Welcome to ø; this is the navigation

{

...and this is an archive. Enjoy.

Tagged ‘image of thought’

Brassier and the Idealization of Immanence

I recently read Ray Brassier’s doctoral work Alien Theory. Although unnecessarily obscure and dense at crucial points, Brassier offers several very interesting points, especially on the connection between Deleuze and Laruelle. One idea I am particularly interested in is the supposed ‘ideality’ of the plane of immanence in Deleuze, previously discussed here and here. Contrasting it to the phenomenological positing of the transcendental field, Brassier writes:

What is idealizing about the Deleuzoguattarian reduction is that the plane is instituted not according to the form of absolute consciousness as ‘self-giving’, but rather through the philosophical Concept as ‘self-positing’ or as a relative-absolute which pre-supposes the plane in and through its own self-supposing or self-positing…. The plane has to be philosophically constructed; yet it is also that which constructs itself through philosophy…. (2001, p.63)

Brassier’s Hegelian formulation is far from being accidental. What is it stake is precisely the “hyletic continuum” that lies at the center of Deleuze’s project. Continue reading

Thinking Thought, Plane and Simple…

In his comment to Idealism and the Plane of Immanence, Pete writes:

…although it is certainly not the case that Deleuze is a subtractive thinker, we should be careful of following the Badiouian line of thought, whereby, if there is a totality it must therefore be a presented or presentable situation in its own right. It is possible not to read the structure of Being as the structure of presentation or givenness to thought (which both Badiou and Heidegger do, even if Badiou’s conception of thought is far more austere, i.e., purely quantificational), and despite Deleuze’s discussions of givenness (his transcendental empiricism) I would suggest we read him this way, insofar as there is no pre-defined term which plays the role of thought in his work (unlike Dasein in its multiple guises in Heidegger, and the quantificational structure of the count as one in Badiou).

The problem I have with this is very simple. If we take this line of argumentation, we are completely ignoring one of the perennial aspects of Deleuze’s thinking – his constructivism. Continue reading


Copyright 2009 Ø

Subscribe to us:

Proud fans of:
Wordpress We support Firefox