Deleuze/Whitehead update

5 thoughts on “Deleuze/Whitehead update”

1. Pingback: Steven on Whitehead and Deleuze « Larval Subjects .

2. I wish you were dealing with Berkeley rather than Whitehead.

   Berkeley is a lot more entertaining.

3. I enjoyed your account of Whitehead’s notion of ‘events’ in relation to things. But when you suddenly pulled ‘eternal objects’ out of your hat I started scratching my head. Are there other kinds of objects besides eternal ones? If there are, mightn’t they sort of pre-suppose a subject? Are the more transitory sorts of objects more likely to resemble things or events? Why do I get the feeling that Deleuze may be working in a portion of the post-Kantian tradition that was rationed, embargoed and eventually quarantined around the time that Whitehead was responding to it?

4. Hi,

   I found this quite interesting. I enjoyed Kant’s attempts to understand reality and try to make philosophy a tool.

   “in the Proustian formulation so frequently used by Deleuze, the virtual is
   “real without being actual, ideal without being abstract”

   This reminds me of the Sanskrit notion of “Maya”: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maya_(illusion)

   “the use of philosophy,” which is “to maintain an active novelty of
   fundamental ideas illuminating the social system”

   And…when I have explored many philosophers from Europe and “modern” or “contemporary” times, i am surprised how little the empirical studies have bene blinded to the ancient and common practices of those of us who are not Europhiles. Buddhisms meditation techniques are conducive to reaching states where one analyses motives and desire to understand what illuminates various social systems. There isn’t “the social system” there are thousands especially once you look outside the totalitarian agriculture economy.

   I loved reading this and it was inspiring…I would love to see how philosophers come to a technique a practical way of thinking…comparing experiences, observations etc. Of course, it is ultimately a little liek Buddhism and exeriencial…fun article so far! Good luck in future writings…

   Candy

5. Hi Steven,
   thanks for this paper. I never read any whitehead before and really enjoyed your draft chapter.
   The term prehension was what stood out the most for me in this chapter. When reading this section I was reminded about the machine connections D&G speak about in Anti-Oedipus, which also helps to consider how encounters connect that are independent of the human mind. D&G’s concepts of the residual subject may also be helpful, where the encounter/connection of machines create a residual subject that consumes and consummates the machines, and is born anew through each machine it consumes. Of course, this residual subject does not need to be a human subject.
   However, from my reading of our chapter, i felt it more as a type of introduction to whitehad, rather than discussing the encounter between Deleuze and Whitehead, maybe a bit more discussion of Deleuze?

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.