جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه "دلوز" در نشریات گروه "فلسفه و کلام"

Gilles Deleuze in the late of his philosophical work, in what is Philosophy, considers the question of the essence of philosophy and the logic of the philosophizing activity in an important relation, about the city or earth (geo). That is the reason why philosophy will named "geophilosophy" in this book. In this article, we will consider geophilosophy in three periods: ancient Greece, the current city, and the future city. In the first part of the article, we will explain the genesis of philosophy in his earth, Greece; in the second part we explain the annihilation of philosophy in the current city; and in the last part, we will consider the revival of philosophy in the future city or earth. In the last part, at first, we think of the earth for philosophy because today philosophy doesn't have earth. After that, we pay attention to the relation of the earth of philosophy and the new city. We will follow these three periods of geophilosophy in relation to three essential elements of philosophy which we will explain their birth, annihilation, and revival in relation to these three cities: concept, friendship, and struggle.

In Deleuze - Guattari's schizophrenic or onto - ethic - aesthetic philosophy , existence is closely along with aesthetics and ethics ; an act of revolution that connects and binds formerly separate spheres . This approach to existence also requires a reconsideration of pre-existing realms. and even more so , a critique of any educational, social, or therapeutic institution that obstructs the creative process and the élan of schizophrenic desires  . Accordingly , the capitalist machine and all its subordinate apparatuses , by limiting schizophrenic desires of desiring-machines, deserves more criticism and reconsideration from the schizophrenic philosophy onto -ethico - aesthetic point of view than any other institution ; However , the difficulty of analyzing the repressive institutions manifests itself in the moment of criticism because the subject of such research and criticism has an indescribable desire to axiomatize everything - even the revolution and anything related to schizophrenic philosophies. In this research , we attempt to look closely at the fundamental concepts of schizophrenic philosophy , such as multiplicity and subjectivity , while plotting the revolutionary path of Deleuze - Guattari philosophy and Its critiques of repressive systems and therapeutic or organizational apparatus below , and examine the routs of evolution and exit from the isotopic conditions of the capitalist machine

In this article, we want to think about the concept of desire in the philosophy of Deleuze and Guattari, and through it, to understand Deleuze's ontology of the concept of "event". In formulating the concept of "desire", they are looking for an answer to the problem of the chaotic world of contemporary man. A world where for its resilience contemporary man seeks refuge in all kinds of ways of escape. Deleuze and Guattari create a new conceptual system centered on the concept of "desire" in order to answer the why of this situation and draw ways to avoid it. In this text, we tried to analyze the concept of desire from their point of view in connection with the concept of "Apparatus" by Foucault-Agamben and Finally, we should approach a new understanding of the concept of the event as its escape from the relativistic postmodern challenge. An understanding that Deleuze included in the concept of "life power" in his last writing and in this context, he offers us a strange and yet familiar view of "life".

Gilles Deleuze in the "Logic of Sensation" that is a reading of the paintings of Francis Bacon, explicitly criticize the narration. But in fact he criticizes figurative and representational narration, and highlight an alternative narration that exist in the work of Bacon. Our problem in this article is this alternative narration, not in the works of Bacon but in the work of Deleuze himself, in this book. I think Deleuze have a very interesting narrative attitude in this book, he is a theater director. Through elimination of all the figurative and representational narrative elements, Deleuze receive two elements: scene and figure. Empty scene and isolated figure in the scene. We adhere to these two element in the whole of our narration and reveal changeable relations between these two element, changeable relations that operate as engine of our narration. If these two elements are main elements of our narration, the theme of our narration is this: liberation of the frigid figure. This liberation had five step for figure: 1) isolation. 2) deformation 3) dissipation 4) disappearation 5) liberated figure as an acrobat, in other words, athleticism in the bedroom. These five step are five step of a theater that in the end of that, occur the liberation of the figure.

The present article attempts to explore two principles out of four literary and poetic principles with the centrality of Kant's conceptual turn concerning the concept of time that Deleuze opted for treating Kant's philosophy. In order to reformulate the Critique of Pure Reason, Deleuze exploits two literary principles. The first one is taken from Hamlet according to which time is out of control, the second one is taken from Arthur Rambo as he said, I is another. For appreciating such complicated statements and explaining Deleuze's particular reading of Critique of Pure Reason, the author proceeds to explore Deleuze's writings and seminars on Kant in order to show that the presupposition of having a good command over Deleuze's philosophy is to study his confrontation with Kant's philosophy. For achieving such an end, the author accompanies Deleuze's treatment of Kant's philosophy step by step in order to shed some light on the concept of time in his reading of The Critique of Pure Reason from various perspectives so to apprehend the two poetic principles concerning the time.

Bergson's philosophy has sometimes been regarded as dualistic and sometimes as monotheistic. The price of being partial to each has been to destroy some of Bergson's concepts and specifications in favor of others. In the meantime, some have tried to read Bergson's philosophy as dualistic and monistic at the same time, but the efforts have not only been unsatisfactory, but have also added to the previous difficulties; Because sometimes he has changed Bergson's philosophy to a philosophy of existential unity, sometimes he has made it based on a dialectical foundation, and sometimes he has turned it into a kind of conventional dualism. Gilles Deleuze, by proposing the doctrine of "difference", has given a reading of Bergson's philosophy, based on which Bergson's philosophy has different moments of dualism and monotheism, in each of which Diernard accepts a different "expression": From absolute dualism to hidden monogamy and then to recovered dualism. The purpose of this article is to highlight the fundamental difference between Deleuze's reading and other readings of existential unity or dualistic or dialectical of Bergson's philosophy, and to show that the explanation of these moments and especially the explanation of the logic of the last transition to recovered dualism requires recalling a doctrine that although Deleuze himself He cultivated it, he did not emphasize it much in his reading of Bergson. In this way, the claim is that explaining the logic of separating the moments of Bergson's philosophy in Deleuze's reading, as well as the logic of the transition from one to the other, instead of considering the two statements of Dirndt, it is necessary to consider the third statement of Dirndt as a difference in itself. This is the way that the expression of each aspect of Dirand is possible in three types of difference: Dirand as a pure thing in the essential difference, Dirand as a comprehensive thing in the difference of the material, and Dirand as a creative thing in the difference in itself.

Gilles Deleuze can undoubtedly be considered one of the most important philosophers and theorists of cinema. In the 1980s, Deleuze wrote two volumes of cinema books, which established the main directions of cinema philosophy as a separate discipline in the university. Among different philosophers, Bergson has the most influence on Deleuze's theories. Both of them believe that time is not linear and quantitative but qualitative and non-local. The extension of this philosophy led to the formation of the chronology as the main basis of time and cinema in Deleuze's works. In the first volume of his book, Deleuze deals with movement-oriented classical cinema and in the second volume with time-oriented modern works. Time is the central element of Deleuze's modern narratives, dividing images into temporal mirrors and crystals. Deleuze strongly believed in the simultaneity of non-linear times and events in modern works. In recent years, modern Iranian cinema has turned more and more to Deleuze's philosophy and many time elements can be seen in various works. This research comes with Deleuze's modern cinema theories by examining the films of Fish and Cat made by Shahram Makri, Dragon! The work of Mani Haghighi and Homayoun Ghanizadeh's mockumentary comes to the conclusion that the filmmakers of the younger generation of Iran became more interested in non-linear events with tools such as retrospective and forward-looking, as well as the association of past, present and future times in one scene. In the meantime, Makri is strongly influenced by the time period and Mani Haghighi, as a philosophy student, borrows many elements from Deleuze in his works.

Deleuze and Guattari in their second philosophical period, especially in the volumes of Capitalism and Schizophrenia, point their fingers at accusations of the capitalist machine, and consider its reactionary forces as one of its important features. Reactionary in the sense that the institution of oppression and domination, after each deterritorialization, again carries out another territorialization and follows the rigid and fixed axiom of the previous one in a new form. As a result, they accuse psychoanalysis and other educational institutions and its apparatuses of promoting fascism based on the desires of the desiring machines, which are revolutionary and schizophrenic. The main claim of this article is the introduction of another apparatus called Management Science. Based on reasons that will be explained, a critique of Management Science is more important and justified before any other apparatus, and the critiques of Deleuze and Guattari should be reoriented in that direction. In this text, we attempt to find out why the schizophrenic philosophy of Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari is revolutionary, as well as explain the opposition of this philosophy to the repressive movements and reterritorializing apparatuses of the counter-revolution. Finally, we will explain the main apparatuses of capitalism- the Management Science.

Aesthetic concepts explaining with scientific functions, can be an inspiring idea to lead to a new and special form of aesthetics. A form of aesthetics that as its most important work, produces relations between the aesthetic dimension as the material form of the artwork, and material functions in natural science. Establishing such relationships, may first and foremost seem like an idealistic simulation; An effort that is supposed to reduce the latter to an allegory of the first system by finding similarities between two incongruous scientific and aesthetic systems. However, it should be noted that such discussions are not aimed at producing allegorical relationships between scientific and aesthetic systems, and they have no relation with the subsequent reductionism, but by maintaining the independence between these two systems from each other, they try to move in the boundaries, regions and intersection blocks between them, and rooting the modern aesthetic concepts in the scientific systems, or by discovering and even "inventing" these intersection blocks and establishing material relations, try to explain aesthetic concepts by scientific systems. Therefore, the aesthetic concepts located in the intersection block will no longer be an allegory of scientific functions, but they are nothing except a slice of these functions but with a different formulation. Because of their adherence to scientific procedures in producing material relations between the material form of the artwork and the material functions of natural science, such discussions can be considered as a form of materialist aesthetics. As a methodological proposal, materialistic aesthetics can start its work by discovering the trace of a scientific system in an aesthetic system, or in other words, by reconstructing that intersection block that is achieved by intersecting two sets. In this regard, the discovery and reconstruction of the relationship between the Frankfurt School’s critical aesthetics and Leibniz's mathematics can be an outstanding and inspiring example.This research has tried to root Benjamin's concept of Aura in Leibniz's differential theory and Deleuze's special understanding of singularity, and explain Aura based on it. Due to his influence on Leibniz, Deleuze offers a special understanding of mathematical singularity, which can be considered exactly equivalent to extreme point in the general calculus of curves. By intersecting the concept of Aura with differential theory, then discovering conceptual equivalences, identifying nodes, and producing a junction block, it was shown that Aura can be considered as a singularity on the aesthetic space-time curves. Then, based on this experimental method, an attempt was made to formulate the initial and proposed design of a materialist aesthetic as a secondary achievement of the research. Based on this plan, the main idea of the proposed materialistic aesthetics is to intersect the aesthetic system with the scientific systems to produce intersection blocks and areas; in such a way that the aesthetic concepts established in these intersecting blocks can be reconstructed as scientific-material functions. To understand this issue, help was taken from the theory of sets in mathematics.

Critiquing the ontology of essence, Gilles Deleuze, in the Logic of Sense, provides an “ontology of sense” in which the notion of ‘sense’ as its central point is developed to establish a connection between thought and existence. Employing Stoic logic and concepts such as lekta, event, effect, expression, etc., and also applying Leibniz’s concepts of convergence and divergence relation between series of singularities- events, he presents his new ontology. This paper, aims to examine the notion of ‘sense’ in Deleuze’s Logic of Sense and provide an account for his conception of ‘Ontology of Sense’. So, after a glimpse at the ground which it grows and departs from, we go further to determine the topology of sense in Deleuze’s thought and get closer to understanding his ontology of sense, by making its connections with other concepts and ideas. Finally, we hope these steps could illuminate the relation between language and existence in Deleuzian philosophy.

Nietzsche understands the death of  man as the condition of the birth of Overman, death of man or its synonyms, the active destruction, or man who wants to destruct himself. Death of man as the condition of the Overman. The concern of this article is the presentation of this Nietzschean concern with the political expression in order to explanation of the political subject in the thought of Gilles Deleuze, based on the book titled Nietzsche and Philosophy. First, the concept of the death of man, active destruction, would be interpreted as a political concept. This would be one aspect of the intended subject, its negation side. Another aspect, its affirmation, would resort to the Nietzschean concept of the midday or transmutation, which clarifies the complicated relation between negation and affirmation. In this way, we will get the concept of affirmation as the foundation of this thought, but affirmation which is armed with negation. This is the fundamental feature of the intended subject which is named aggressive. The type of subject that is alternative for the dominant understanding of the revolutionary subject, the subject of resentment, the kind of negation that doesn’t know affirmation. But more than it, the aggressive subject is against the current subject, an affirmation that doesn’t know negation.

We and our world are caught in the last period of nihilism. The remarkable point is the durability of this situation, and that the time for the end of this situation is unclear. The concern of this article is understanding the nihilism, especially its last kind, understanding of the nihilism in order to provide the possibility of the thinking about the conditions of the liberation from that. For this purpose, we should understand three kinds of nihilism: negative, reactive, and passive; Understanding these three kinds, especially its last kind, which is the property of the present situation. For the explanation of this step of nihilism, we will resort to a Nietzschean-Deleuzian concept and then try to transmit the affective aspect of this concept to the reader in order for the necessity of the liberation from our nihilistic situation to be sensed affectively. At this point of the analysis, the argument is ready for thinking to the next step, which proceeds by understanding the distinction between the last step of nihilism and the condition of liberation from that. Therefore, the trajectory of the article is like this: explanation of kinds of nihilism: 1) negative. 2) reactive. 3) passive. 4) and the liberation from nihilism.

In the later theory of desire, two important economies of desire can be identified according to Lacan and Deleuze; Different formulations of the expansion of desire, each of which creates special relationships with the subject and society. Deleuze, with the plan of schizoanalysis against psychoanalysis, is completely separated from the Freudian tradition and establishes a new form of the economy of desire. Against the Oedipal formulation of desire in Lacan, with continuous reference to a missing ultimate object, desire circulates in a vortex movement around an oedipal core, in Deleuze's anti-Oedipal scheme, the body becomes a desire machine. It is possible to produce and move desire in schizo and rhizomatic ways. In general, two types of economy of desire can be recognized here: interal-expansion of desire in Lacan and external- expansion of desire in Deleuze. Also, in Lacan, the concepts of lack and fantasy that organize the economy of desire, and in Deleuze, the concept of the body without organs by producing desire as force, formulate special forms of the relationship between desire and society.

In this article, we try to consider the concept of time or duaration of Deleuze in photomontage photography with reference to Francis Bacon's paintings. Deleuze discusses time using Bergson's philosophy of motion and duration. Philosophy is a work of art in the postmodernist view, it is anti-structuralist, and according to this issue, art cannot be considered a narrator, because art that is a narrator and is based on structure is a dead art. Deleuze's philosophy is neither subjective nor objective; He tells the story of the very presence and life in the world. For this reason, and based on his initial teachings and Hegelian's totalitarian ideas, he reduced the world and thought in the world to a single whole called the nature of life, and tried to put this totalitarian thought into thought. The gradual-evolutionary naturalistic experience blends. Jilles Deleuze tackles the issue of art from an anti-structuralist perspective. He examines the relationship between times in photomontage photography. We assume that concepts in photography have a motion-driven and creative role with the principle of being in photomontage. The main claim and finding of this article is that it can be said that Deleuze, by violating narrative and being in the art of photography, considers photomontage as a creative movement in fluidity that takes time and space. The most prominent English formalist painter is Francis Bacon. Bacon was able to express the modernist European perception and mentality in his works through visual language or figurative art. Our method in this research is descriptive and analytical. This research seeks to find the answer to the question of how to bring becoming into the art of photography and prevent its narrative and structure.

This article, focusing on the inclusion- in- notion principle in the philosophy of Leibniz and its reading by Gilles Deleuze, claims that Deleuzian approach in the philosophical critique of the philosophy of Leibniz leads to recreation of the concept of the fold and the subject of fold in Leibnizian thought. To achieve this goal, we initially provide an in-depth study of this principle and its related principles in his philosophy and place emphasis upon their ontological aspect. Then we organize Deleuze’s reading of Leibniz’s philosophy around the inclusion-in-notion principle and picture the world of foldings as the outcome of such reading. We make an effort to clarify how the reading of this principle by Deleuze creates new possibilities in the philosophy of Leibniz and gives birth to the Leibnizian- Deleuzian subject of the fold. Therefore, in the last step, we study this Leibnizian- Deleuzian subject and its characteristics, which is the result of the inclusion- in- notion principle.

This paper would attempt to illustrate some possible links between Deleuze's way of thinking and the practice of modern and post-modern artists. This analogy is defined and explained in the context of Deleuze's anti-Platonism to see if there is a relation between Deleuze's struggle to oppose anti-Platonism, his desire to create a new way of thinking, and what modern artists actually did in their practice. Hence, after defining some of the concepts and showing the importance and function of them in modern art, the paper would try to trace the same concepts in Deleuze's thought. It will then explain Deleuze's anti-Platonism putting emphasis on the concept of simulacrum; meanwhile, it will briefly answer Badiou's critique of Deleuze's anti-Platonism. Finally, it would show that Deleuze, relying on this opposition, and in fact inspired by intellectual processes used by post-modern artists, is trying to find a third way for thinking to a world full of images. He introduces a path that neither goes back and nor, as we find with Baudrillard, sees the world as an apocalyptic world of images in which we wander.

This investigation is intended to present a critical analysis of rhizomatic approach on the basis of Illuminationism. Our method in this study is descriptive analytic. Rhizomatic is a central concept in Deleuze’s philosophy. Rhizomatic Approach as a post-structuralist current focuses on ‘becoming’, negation of metaworld-versions, horizontal relations, multiplicity, and nomadic thought. By contrast, the basis of Illuminationist approach is the movement from darkness and nightfall to light and illumination. Illumination is but intuition and vision. Unlike rhizomatic approach Illuminationist philosophy understand the world in terms of hierarchical relations rather than purely horizontal ones. In Deleuze philosophy no element is to be regarded as higher than another. Both approaches seek to interiorize knowledge and criticize the formal inflexible constructions and as result regard human reason inadequate. Rhizomatic approach however rejects grand realm of reality and renders reason as a perceptive faculty unnecessary. Illuminationist approach is teleological and calls into question rhizomatic approach.