Scan barcode
A review by volbet
Nietzsche and Philosophy by Hugh Tomlinson, Gilles Deleuze, Michael Hardt
4.0
If you've read and understood this book, then please find me on social media and send me DM. I really wanna call you liar directly to your face.
As my understanding goes, Gilles Deleuze's main thesis, which shows up half way through the book, is that Nietzsche's book, the Genealogy of Morals, is a rewriting of Kant's Critique of Pure Reason.
Now, that's quite the claim, considering the two books deal with very different themes. One is a about an historic analysis of ethics, while the other is allegedly about ontology in the age of reason.
What Deleuze want with this comparison is to establish a new form of ontology, an ontology that stands in contrast with dialectics in particular and hegelianism in general. We'll get back to why this is important.
Through a vigorous reading of various of Nietzsche's texts, Deleuze does manage to argue in favor of his thesis. Interpreting the often pragmatic Nietzsche in a way that establishes an independant ontology. An ontology based on will, value and force.
At its surface this might seem like an exercise in academic masturbation, doing readings and interpretations as an excuse to use big words and have book to your name. But I would argue that this book serves a greater purpose. The purpose of establishing what would become the French Radicals of the late 20th century, as a contrast to the Frankfurt School, who were nothing if not rigorous in their usage of dialectics. Deleuze seeks to establish an alternative to dialectics that's even more radical and even more deconsstructive.
For that purpose, Nietzsche and Philosophy is a resounding succes.
Many of Deleuze's conclusions are far-fetched and vague, but he certainly come to those conclusions with fire and fury.
While I still hold to a way more pragmatic reading of Nietzsche, Delueze is difficult to argue against. His reading of Nietzsche is in-depth and consistent throughout the book. It's a book that makes you think, and that might be the highest purpose of all.
As my understanding goes, Gilles Deleuze's main thesis, which shows up half way through the book, is that Nietzsche's book, the Genealogy of Morals, is a rewriting of Kant's Critique of Pure Reason.
Now, that's quite the claim, considering the two books deal with very different themes. One is a about an historic analysis of ethics, while the other is allegedly about ontology in the age of reason.
What Deleuze want with this comparison is to establish a new form of ontology, an ontology that stands in contrast with dialectics in particular and hegelianism in general. We'll get back to why this is important.
Through a vigorous reading of various of Nietzsche's texts, Deleuze does manage to argue in favor of his thesis. Interpreting the often pragmatic Nietzsche in a way that establishes an independant ontology. An ontology based on will, value and force.
At its surface this might seem like an exercise in academic masturbation, doing readings and interpretations as an excuse to use big words and have book to your name. But I would argue that this book serves a greater purpose. The purpose of establishing what would become the French Radicals of the late 20th century, as a contrast to the Frankfurt School, who were nothing if not rigorous in their usage of dialectics. Deleuze seeks to establish an alternative to dialectics that's even more radical and even more deconsstructive.
For that purpose, Nietzsche and Philosophy is a resounding succes.
Many of Deleuze's conclusions are far-fetched and vague, but he certainly come to those conclusions with fire and fury.
While I still hold to a way more pragmatic reading of Nietzsche, Delueze is difficult to argue against. His reading of Nietzsche is in-depth and consistent throughout the book. It's a book that makes you think, and that might be the highest purpose of all.