This paper aims at studying how Benedict de Spinoza and E.V. Ramasamy Periyar have responded to their socio-economic-political environment, and have produced great thoughts of freedom, equality, and ...social justice. Both the thinkers were powerful rationalists who viewed religion only as a political power to oppress people. They seem to be responding to oppression created by religion's social codes and have rebelled against the Establishment. Spinoza was writing against the system hiding his identity as repercussions were quite high in the Dutch Republic against texts that had content against the Establishment. Periyar was a reformer, thinker, and writer and hence, he boldly expressed his views and become the most controversial name during the twentieth century in Tamil Nadu, and his name continues to be used in controversies even now. Keywords: Spinoza, Periyar, religion, caste, rationalism Courtesy: Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy
In this paper, I defend a conception of Deleuze’s two volumes dedicated to film – Cinema I: The Movement-Image, and Cinema II: The Time-Image – as protracted expressions of his political philosophy. ...In this context, I will elaborate the difficult and entwined political claims Deleuze makes on behalf of cinema: that it is capable of engendering a tentative ‘belief in the world’, such as is the necessary correlate of political action; that it captures the contemporary political fact that ‘the people are missing’, as a unified or coherent political agent; and finally that it might reveal those ‘impossible’ or ‘intolerable’ situations which would provoke such a people into being. In advancing this conceptual triumvirate, I will argue that the claims made here on behalf of cinema overspill the art form itself, linking up with Deleuze’s broader political ontology of thought and constituting a generalised political philosophy proper to so-called ‘late-capitalism’.
Theorizing, Deleuzian-style Collinge, Chris
Cultural geographies,
10/2020, Letnik:
27, Številka:
4
Journal Article
Recenzirano
Odprti dostop
There is a difference between theory and theorizing. One way or another, theory is central to the organization of most academic disciplines: for example, as a framework of concepts that expresses ...preoccupations, that codifies linkages, that relates discoveries, that raises questions. But theorizing is the becoming of theory: for example, running into problems, feeling perplexity, creating space, forming concepts, finding time, condensing frameworks, forcing conclusions – a living reality that is (for reasons explored below) neglected as a topic of inquiry. I address this deficiency here by engaging with theorizing as a legitimate, perhaps inescapable theme, albeit one that remains elusive and that must as far as possible be grasped directly as it occurs. In developing this engagement, I suggest that the philosophy of Deleuze and Guattari offers an appropriate point of departure and – through a reading of Difference and Repetition and What is Philosophy?, and through a synthesis of this with the experience of theorizing – I draw out the components of a Deleuzian theory of theorizing.
VII—Spinoza’s Unquiet Acquiescentia Douglas, Alexander X
Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society,
07/2020, Letnik:
120, Številka:
2
Journal Article
Recenzirano
Odprti dostop
Abstract
For Spinoza, the highest thing we can hope for is acquiescentia in se ipso—acquiescence in oneself. As an ethical ideal, this might appear as a complacent quietism, a licence to accept the ...way you are and give up hope of improving either yourself or the world. I argue that the opposite is the case. Self-acquiescence in Spinoza’s sense is a very challenging goal: it requires a form of self-understanding that is extremely difficult to attain. It also involves occupying a daring and radical political position, one that obstructs the psychological mechanisms by which political power is typically maintained.
PDF
