Um excuse me but what is this?

>>8406581
It's a book. Go and read one

>>8406586
But should I read THIS >>8406581
one?

Pseudointellectual garbage.

Looks like a bunch of buzzwords dumped on the cover of a book.

>>8406615

go finish reading the greeks or whatever lol

>>8406601

at least not until you've read a lot of other stuff

>>8406936

looks like somebody has never opened said book

deleuze and guattari will literally change your life if you can understand them. i've never had contemporary society elucidated before so clearly to me

territory

>>8406971

this. anti oedipus is a landmark in revolutionary critical theory.

File: apo.jpg (49KB, 247x382px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 247x382px

Mandatory boutang-posting.

>>8406581
A boutade

>>8407004
Is he somewhat sympathetic to D&G?
>>8406971
Can you recommend good secondary sources? Something that helped them 'click' for you?

>>8406977
a veritable tour de force

>>8407528
>Is he somewhat sympathetic to D&G?
Not really.

"As he approaches the debris of desire, the author hears the galloping hooves of the four horses in the Revelation of St John. His reaction is not despair; just as St John’s text does not end in disaster. But before continuing, there is some rubble to clear away. In metaphysics, to clear away is to recognize, to invite others to recognize. Consequently the author reveals the deadly effects of the idealism of the ‘Enlightenment’, of psychoanalysis, of Deleuze’s ‘desire machines’. After demonstrating how desire was ‘unmasked’ during three centuries of theoretical and practical error, the author establishes, or re-establishes, a free will whose tragedy and glory was understood only by Christianity. Assembling the Fathers of the Church and modern thinkers such as Kierkegaard (and even, on rare points of convergence, Heidegger), he designates the hope, fundamental and constitutive, of all desire. Built on faith in the Christian revelation and the specifically Catholic idea of man in God’s image, he brings us a philosophy which permits man who has recognized his supernatural origin to access authentic release. [Pierre Boutang] "

>>8407668
so, he a Thomist? French Milbank?

>>8406581

Is it really as difficult as people sometimes claim on this board?

Can someone tell us what the gist of the book is?

File: 7a0b6a1f2273488951c7172b8834c832.jpg (16KB, 348x404px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 348x404px

>Deleuze and Guattari develop four theses of schizoanalysis:

>Every unconscious libidinal investment is social and bears upon a socio-historical field.
>Unconscious libidinal investments of group or desire are distinct from preconscious investments of class or interest.
>Non-familial libidinal investments of the social field are primary in relation to familial investments.
>Social libidinal investments are distinguished according to two poles: a paranoiac, reactionary, fascisizing pole and a schizoid revolutionary pole

File: 822[1].jpg (48KB, 500x376px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 500x376px

Was he Deleuze's bitch?

>>8407887
>French Milbank
I can't say.
He wasn't a theologian, but a Thomist for sure. Plus he too loved Vico, Plato and Augustine, so there may be things in common.

>>8407915


It sounds like a horrible mix of poor-man Marxism and snake oil psychoanalysis.

Also >a paranoiac, reactionary, fascisizing pole and a schizoid revolutionary pole

While it often superficially celebrates tradition, fascism is a modern, revolutionary ideology and thus certainly not reactionary in a proper sense.

Two or three actuall ideas wrapped in hundreds of useless words. Subconscious is like a machine and they want be the mechanic but they are retarded/French. Oedipus Complex is wrong because a couple tribes don't follow it. I had respect for '68ers until I read this.

>>8407970
>I had respect for '68ers


kys

>>8407896
the gist of the book is that you should just read Nietzsche and Marx who say things that can be readily drawn out to similar conclusions to the ones D&G present, and say them in a more succinct fashion (okay, not so succinct for Marx).

It's not as if they actually act as a secondary source which condenses and makes clear these thinkers, because I have pity on anyone who tries to make sense of their work without at least those two under their belts.

Sometimes I thought 'well, that was a unique way of presenting it', but on very few occasions do I recall feeling as though I had learned something groundbreaking about society from the book. Then again, I only read the first part and declined to go looking for the second.

>>8406581
It's a good reminder that continental philosophy is usually just as masturbatory and empty as analytic philosophy. What are D&G saying? What are they arguing? Nobody can tell you. Just watch. Nobody can tell you.

>>8407915
If you render this in simpler language, without all the dressing-up, it becomes immediately apparent how banal these statements are.

>>8408403
That's exactly the point. D&G present four statements that seem self-evident (axioms, if you will) and then build their system on top of them. The point of the book isn't to affirm these four theses, but to see what logically follows when one accepts them.

>>8406581
I am diagnosed schizophreniform how does this book relate to me

>>8407921
continentalwaveinspo

>>8406936
"i don't understand deleuze so i'm just going to say his work is a bunch buzzwords :^)"

>>8406971
this.

>>8406971
>change your life
for better or worse?

Lazy people call it pseudo-intellectual because they haven't read any of the prequisites for reading it.

It's like starting philosophy with Hegel

>>8406971
i feel like i've been freed from a prison after reading deluze

>>8411450

Must have been a shoddy prison.

>>8411379
I wouldn't say it's pseudo, but I can see how some how understand D&G will think their perspective is pointless.

IMO, Boutang is right.