I am reading deleuze’s what is philosophy at the moment and the part about the creation of concepts, the analysis of their components and the resulting impossibility of discourse in philosophy is blowing my mind. The discourse becomes impossible or at least fruitless because the terms and concepts discussed, although homophones, aren’t comparable because they’re on different planes of thought and have different components. So we think we are speaking about the same things, while only confusing ourselves and wasting our time. I mean the idea is almost trivial, while the execution and explanation is outstanding.
hes a fag
>>24946062Doesn’t matter, don’t care.
>>24946039sounds interesting. haven't read WiP, but i've found his (maybe related?) concept of the plane of consistency to be really useful for thinking about artworks and the miniature model worlds they represent.
>>24946235It’s applicable to most things, I guess. But in philosophy it explains why there’s is no common ground like in the sciences, a set of basic principles everyone can agree on.
>>24946235It's an interesting take, it frequently appears to pull from GS, Twighlight of the Idols, and maybe a few other odd parts where you try to move as quickly as possible, think as slow as possible, and sift even slower. The results appear just as varied. You could have 2 guys who tie their left hands together and play stickpin refutation, a sumo match, or just one guy trying to navigate a minefield. The key part for some of this for Nietzsche at least is that the concept is already there so instead of finding a potentiality you basically look for how actual but there isn't really a limit on this. Nietzsche claimed it could isolate specific instincts, you get a theoretical edge for the successive attempts.
how the frick do your formulate any concepts in ur mind.then
>>24947693It says that philosophy is basically just creating concepts, but once they’re established the discussion between philosophical school becomes impossible. Take e.g. a platonist and a Kantian: these two won’t be able to meaningfully discuss the concept of time, because the ancient understanding of time and the transcendental understanding of time are so different, that they can’t possibly talk about the same concept with the same components (which would make a discussion possible).
