To: <deleuze-guattari-AT-lists.driftline.org> Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 10:05:34 +0200 Subject: Re: [D-G] deleuze and benjamin on violence Hello, Law is made to exclude violence, that doesn't change from the days of Spinoza. So a discussion on violence used against the state has to take this in account. This is what I missed. It is not good to play around with the idea of pure violence. I don't know which book of Spinoza you read, but reason is not bound to logos in Spinoza but to "adequate ideas". The theme of ideas was the great achievement of the 17th century philosophy and ended up in turning philosophy almost completely in a theory of scientific knowledge. Now in the 17th century Descartes, Spinoza, Locke, Hume and a few other brought up the philosophical foundation of our modern society. This included metaphysical, psychological, political and economical concepts. So if you want to know something more substantial of the foundations of our society and man in general, sooner or later you will come to this time and this philosophers. In most modern philosophical discourses like Wittgenstein or Heidegger or even Kant and Hegel these discussion are supposed to be well known. This is, of course, nowadays not the case. Therefore philosophy got a little bit academic and hard to understand. This can be helped by the reading of the originals, where Spinoza indeed is very hard to grasp. This is especially because his architecture of attributes of thinking and expansion is not like attributes or adjectives in language. This is also pointed out in Deleuze book on Spinoza. So it a kind of thinking surpassing ordinary language by the resources of logic, mathematics and classical philosophy including scholastic and religion. Now if you like to think about the real problems of people or anything else, this is a good source. greetings Harald Wenk -----Original Message----- From: deleuze-guattari-bounces-AT-lists.driftline.org [mailto:deleuze-guattari-bounces-AT-lists.driftline.org]On Behalf Of NZ Sent: Dienstag, 28. Marz 2006 18:07 To: deleuze-guattari-AT-lists.driftline.org Subject: Re: [D-G] deleuze and benjamin on violence so indeed we are talking of 2 different discussions... I am trying to stay within the drift of wbenj's essay, which, in my opinion, does not attempt to explain this type of passionate inter-personal violence (re: "natural law") that you are discussing (do you think "natural law" is more interesting to talk about then "positive law"?), and instead he spends most of the essay developing how violence is inherent to law/logos (I am at least trying to extend his drift into logos specifically), as he moves forward so as to talk about mythic-law-creation. In terms of Spinoza's ethics-of-passions, the violence that I see, comes from the mere act of defining the internal space of man in the manner inwhich Spinoza has done. This kind of law-making violence (so-called ethics) which spinoza uses to attack the nebulous nature of human identity, really culminates in freudian psychology, their aim to pin the subject down, code it, and control(destroy) it, as a modern project of capitalism (re: anti-oedius). The "self-defence," that you speak up is a secondary step (in terms of the freudian-type theories of emotional energy constants internally) - wherein the subject can only resort to violence... against violence. [Please dont think that I am eagar to start punching and shooting people for fun, that is not what I would like to spend my time defending myself against as there is much to get into here, as you acknowledge....] So, It is an acknowledged second step, which is why it is protected by "positive law" (re: benj.'s "c.p.violence") Wbenj. has some interesting (too brief) passages that describe these complicated steps and how they work together and how they are also at odds... like the part where he talks about "techniques" of arbitration and confrence. Seems to me that "technique" is very important in regards to violence control. One of the key aspects of Spinoza, in my opinion, is the application of coded action, prescripted action. It becomes like witchcraft where the blessed reader/user can de-fer a "true" conscious-intelligence, and instead default to a one-dimensional code. For Spinoza, the truth understanding principle is limited to logos-centered code... it is no long language dialog, as Spinoza cannot come to agreement with the world around him and must spend is time violently defending himself... and since his work was made illegeal by various religious instituions of the time, this violence now gets directed at the reader of modernity and thereby "incorporated" into the cannon of soveriegnty. _______________________________________________ List address: deleuze-guattari-AT-driftline.org Info: http://lists.driftline.org/listinfo.cgi/deleuze-guattari-driftline.org Archives: www.driftline.org _______________________________________________ List address: deleuze-guattari-AT-driftline.org Info: http://lists.driftline.org/listinfo.cgi/deleuze-guattari-driftline.org Archives: www.driftline.org
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005