Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2001 20:09:56 +0200
From: "W.F. Wong" <wfwongde-AT-yahoo.de>
Subject: Re: Nietzsche


Hello Ruth,

you wrote: "the dice throw both breaks the good will of the subject predicated
on identity and introduces a selective ontology that selects against the
negative".


Did Deleuze use this term "selective ontology" in his book "Difference and
Repititon"? So much I remember that Deleuze's explaination shows a "serial"
phenomenon in which every element in the world links to another like chains in
serial form, since every single is "particular" and can't be reduced in general
form. Actually I just read part of the book, so I'm interested what is the
relation between this "selective ontology" with the "serial phenomenon".

Wong

Ruth Chandler schrieb:

> Hi Wong,
>
> It is not exactly humanistic but you are quite right that it is the human
> that affirms chance and necessity in a single throw.. Deleuze is committed
> to changing the nature of the 'place' and suggests, elsewhere that is only
> now the death of god has happened that it is possible to properly sate the
> problems of religion etc. the dice throw both breaks the good will of the
> subject predicated on identity and introduces a selective ontology that
> selects against the negative. Only return repeats itself, not necessarily
> the throw or thrower but it is the thrower that, at the extremity of excess,
> raises the difference 'between all' to the power of a positive affirmation
> which splits into two.
>
> I have not read that much Foucault but Deleuze does write a very good book
> on him. It is especially good in the way that it theorises F's
> Nietzscheanism in relation to Heidegger. This might  give you some useful
> background for the Derrida/Foucault debate.
>
> Ruth.C
>
> >>> "W.F. Wong" <wfwongde-AT-yahoo.de> 03/28 10:08 am >>>
> Hello,
>
> I agree that the interpretation of Deleuze on Nietzsche's "eternal return"
> is
> very interesting. I still remember in Deleuze's book "Nietzsche and
> philosophy",
> he describes the "eternal return" as throwing die: not the event (or
> historical
> event) returns but the "action of die-throwing returns", and this action can
> only take place with or under human being, without human being this action
> won't
> happen. It relates to the act of human and also the possibility which exists
> in
> the action of throwing die. It is not law of nature but, for me, it shows a
> kind
> of "humanistic perspective" which binds with existence of human (if I'm
> allowed
> to say that). Then, there is question: how is the responsibility of human
> beings
> situated? or...more...
>
> About Foucault's poststructuralism and Derrida's deconstructionism (better I
> take off the terms) - I'm interested in the argument between Foucault and
> Derrida, e.g. in the problem of "subject". But it is a big topic, and my
> reading
> of it is too limited. Maybe someone here can show me more or leading us to
> an
> interesting discussion.
>
> Wong
>
> _________________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Get your free -AT-yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
>
>  --- from list nietzsche-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>         --- from list nietzsche-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---



_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free -AT-yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com



	--- from list nietzsche-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---