The Logic of Sense - One
I am mostly, philosophically, working on Tarski and truth, and later attempts to disprove Tarski's theory on truth (eg. Etchemende (sp?) or Kripke). But i do not care to post on those issues right now.
So.
How about Gilles Deleuze's "The Logic of Sense", a book i read about 100 pages of about 10 years ago and have been interested on looking back upon, now, post analytic graduate school.
So. Here is an attempt to state what Deleuze seems to intend, with no particular claim that i find the thoughts tenable.
Chapter One: Paradoxes of Pure Becoming ...
1) Getting larger in the present, the now, going forward ... is the same as getting smaller in the present, the now, going backward. The paradox of becoming ... contra static identity of self.
2) Plato distinguishes being (static/discrete/quantum) from fluid becoming. (Deleuze thinks Plato is very wrong.) This is the Platonic Dualism on which Deleuze wants to focus rather than the classic Idea(or Form)/matter dualism, or real/copy(simulacra) dualism.
3) For Plato, the fluid becoming can never "complete" ... can never become a static end. (Matter, no matter how much perfection, can never become a perfect Platonic Form).
4) The Platonic Idea (Form) only applies to being. Becoming eludes Idea.
5) Language has two sets of names. One set points at beings. The other set points at becoming. In Plato, they shall never meet. They shall remain paradox.
6) Pure becoming eludes the present (just as it eludes pure Form).
7) The Paradox of Pure Becoming (the notion we are spelling out in this chapter) IS the Paradox of Infinite Identity. Infinite Identity is the set of properties one has from the standpoint of becoming (forward AND back in time) rather than from the standpoint of being (in the "now").
8) Infinite Identity is reversals. It is becoming larger and becoming smaller at the same time, in the now ... depending on whether we view forward or backward. Reversal is viewing it from both ways at once.
9) Reversals attack the concept of personal identity.
10) Platonic Ideas (and Christian God) support the idea of a persoanl identity by acting as a ground for static being.
11) Pure Becoming assails the idea of a personal identity by dissolving the ground for static being.
12) Nouns and adjectives in language are the stuff of static being. Verbs are the stuff of change, of becoming. The existince of verbs in language creates a paradox that destorys the ground of pure being (of Platonic Ideas/Forms).
My analysis ... (to follow later) ... but roughly ... we will look at the same issue through the ideas of mereology ... the study of identity through change in analytic philosophy.
A comparison to Zeno's Paradox and the mathematical dissolution of that paradox (by Newton and Leibniz via infintesimals) also might be relevent. We shall see.
So.
How about Gilles Deleuze's "The Logic of Sense", a book i read about 100 pages of about 10 years ago and have been interested on looking back upon, now, post analytic graduate school.
So. Here is an attempt to state what Deleuze seems to intend, with no particular claim that i find the thoughts tenable.
Chapter One: Paradoxes of Pure Becoming ...
1) Getting larger in the present, the now, going forward ... is the same as getting smaller in the present, the now, going backward. The paradox of becoming ... contra static identity of self.
2) Plato distinguishes being (static/discrete/quantum) from fluid becoming. (Deleuze thinks Plato is very wrong.) This is the Platonic Dualism on which Deleuze wants to focus rather than the classic Idea(or Form)/matter dualism, or real/copy(simulacra) dualism.
3) For Plato, the fluid becoming can never "complete" ... can never become a static end. (Matter, no matter how much perfection, can never become a perfect Platonic Form).
4) The Platonic Idea (Form) only applies to being. Becoming eludes Idea.
5) Language has two sets of names. One set points at beings. The other set points at becoming. In Plato, they shall never meet. They shall remain paradox.
6) Pure becoming eludes the present (just as it eludes pure Form).
7) The Paradox of Pure Becoming (the notion we are spelling out in this chapter) IS the Paradox of Infinite Identity. Infinite Identity is the set of properties one has from the standpoint of becoming (forward AND back in time) rather than from the standpoint of being (in the "now").
8) Infinite Identity is reversals. It is becoming larger and becoming smaller at the same time, in the now ... depending on whether we view forward or backward. Reversal is viewing it from both ways at once.
9) Reversals attack the concept of personal identity.
10) Platonic Ideas (and Christian God) support the idea of a persoanl identity by acting as a ground for static being.
11) Pure Becoming assails the idea of a personal identity by dissolving the ground for static being.
12) Nouns and adjectives in language are the stuff of static being. Verbs are the stuff of change, of becoming. The existince of verbs in language creates a paradox that destorys the ground of pure being (of Platonic Ideas/Forms).
My analysis ... (to follow later) ... but roughly ... we will look at the same issue through the ideas of mereology ... the study of identity through change in analytic philosophy.
A comparison to Zeno's Paradox and the mathematical dissolution of that paradox (by Newton and Leibniz via infintesimals) also might be relevent. We shall see.
posted by Thomas F. Schminke at 12:02 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home