: Fold: Leibniz and the Baroque (): Gilles Deleuze: Books. GILLES DELEUZE. The Fold*. MATERIAL COILS1. The Baroque does not refer to an essence Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, Philosophical Papers and Letters, vol. Title, The Fold: Leibniz and the Baroque. Author, Gilles Deleuze. Edition, illustrated, reprint. Publisher, University of Minnesota Press, ISBN,
|Published (Last):||28 September 2012|
|PDF File Size:||18.46 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||15.25 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
It splits into ‘The indiscernibility of identicals: Which set of monads should we take to be primary?
Request removal from index. We have to get to those to deal with endless indefinability again [lower down in the chains, as it were, where one term it is only defined by the one next to it and so on].
The Fold: Leibniz and the Baroque
This is found in baroque thinking as the notion of a ‘several orders of badoque [a horribly vague argument, this]. This makes the vinculum ‘the unlocalisable primary link that borders the absolute interior. We can then proceed to produce formal deductions of the nature of the fold [something to do with the transition to mannerism again]. The texture of the monad must include a serial law affecting the deployment of its characters and ‘the differential relation between limits’, but the folds of the monad do not contain this law [I think this is arguing that the unique combination of characters and limits is not understood by the monad itself].
In scholastic logica syncategorematic term syncategorema is a word that cannot serve as the subject or the predicate of a proposition, and thus cannot stand for any of Aristotle’s categories, but can be used with other terms to form a proposition. Notice that to show that the identity of indiscernibles is false, it is sufficient that one provides a model in which there are two distinct numerically nonidentical things that have all the same properties.
The leibnkz of closure or envelopment is represented by the lack of windows in the upper floor of the baroque house.
However, only in the Baroque does the fold have ‘unlimited freedom whose conditions can baroqye determined’ 38folds with no apparent determinations as in El Greco’s Baptism of Christ below —’a counterfold of the calf and knee, the knee as an fild of the calf, confers on the leg an infinite undulation, while the seam of the cloud in the middle transforms it into a double fan…’ Still, if you do not read French well, this very important book should not escape you even in this edition.
The simple notions have no reciprocal inclusions [they include other things but are not themselves included]: Technically, all analysis is infinite, but there are different types. He argued, then, that there is no good and evil, but rather only relationships which are beneficial or harmful to leivniz particular individuals. Is Deleuze still using the preNewtonian understanding?
However, it all turns on dwleuze notions of infinity and inclusion. There is some notion ddeleuze a general connection with other bodies, because the monad knows them only folx resemblance—so its own body must be organic, resembling the body of another man or another animal.
Now to see if I can pick up any points in support So perspectivism is varoque, but this is not provided by truth appearing to the subject differently. We can generalize, but if we analyze deeply enough, we will find that concepts relate to individual things only. The four singularities attached to Adam, above, are extended along regular lines ‘that have common values in both directions’ Quotes from The Fold: Assemblage Theory and Social Complexity. When we think, we need to analyse this passage from subject to object, instead of thinking in terms of permanent attributes of the subject.
As a constructivist, he was adamant that philosophers are creators, and that each reading of philosophy, or each philosophical encounter, ought to inspire new concepts. Every actual human individual can experience these partial zones in their bodies as monads pass through them.
The Fold: Leibniz and the Baroque – Gilles Deleuze – Google Books
It is continuum, with god’s light at one end, and an infinity of black holes and caverns at the other [then a very obscure bit annd that the fold between darkness and light has limits at either end of the continuum? In this way, the two floors are related but also different.
Each includes itself and only itself, each is identical to itself [why do we have to add that? A disciple, Ruyer, insists on the connection, however, in ‘substantial or individual forms’, although we can work with figures as having an autonomy of their own.
We are not just talking about autonomous objects grasped by conventional subjects, but a notion of self presence, an absolute interiority, that displays self fulfilment and self enjoyment [developing perceptions baroqu of material influences from organs or extrinsic forces]. We can use a chain of definitions, a ‘concatenation of reciprocal inclusions’ [as when we go on to add numbers as defined]. Here, we have a relation not of subject and predicate, but one that is substantial. It becomes necessary to assign points of view to particular cases, and these can be arranged in a Leibnizian table.
Email required Address never made public. Maybe, Leibniz is on the side of the mechanists here? However, it is a different notion from localization in bodies, to a projection outside of bodies focusing on bodies. Husserl gives us an example of a theory of appurtenance, in the fifth of the Cartesian Meditations [discussing how we know about others] and this refers tne Leibniz.
The Fold, explained
We can consider the relations they display as ‘the unity of the [original] nonrelation [absence of relations] with matters of [the ability to produce series of] wholes and parts’.
This is where we get compossibility from. Instead there is ‘the modulated flow, as it were, of concept-sentence-units, which flatten illusion that generally accompanies the rhetoric of argument or narrative’ xxi.
This lies in the depths of the soul, and these omnipresent depths are also a feature of mannerism, because they blur the clarity of the form, which is what produces spontaneous manners in the first place.
Gilles Deleuze, The Fold: Leibniz and the Baroque – PhilPapers
However, there are different types of inclusion or analysis, truths of leiniz where the predicate is expressly included in the notion, and truths of existence, where predicates are a matter of contingency, something only ‘implicit or virtual’ [the lectures refer to these as inherent properties rather than essential ones].
We can understand this by first of all considering curvatures that produce concavity. Notify me of new comments via email. The difference is that Husserl was to go on to argue that we can apperceive the other as another monad [through the deleuzee of reciprocal perceptions and so on], but Leibniz had already assumed that there are other monads, and seeing everything outside my clear zone as indicating their existence, leibnz ‘a community of monads’ [sic].
As a result, we cannot grasp them fully with mathematics.