“The safest general characterization of the European philosophical tradition is that it consists of a series of footnotes to Plato.”
–Alfred North Whitehead

Deleuze and Guattari on Discussing Philosophy (on a blog)

From chapter 1 of What Is Philosophy?:

“Discussions are fine for roundtable talks, but philosophy throws its numbered dice on another table. The best one can say about discussions is that they take things no further, since the participants never talk about the same thing. Of what concern is it to philosophy that someone has such a view, and thinks this or that, if the problems at stake are not stated? And when they are stated, it is no longer a matter of discussing but rather one of creating concepts for the undiscussible problem posed. Communication always comes too early or too late, and when it comes to creating, conversation is always superfluous. SOmetimes philosophy is turned into the idea of a perpetual discussion, as “communicative rationality,” or as “universal democratic conversation.” Nothing is less exact, and when philosophers criticize each other it is on the basis of problems and on a plane that is different from theirs and that melt down the old concepts in the way a cannon can be melted down to make new weapons. It never takes place on the same plane. To criticize is only to establish that a concept vanishes when it is thrust into a new milieu, losing some of its components, or acquiring others that transform it. But those who criticize without creating, those who are content to defend the vanished concept without being able to give it the forces it needs to return to life, are the plague of philosophy. All these debaters and communicators are inspired by ressentiment. They speak only of themselves when they set empty generalizations against one another.”

I read this for the first time just after getting caught up on this discussion about the psychopathology of philosophy blogging over at An Und Für Sich.







2 responses to “Deleuze and Guattari on Discussing Philosophy (on a blog)”

  1. goldenagebeyond Avatar

    OK fine, a lot of hi falutin blah blah so what is the problem in question that is so arcane that it cannot be addressed directly?

  2. troyrhoades Avatar

    Reblogged this on Drops of Experience and commented:
    A great quote posted by Matthew Segall at Footnotes 2 Plato from Deleuze and Guattari’s What is Philosophy? that is appropriate for the blogosphere.

What do you think?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: