Would he have been the new Spinoza if 1. He was not born a frenchman

>>8646724
he wouldnt have been as creative if he wasnt trying to troll frogs by being into hume and shit

Wow look a bad thread

Am I doing it right if I write of Spinoza as trash by referring to him as le magic monad man???

>>8646744
Spinoza is god tier

I was just wondering if Deleuze would have been a better philosopher if he wasn't exposed to all that hsit i listed

>>8646748
no he only became a philosopher because of being and nothingness the ultimate frog banter so no the answer is no

>>8646755
i dont understand your post

>>8646724

Do you have any other shitty questions to ask?

Just to put them all in a single thread

>>8646758

every morning in Paris, trillions of frogs pour from the gutters surrounding the Écoles national bearing gauloises, baguettes, and postfeminist anti-Foucault-neo-Foucaultian schizoanalytic pamphlets, shitting everywhere in little piles that when viewed from space forms giant critiques and critiques of critiques of Beauvoir's "Les Mandarins"

>>8646803
Please don't bully me. This is a reflexion I have spent a whole week thinking about and wanted to share it here.

>>8646744
That's Leibniz

>>8646818
If it took you all week to squeeze out that turd, you better look for some kind of an intellectual laxative.

>>8646923
Rude.

>>8646724
Nice thread OP. Really paved the way for intelligent discussion.

1. The virtual is a concept that encompasses both structuralism/psychoanalysis and vitalism (elan vital and all that). That's not to say that Deleuze agreed with structuralism/psychoanalysis, only that the cultural climate (including May 68) might've been more fertile than it might seem.

2. Again, Guattari might've had a positive influence in some aspects despite being batshit. Deleuze might've been the more precise and analytical of the two, but his philosophy was in no way down to earth, which is good for the most part.

I'm really struggling with the Bergsonian part if his philosophy despiye having read the book and his articles. Any suggestions for better understanding Bergson or Deleuze's Bergson?