File spoon-archives/deleuze-guattari.archive/deleuze-guattari_1998/deleuze-guattari.9810, message 105


Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 16:03:54 +0800
From: Paul Bains <P.Bains-AT-murdoch.edu.au>
Subject: Re: Scotus and Univocity


Well i'm sure you're on to something, look forward to seeing the poietic
product!

One thing. The expression 'ontological relation' is Deely's way of
translation the cumbersome latin expression 'relatio secundum esse'
(relation according to the way it has being). This is in contrast to that
which is relative (the pre-kantian 'transcendental relation').

Thus, within human experience every being is relative, i.e involved with and
dep. upon things other than itself. An indiv. is not itself a relation, but
cannot be understood unless the relations it is involved in are understood.
The relations a being are involved in are the ontological (external) relations. 
Signs in what they are as signs, are ontological relations. And a relative
being will give rise to an indefinite number of sign relations. A univocal
logic of sense. An onto-ethology to use Alliez's expression. Or an eco-logic
of relations/affects. Voila.

"So an animal, a thing, is never separable from its relations with the
world." (Deleuze, Practical Phil, 125. Following uexkull [and others]).

'In short, if we are Spinozists we will define a thing' by its
relations/affects. A limitless plane of immanence. Or something like that.

I don't believe L'actuel et Le virtual has been published anywhere else. It
is four dense pages.

"Philosophy is the theory of multiplicities.Every multiplicity involves
actual and virtual elements. There is no purely actual object.................."

Nothing that changes what has gone before. D. refers in partic. to Pierre
Levy's *Qu'est-ce que le virtuel?* (in trans. minnesota?).

pb.



   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005