Steven emailed me this morning, reminding me of a post he had written on NPS a few years back. I agree with most of what he says here, with the exception of him lumping Luhmann into the group of thinkers that see the world in terms of relations of interiority. I’m less clear as to why DeLanda is unable to account for becoming and events (does the absence of a particular vocabulary preclude thinking these things?). I do, however, emphatically agree with Shaviro’s points about DeLanda and Marx. I’ve never quite understood DeLanda’s hostility to Marx as Marx strikes me as fitting very nicely with assemblage theory. As always, Shaviro’s post is a masterpiece of close reading and incisive critical commentary. Enjoy!
Advertisements
September 15, 2010 at 10:59 pm
Totally OT, Levi:
In a forthcoming book: Kant, Deleuze and Architectonics (Continuum Studies in Continental Philosophy) by Edward Willatt, I noticed your name in the Amazon Inside the Book section:
There is strong evidence in Deleuze’s writings to suggest that he didn’t find it worthwhile to think about Kant’s Critique of Pure reason as a unified whole. His criticisms of Kant suggests that, as Levi R. Bryant puts it, we need to locate Deleuze’s ‘…doorway for jumping out of critical philosophy…’ (Bryant 2008: 181)
Just thought you might want to know :)
http://tinyurl.com/2fdkebj
September 15, 2010 at 11:01 pm
In the introduction, p. 4