like Foucault, Deleuze, Derridá, Baudrillard but are not using pomo for some sort of biased political purpose. Any recomendations?

Did reading them get you any pussy?

Prove me you have an in-depth knowledge of these philosophers' thought

Was it autism?