Gilles Deleuze For You
@DeleuzeForYou
Followers
8,217
Following
8,298
Media
0
Statuses
4,996
The writings of Gilles Deleuze (1925-1995), French philosopher, pure metaphysician.
Joined May 2023
Don't wanna be here?
Send us removal request.
Explore trending content on Musk Viewer
México
• 1598655 Tweets
México
• 1598655 Tweets
Morena
• 846177 Tweets
Xóchitl
• 489474 Tweets
PREP
• 299600 Tweets
増山さん
• 88910 Tweets
増山江威子さん
• 84344 Tweets
峰不二子
• 70253 Tweets
ルパン三世
• 69761 Tweets
#FraudeElectoral
• 34433 Tweets
Kaveh
• 29180 Tweets
土砂降り
• 23840 Tweets
肺炎のため死去
• 22614 Tweets
ゲリラ豪雨
• 21741 Tweets
SmangatPRABOWO UntukNKRI
• 21498 Tweets
KitaKOMPAK KitaKOKOH
• 20648 Tweets
カーヴェ
• 15639 Tweets
Happy New Week
• 15291 Tweets
キューティーハニー
• 13898 Tweets
不二子ちゃん
• 13035 Tweets
#圧倒的ザクザク感
• 12980 Tweets
#MondayMotivation
• 12894 Tweets
ベンチマーク
• 12582 Tweets
#وزاره_التربيه
• 10074 Tweets
Spinoza means something very simple, that sadness makes no one intelligent.
3
246
2K
Find what you like. Never spend a second criticizing something or someone. Never criticize, never, never, never. And if someone criticizes you, you say, “fine, move along”, eh? Nothing to be done.
10
125
1K
But the more you love someone, the more you increase your power of existing, and the more you become capable of perceiving things, if necessary of a completely different nature.
3
196
940
I never let go of Proust’s lovely formula: masterpieces are always written in a kind of foreign language.
2
107
843
Spinoza’s idea is: sadness, in the end, is inevitable. But that’s not what humanity dies from. Starting from inevitable kinds of sadness, humanity dies from what is added onto them. This is a kind of fabrication of sadness, a fantastic factory of sadness, really.
4
91
771
Schizoanalysis, yet again, does not ask: “what are your relationships with your father and your mother?” It asks: “who are your allies, who are your enemies”?
3
130
771
As Kierkegaard says, again in a formula all his own: "There is never a solution, there are only decisions".
0
145
690
I am not trying to tell you, "Be Spinozists", because I could care less. What I do care about is that you discover what you need, that each of you might find authors that you need, that is, authors that have something to say to you, and to whom you have something to say.
3
92
550
Spinoza is merciless, right, because he has both extremely tender sides and then extremely hard sides; you can feel it through the texts. There are things he can’t stand. He can’t stand the man who causes his own suffering.
2
66
523
The huts of forest-dwelling metallurgists are very fascinating; me, that’s where I would like to live; I … I would like to be a forest-dwelling metallurgist.
6
91
522
Intellectuals, they know everything. Well, maybe not, but they are informed about everything-they know the history of Italy during the Renaissance, they know the geography of the North Pole, they know..the whole list, they know everything, can talk about anything..It’s abominable
4
71
507
I don’t believe that individuals exist, I believe that we are something other than individuals, I don’t think we’re people, I think we’re something other than people, something even more beautiful and even lovelier.
7
135
850
William James is a marvelous, marvelous, brilliant author. He is one of the greatest American philosophers, and contrary to what the Americans say, they have many very great philosophers, only they don’t read them, they don’t know them, they’ve forgotten them.
10
57
463
If one abandons Marxism, one abandons the last hopes one has. So it’s quite simple: we had better return to these definitions of variable capital and constant capital before unpacking what is involved in the State.
6
53
446
It is said that Spinoza kept his coat with a hole pierced by a knife thrust as a reminder that thought is not always loved by men.
2
52
401
Finally, it is necessary at all times above all to retain as much gaiety as possible for the horrors that await us because there will never be quite enough of them.
0
25
344
Let’s assume that what I’ve said up to this point is clear.
4
54
377
Now I’m really just saying anything at all, you know—these computer-trained kids, I think they’re going to develop subjectivities that I personally cannot even conceive of. When I see some of them, I mean, kids who are currently 8 years old and who are trained in electronic games
2
55
369
If you will, you have to be able to resist those forces that require us to speak when we have nothing to say. That is fundamental.
3
69
363
Generally people tend to summarize their unhappinesses, this is where neurosis or depression begins, when we set out to figure the totals; oh shit, there’s this and there’s that. Spinoza proposes the opposite:
5
37
354
If I am in a bad philosophical mood, I say, that's how it is, buddy, that's it, so long, see ya.
3
68
345
And for someone who hates cheese, I am one of the rare people to be tolerant, that is, not to get up and leave or throw the person out eating cheese. For me, the taste for cheese is a little like a kind of cannibalism, a total horror.
4
53
329
What does it mean, for example, if Descartes climbed out of his grave and said, Kant understood nothing about my thought. Obviously, Kant understood nothing of Descartes’s thought; he had a greater task than understanding Descartes’s thought.
5
25
311
The list of sad passions in Spinoza is infinite, he goes so far as to say that every idea of reward envelopes a sad passion, every idea of security envelopes a sad passion, every idea of pride, guilt. It’s one of the most marvelous moments in the Ethics.
4
44
306
Empiricism, believe me in this, never was defined by: knowledge comes from experience, or else: the sensible world is first. Empiricism is defined by this position: relations are external to their terms.
6
36
299
There is no possible compromise between Hegel and Nietzsche.
23
22
289
Neurotics pose the greatest risk. They won’t let you go until they pass their stuff onto you: they’re contagious par excellence. Better to have ten times as many schizos than a single neurotic, since a schizo will leave you alone.
2
42
292
You know how when you get up in the morning, ordinarily speaking, and then you receive a huge blow on the head, and you’re laid out, bleeding. And then you think, well, my day’s off to a good start. That’s what Melville is talking about.
3
46
297
Someone might tell me: “You must not create any more concepts,” and so, ok, let stupidity reign — fine, it’s the idiots who want to do philosophy in. Who is going to create concepts? Information science? Advertising agents who have taken over the word “concept”?
2
53
281
I would like to make you understand why Spinoza has had such a strong reputation for materialism even though he never ceases to speak of the mind and the soul, a reputation for atheism even though he never ceases to speak of God, it’s quite curious.
4
23
279
In short, if we are Spinozists we will not define a thing by its form, nor by its organs and its functions, nor as a substance or a subject. Borrowing terms from the Middle Ages, or from geography, we will define it by longitude and latitude. A body can be anything;
3
33
267
Nietzsche is a philosopher insofar as he always reminds us that the question of love and hate lies at the heart of the question of truth, to the point that those who say, "I want the truth," are fundamentally hateful. It's a peculiar turn of events.
6
26
272
The concrete problem is how and why do people become revolutionary? And fortunately, historians can’t prevent them from doing so. It’s obvious that the South Africans are caught up in a becoming-revolutionary, the Palestinians are caught up in a becoming-revolutionary.
5
44
253
I am sure that you have understood from the depths of your soul. Anyway, if you haven’t understood from the depths of your soul, there’s no point in me repeating it because it can only be understood from the depths of your soul.
3
57
250
When I hear “Descartes is mistaken”, that’s it, my suffering is on the way, I can’t continue, I can’t continue. Because I’d understand very well if someone said to me: the problems that I pose have nothing in common with the problems that Descartes poses.
3
32
261
There is a famous Spinoza expression that is always quoted, but very often it’s quoted separated from its context. And it’s a shame because when we see the context, we are completely interested. This is the formula, “all determination is negation”; in Latin,
4
22
249
Writers, poets, musicians, filmmakers, painters too, even chance readers may find that they are Spinozists; indeed, such a thing is more likely for them than for professional philosophers.
1
30
245
So, you can tell me, okay, I’m not an idiot, that’s something I can understand, that sadness is inevitable, just like death, like suffering, yes. But every time I see someone trying to persuade me that there is something good, useful or fruitful in sadness, I will smell an enemy
4
36
249
The Israelis held onto their religious position of denying not only the Palestinian right but also the Palestinian fact. They cleansed themselves of their own terrorism by treating the Palestinians as terrorists from outside. And precisely because the Palestinians were not that,
2
46
242
There are two kinds of people who are wrong: those who say that the real battle is on the outside; the people who say that are the traditional Marxists: in order to change man, let's change the external world. And then there are the priests or the moralists who say:
3
26
244
That’s what’s so funny about Plato’s dialogues. You can’t assume that Socrates will always come out on top. What’s more, a lot of the time Socrates ends up agreeing with his interlocutor’s original position, who he’s been treating like an idiot, and it doesn’t bother him.
1
22
244
I remember Foucault telling me: I will never stand the word desire. I said: why? Why? He says for me, whatever they may be, so he tells me with great great kindness, whatever your attempts may be to explain that desire is absolutely not linked to lack, for me, I can’t help myself
4
19
236
You understand, if I am asked, “Do you believe in God?”, well I say, Yes! I believe that there is an infinite set of images varying as a function of each other, on all their facets and in all their parts, and in this regard, I tell myself: Hey, I am a pure Spinozist.
3
34
235
I am deeply pleased by your very great kindness in having listened to me, and I thank you very much.
9
35
239
What did we try to do in Anti-Oedipus? I think there are three main points directly opposed to psychoanalysis. These three points are — well, for me and I think for Félix as well, we would change none of these points at all.
3
16
232
Nietzsche? Oh yes, he is the thinker of the death of God! Not at all! You know: not at all! For a very simple reason, namely, that at the moment when Nietzsche is writing, the death of God is already a kind of truism that is everywhere in the background.
5
24
227
So much nonsense is repeated because, you understand, stupidity is not just when someone says something false; but this is much worse. It’s when someone gives a mediocre interpretation of something true.
3
45
223
Get rid of the idea that politicians trick you, it’s worse, it’s definitively worse: if only all they did was trick us! Even, even with respect to holocausts, they don’t hide them. They don’t hide them.
0
47
225
We’re going very slowly because I think there are tons of traps. The more you think you’ve understood something right away, the less you will have understood it.
4
36
223
You don't like to speak in public? Wonderful!
You know, I don't think anyone does, aside from a few crazy people who speak all the time. You are perfectly normal.
4
27
222
Philosophy is nothing if it isn’t capable of inspiring a non-philosophical rapport, that is, a rapport that it has with non-philosophers as non-philosophers.
3
30
221
Foucault never spoke about primitive societies. Why did he never speak about so-called “primitive” societies? He never spoke of them for a very simple reason, I believe, and it is not at all that he did not like ethnography and ethnology; it is because he wanted
6
7
219
For those who are a bit familiar with it, what does English philosophy consist of? It consists of a sublime encounter: the encounter of the most demanding empiricism and the subtlest neo-Platonism. The most typical representative of this is one of the world’s greatest poets,
4
7
221
When someone says: philosophers are difficult, it’s because they don’t want to read the sentence ten times, or they don’t know how to parse the text. Obviously, to read the same sentence ten times you shouldn’t fixate on one point;
2
28
215
We can guess what the creature of ressentiment wants: he wants others to be evil, he needs others to be evil in order to be able to consider himself good.
1
55
210
Concepts have no meaning unless you have found what affections are connected to them, what affects are linked to them, how and in what ways they affect you, along with how and what they make you perceive.
4
42
205
The state of Israel will never stop denying the very fact of a Palestinian people. They will never speak of Palestinians but of the Arabs of Palestine, as if they found themselves there by chance or in error.
1
37
210
He seeks the truth. He’s looking everywhere for the truth. Is it in religion? Is it in morality? Is it in science? No—truth resides with the cows. That’s what we learn from the voluntary beggar in a striking passage—yes, because cows know how to ruminate.
5
21
202
Ideology absolutely does not consist in deceiving people; ideology is just the system of statements that flow from an organization of power such as it is: for example, between the Reformation and Catholicism, the problem is one of organizations of power,
1
31
206
What annoys me in psychoanalysis of the Lacanian camp is the cult of castration.
6
16
200
This is the fundamental action of a society: to code the flows and to treat as an enemy anyone who presents himself, in relation to society, as an uncodable flow, because, once again, it challenges the entire earth, the whole body of this society.
0
48
202
This is the great Nietzschean criterion. Do you exhaust life or is it life that exhausts you?
2
39
194
In Adorno, in particular, the failure of the dialectic of knowledge will appear under dramatic conditions. The dialectic of knowledge, instead of producing the rational totality, produces what Adorno calls totalitarian rationality, and the issue then fully emerges:
1
19
197
A certain number of people know that there is no self, but we will continue to talk about the self, because the self is precisely a habit; so, we stick to our habits. It’s not that we have the habit of telling “me”, it’s the self, that is a habit.
1
25
187
At school the children don’t receive information… The example of school is…Félix puts it well in a text he wrote…we put language in the mouths of children exactly the way we put shovels and picks in the hands of workers.
1
41
193
In the reproach that Hegel will make to Spinoza, that he ignored the negative and its power, lies the glory and innocence of Spinoza, his own discovery. In a world consumed by the negative, he has enough confidence in life, in the power of life, to challenge death,
2
27
184
Metaphysical questions are very concrete. They consist in asking very simple things. They consist in playing the idiot and asking: “but why does the present pass?” So if someone says to me: well, that’s the very definition of the present, I answer: ah no, no, no, no.
3
23
188
What is unique about Spinoza is that he, the most philosophic of philosophers (unlike Socrates himself, Spinoza requires only philosophy...), teaches the philosopher how to become a nonphilosopher.
2
23
176
There are so many kinds of poetries, and for me, Spinoza is truly, within philosophy, one of the greatest poets that ever existed.
2
21
183
Note that when the cruellest, hardest, most wicked capitalists have said ‘we are humanists’, they have a literal reason for saying so. They are just saying something simple: obviously, we have never confused constant capital and variable capital.
7
31
183
Spinoza attacks any conception of immortality. He tells us: no, no. This is not a question of saying that everyone is immortal; it’s about saying that everyone is eternal. And this is not at all the same. Why is it not at all the same?
2
18
171
The lowest degree of the will to power according to Nietzsche is the will to judge, that is, to dominate life, while its highest degree is the will to metamorphosis, as announced by Zarathustra, Dionysus and characters simpler than these.
2
30
170
All of us are deeply incoherent, all. We hold onto something from a tradition, and then we enter into something new.
1
22
164
One of the first philosophers who followed Kant and pretended to push farther than Kant through his own efforts, was named Fichte. And there is in Fichte a page that seems exemplary to me precisely for the Kantian polemic, Kant-Leibniz. Here is what Fichte tells us;
5
18
174
Nietzsche says, don’t judge life, don’t dare to judge life. He says it’s awful, who are all these guys who are judging life? What does that mean? By what right do you dare to judge life?
5
20
160
Find your molecules. If you don’t find your molecules, you cannot even read. That’s what reading is: it’s finding your very own molecules. They are in books, your cerebral molecules. They are in books, and these books, you have to find them.
1
18
172
Oedipus is absolutely meaningless when it comes to the unconscious. Lacan is the first to say as much, but tragically, he didn’t want to say the same for castration. And I’m claiming the same thing regarding castration.
4
19
165
They really are stupid fools; really, it’s the abomination of literary mediocrity, in every era, but particularly quite recently, that makes people believe that to create a novel, for example, it suffices to have some little private affair, some little personal affair –
2
15
168
And of course, we laugh; I mean that the tyrant can laugh, the priest laughs, but, Spinoza said, in a page that I find very beautiful, “his laughter is that of satire, and the laughter of satire is a bad laugh.” Why? Because it is laughter which communicates sadness.
1
25
160
There is no “my essence”. Moreover, this becomes completely contradictory since in presenting myself as my essence and being the one who presents it, I necessarily take a distance from what I am.
1
21
159
There are people, right, who can only reign, who only acquire power by way of sadness and by instituting a regime of sadness of the type: “atone”, of the type “hate someone”‚ and “if you don’t have anyone to hate, hate yourself,” etc., everything that Spinoza diagnoses
3
22
158
What is a bad philosopher, or a great philosopher? The bad one creates no concepts, is someone who uses ready-made ideas. So, he puts forth opinions then and does not do philosophy….
2
20
158
instead of summarizing of our sadnesses, taking a local point of departure on a joy on the condition that we feel that it truly concerns us. On that point one forms the common notion, on that point one tries to win locally, to open up this joy. It’s the labor of life.
1
18
158
Nietzsche will say that there is another path. Not a middle way, but a completely different path that will overturn the very terms of the problem. He will say, no, that the choice is not between the individuation of persons or the undifferentiated abyss:
2
20
152
Spinoza is one who polishes lenses, who abandoned everything, his heritage, his religion, every social success. He does nothing and before he had written anything whatsoever, he is insulted, he is denounced. Spinoza is the atheist, the abominable. He practically can’t publish.
2
9
150
As Kant says, the beautiful itself is symbol of the good (he means that the feeling of the beautiful is not a dim perception of the good, that there is no analytical relationship between the good and the beautiful, but that there is a synthetic relationship
2
11
154
So, your page is full. Full of what? I would say of ready-made ideas, and you would have a difficult time finding them original.
2
18
153
The biologists would be right if they knew that bodies in themselves are already a language. The linguists would be right if they knew that language is always the language of bodies.
0
27
151
Spinoza belongs to that line of "private thinkers" who overturn values and construct their philosophy with hammer blows; he is not one of the "public professors" (who, according to Leibniz's approving words, do not disturb the established sentiments,
2
17
149
Does everything have a form? What is it to perceive a cloud? What is it to perceive that which keeps changing form? What is the walk of Mrs Dalloway in Virginia Woolf? It will be the discovery of a whole graduation of scales, a whole scale of modes and degrees of perception.
2
17
155
How do you expect my heart to beat without believing that it's going on indefinitely? If my heart believed itself to be beating for a limited duration, it would immediately stop. My heart is a prehending subject. And me, what am I? I am a conglomerate of prehending subjects.
5
25
148
The lesson of the eternal return is that there is no return of the negative.
2
22
153
In Spinoza's thought, life is not an idea, a matter of theory. It is a way of being, one and the same eternal mode in all its attributes. And it is only from this perspective that the geometric method is fully comprehensible.
2
13
152
I find that nothing is sadder for gifted young people, in principle, than growing old without ever having found the books that they really liked, or never finding any, in the end, and then all at once, playing the scholar about all books.
1
14
151
There are no good concepts without great love. There are no good concepts without a great love, but ‘without a great love’, that no longer means at all – try to think we’ve at least made some progress – that no longer means at all: interest yourself in what you do,
1
19
150
Those who say in advance: “You will see, this is great, what I’m telling you is completely new!” are, generally speaking, not very new at all. But there are others who operate like moles! The ones who really bring something new are always the moles.
2
10
152
You know, Hegel didn’t invent dialectics, you know that. He hardened it enormously, he hardened it enormously, because the dialectic in Schelling is something with transitions, soft aspects, some… It’s not there. Hegel made a dialectic of war. It’s not that it’s not beautiful;
4
12
144
So, the problem of sex, The World of Sex, well obviously, Spinoza would not have written a book on the world of sex. Why wouldn’t he write about the world of sex? Why is it that for Spinoza, here, I don’t need to replace him, it’s obvious here that he tells us something about it,
2
13
143