[ 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: 18 KB, 313x286, C21D8DFC-BD94-470C-ABA8-0ECFB954D981.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
20633600 No.20633600 [Reply] [Original]

Was Deleuze right about Hegel?

>> No.20633602

>>20633600
You have not read Deleuze so I am not going to answer your question.

>> No.20633609
File: 68 KB, 1022x731, C3F26CCC-2ED1-4EB8-B21E-7CD6DC7CF88D.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
20633609

>>20633602

>> No.20633625

>>20633609
Maybe if you actually spent time reading you would not be so tiresome.

>> No.20633779
File: 105 KB, 598x785, 1651102106491.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
20633779

>>20633600

>> No.20633814

>>20633600
No. Hegel literally destroyed everyone with his schizophrenia. He won.

>> No.20634014

Why don’t you read Deleuze to find out?

>> No.20635072
File: 679 KB, 1680x1050, CC37FF12-C599-41A4-83D1-96AFA9E1335C.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
20635072

>>20634014

>> No.20635365

>>20633600
Schopenhauer was

>> No.20635423

>>20633600
Only in so far as Deleuze is a Kantian

>> No.20635436

>>20635423
Insofar as*

>> No.20636107

>>20633609
how about you fucking read him

>> No.20637893

whenever a french philosopher talks about "hegel" replace it with "kojeve"
i've read that deleuze was primarily talking about kojeve's hegel instead of hegel hegel

>> No.20637903

looking through the thread again you also seem absolutely insufferable OP

>> No.20637914

>>20633600
No. Pretty much everyone in the world before Zizek, whether analytic or continental, had a fundamental misunderstanding of Hegel.

>> No.20637941

>>20633600
the main critique of Hegel's dialectic i know is from his very early work 'Nietzsche and philosophy', where he considers the negation of the dialectic passive and resentful as opposed to the active affirmation of the will to power. This reading is absolutely wrong on a technical level. It is mostly insubstantial bickering about misunderstood concepts mostly based on a very peculiar reading of Hegel by Kojeve. Its terrible scholarship although im willing to forgive Deleuze for it since its an early work and his reading of Nietzsche is otherwise pretty good. I dont know if Deleuze mounts a more substantial critique in any of his other works.

>> No.20638080

>>20637941
Their idea is that Difference and Repetition, and also C&S kinda, are “fundamentally oppositional to Hegel”