Éric Alliez - On Deleuze's Bergsonism

7/27/2019 ric Alliez - On Deleuze's Bergsonism

1/22

On Deleuze's BergsonismAuthor(s): Eric Alliez, Tom Conley and Melissa McMuhanSource: Discourse, Vol. 20, No. 3, Gilles Deleuze: Areason to Believe in this World (Fall 1998),pp. 226-246Published by: Wayne State University PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/41389514 .

Accessed: 29/07/2013 08:27

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Wayne State University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access toDiscourse.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 190.247.66.216 on Mon, 29 Jul 2013 08:27:17 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=wsupresshttp://www.jstor.org/stable/41389514?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/41389514?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=wsupress


2/22

On Deleuze's Bergsonism

Eric Alliez

I believet's uitebstracto ccountorthoughthroughhattfinds mongu-thors,incet inds nly hatt nvestsnthem,nd nvestsn hemorntirelytherreasons. .GilleseleuzePrivateetter

I believehat e un eryreatisksndesir-ingo econstituten uthor'snfluencesasedon hexternalesemblancesf doctrineithothers.henherere recisendicationsom-ing romn uthorhatllows o ediscoverwhateallyooklacenhis rhermind eoflenealizehatheath e as akensverydifferentromhene ewouldaveaturallyassumed.HenriergsonJune2, 928

In short:we have to recognizethat there could be no projectedresearchtopicless Deleuzian and Bergsonian, priori, han thisone: "On Deleuze's Bergsonism." part rom he distrust hesetwophilosophers hared forwords nding n "ism,"we wellknowthat"no double stars xist n thegalaxyofphilosophy."n the orderofthe"event," what s done, is done once and for ll,"as saidbyDiscourse,0.3,all 998,p. 26-246.opyrighty 998 aynetateniversityress,Detroit,ichigan8201-1309.

226

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


3/22

Fall 1998 227anotherBergsonian, ften uoted,with rwithoutuotationmarks,byDeleuze: CharlesPguy.1NonethelessDeleuze is theauthor of a book entitledBergson-ism a book that s anticipatedbytwostudiesof a decade earlier,published n 1956.The first ears the sobertitle, Bergson,"whilethe second is 'The Conceptionof Differencen Bergson."Let usformulate traightwayour workinghypothesis orwhatfollowswithin he narrowcontext of these titles.A minimawe go fromBergsonto Deleuze's ownBergsonism ywayof the nvestmentfthequestionof difference s a means f he estructionfthe estab-lishedBergsonismthatMerleau- onty ualified s a "retrospectiveBergsonism")in its most sober versionthat the older Bergsonmight avegiven ome credit: ... intearing houghtway rom ci-entific eterminism,Bergsonism-thisBergsonism ramedwithintheThomist icture rderived rom heTeilhardianAbsolute]onceagaindirected hinkingoward spiritualist etaphysics,ndfinallytowards new ccession o Christian ruth."2 maximaitwouldbe amatter fgrasping,ntheBergsonismfDeleuze, theheterogenesisof Deleuzian thought twork, s muchat the evelofsystems ofmethod.Here I need toquote Deleuze:

For ongimehave done"he istoryf hilosophy.. . . At he imemy ayfgettingut f twas, think,hat f onceivinghe istoryfphilosophys sort f uggeryr, o ess,s n mmaculateonception.fancy yselfomingp o uthorsromehindnd onceivingonstrouschildrenith hem. hat t s his rher wn s mportantecause heauthorsad o ay ffectivelyverythinghat made hemay. ut hatthe hild e monsteras lso equired,ecausellkindsf ecenterings,slippages,reakages,nd ecretmissionsroughte rush f leasure.Forme he ooknBergsonsexemplarynthisenre.nd odayherexistsome eople ho igglehenheyeproache orven avingrittenonBergson.t's ecauseheyon't nownoughistory.heyon't nowthatn he eginningergsonas centerf oncentratedaten renchuniversities...). ItwasNietzschehom readater ndwho otmeout f llthat. or t s mpossibleohave imubmito treatmentfthat rder. e's he ne esponsibleoronceivinghildrenehindourback."3Fromthis ong quotation t ssufficientlylear that urhypoth-esis can onlybe sustained n relation to the extentof Deleuze's

decentering fBergson'soeuvre,and withrespectto its constitu-tive function or Deleuzian thought tself.To shed lighton this"Bergsonian" enesisof "Deleuzianism"wewouldhave to under-standhow the "late"discoveryfNietzsche,whichwastoengenderthepublicationof Nietzschet aphilosophie1962), had been, as it



4/22

228 Discourse0.3were, nspiredbyhis initial tudiesofBergson,beforeproducing,in turn, e bergsonisme1966). Everythingappened then as ifthe"great dentityfSpinoza-Nietzsche"owardwhich everythingon-verged" op.cit.: 85) had been nourished y more ecret missioncomposed bythe "little"dentityfBergson-Nietzschehatormshebase f he italistrianglehus onstituted

SpinozaBergson NietzscheWhich leads us to remark traight waythat the geologicaladherence of Deleuzian thought o a certainFrenchphilosophy,thathas tspointofdeparture etween he astphilosophy fMainede Biran and the Mmoire fRavaisson, rovidesmaterial or this"minor"dentity,fBergsonian rigin,nwhichthegreatrupturewith hephilosophy ftheStatewasopened infavor f philosophyof Lifeand Becoming, nwhich, o evokea Bergson n resonancewithNietzsche and Spinoza, "there re no things, here are only

actions" that s, mpulsesndconstructions)Whichcould be trans-latedas follows: herereno mpressionstherereonlyxpressions.But et's isten oDeleuze:Philosophy'selationshipith he tate...) goes urtherack. orthoughtorrowsts roperlyhilosophicalmageromhetatesbeau-tiful,ubstantialrsubjectiventeriority.t nventsproperlypiritualState,san bsolutetate...). Bergson,f ourse,as lso aughtpinFrench-styleistoryfphilosophy,ndyetnhimheres omethingwhichannote ssimilated,hichnabledimoprovideshock,obearallyingointor ll he pposition,he bjectf omanyatreds:ndthissnot omuch ecausef he hemef uration,sof heheoryndpracticef ecomingsf llkinds,f oexistentultiplicities.5

In the notesthatfollow willattempt o discern this"somethingwhichcannot be assimilated" hatthe theme of durationwouldactualize na certainway,ndthatwouldconstitutehe uthenticallyDeleuziangraspwithwhich tbecamepossibleto"say omethingnone's ownname (...) inopeningoneself omultiplicities"norderto assumethe risk fproducing, f"taking old" of a philosophy,at thepointwheretheexpressionismfthepercept a perceptionis not an impression) s identicalwiththe constructivismf theconcept theconcept screation)6We can recall Pguyagain, in his Note ur M. Bergsont laphilosophieergsonienne"Agreat hilosophys notone inwhich here



5/22

Fall 1998 229isnothing o be takenup again. t is the one thathas takenhold ofsomething.

*Thatsomethingwastakenfrom Bergsonianmageofthoughtoughtto be obvioustoevery eaderofDifferencendRepetitionhois attentiveo therecenteringhat onditions he critical imensionof thework,with his"intuitiveowerofnegation" hatforms heinitialexpressionof a thought7 nd whichseems here to matchup at everypointwiththe negating ntuition f common senseelaboratedbyBergson.Arecenteringfthought pon a differencethat cannot be thought n the abstract dentity f the concept,that iberatesphilosophy rom heprimacy fidentityn beingasalso in representation,at thepriceofa moregeneral categoricalreversalccording owhich eing s said ofbecoming, dentityfthedifferent,heone ofthemultiple,tc."8 hisCopernicanevolutionswhat rings ack thegreatBergsonian hemes n thebasisof seriesofdualitieswhere nepole isalways ynamicnd intensive hile hesecondisforciblytatic ecause it s nthe first lace only he outerenvelopeand theabstract ffect f therepresentationf the first.From thisnotion that differences behind all thingsonceit is graspedin itsheterogeneitynd itsbecoming,Deleuze willsharewithBergsonthe idea thatphilosophyhas to do withdetailinasmuch s its task s to determine heeffectiveonditions frealexperience and notthegeneric onditions f merely ossible x-periencefor representationhat rojects ome(resembling) hingbehind difference. . .9 t s tantamount osaying hat rom latotoHegel, byway fKant and especiallyyway fKant "what as been

most acking n philosophy sprecision.Philosophical ystemsrenotproportionedo themeasure f herealitynwhichwe ive.Theyare" ( . . . ), concludesBergson, toobroad for t."10 nd how couldthisnot be so, if, s Deleuze explains, mphasizing heoppositionof representationo a formationfan entirelyifferentature,theelementary onceptsofrepresentationre thecategoriesdefinedas theconditionsofpossible experience.These, however,re toogeneral or too broad for the real. The net is so loose that thebiggest ish wim hrough. . ."n Thatmetaphysicsecomesxperienceitselfn a philosophyfpureexperience-hisprogramto adjusttheimmanence ofthought pon theunivocityfbecoming s thatofa "superior mpiricism"Deleuze) whose "superiority"ould notexceed the limits f a "true mpiricism"hatwouldonlywork intailor-madeashion,"husdefining "radical mpiricism"Bergson



6/22

230 Discourse0.3marking isaffinityith hepragmatismfWilliam ames, eekingthe"integralxperience")Anempiricismommonto Deleuze andtoBergsonthat mposesa newstylefphilosophical xpressionnorder to explore, n the immanence and univocityfBeing,therequisites f a thought f the realityfdifference:stylen whichintuition hymes ithnarration, roblematizationnd descriptionof processesof individuation, utside of all argumentation.Wehave no fearofmultiplyinguotations n order to make clear thiscommunityfstyle ndwriting. oesn't thisoftengiverise to theperceptionof the Deleuzian phrase as "a certain flexuous ine"whoseputtingnvariation ependson a power f ntegration hichis thatof a living otality,n the case of a heterogenousontinuityfreciprocalnterpntrationreferringoBergsonisms its virtual enterofexpression? erewe think ess of the"rhizome" hanthegeneralproblemof Deleuzian (and Deleuzo-Guattarian)writinguch as itisexposedon a double level nMille lateaux:121 Anexact $] xpressionsreabsolutely ecessaryo describesomethingxactly,tbeingsaid that nexactitude sic] is nnowayan approximation- tis,to thecontrary,s Deleuze and Guattariwriten reprisingheBergsonism ormula, he xact assage fwhatis n the rocessfbeingmade.2. The "magicformula" f PLURALISM=MONISM needs tobe affirmedbsolutely, assingvia all of thedualisms hat re theenemybut he ntirelyecessarynemy,he iece f urniturehatweareforever oving.o we need to be reminded hatno one has bettershown than Deleuze, in Le bergsonisme,hat thisframework asBergsonian arexcellence?ergsonwasmoving eyond he pparentcontradictionetween he dualism fdifferencesfnature nd themonismofcontraction-relaxationn thepluralism f durations nsuch a way hathe composesthe monism f Time as a function fthetheory f virtualmultiplicitiesnd thedifferentialrinciple ftheir ctualization . . .13In short,fa method s needed to "effectivelyake" the mul-tiple, verythingndicates hatforDeleuze thismethodwill boveall be ofBergsoniannspiration.To return o Bergsons letter, his methodwill be essentiallyproblematic n that twillengage thereality f itsexperience bymanifestinghe llwill equired o "chase way eadymade oncepts"- conceptsofrepresentation-nordertopose problems na newway,spousethe rticulationsfthereal andfollow heir endenciesinstead of etting neselfbe guidedbytheconservativeogic thatrulescommon sense nsofars it "submits otheproblem uch as itis posited by anguage."Whence itfollows hat"conversationerymuch resembles onservation,"nd thatBergsonwill hold in low



7/22

Fall 1998 231esteem he homooquax whose hought, henhethinks,sonly re-flection n his peech,"hitching iscommunication o a knowledgethathis nterlocutorslready ossess; nd on theoppositeside,thephilosophy hat s iberated rom he naturaldialectic fwords ndthingswhichtheunderstandingeparates utfrom hecontinuityof ife, orwhich opose a problemmeansto invent,ndnotmerelydis-cover.t means creatingn one swoopboth thepositionoftheproblemand its solution."And call philosopher hepersonwhocreates he olution,whichsnecessarily nique,oftheproblem hathe has newlyposed,"withthe "newmeaningthatwordsacquirein the newconceptionof theproblem," nd thecreationofnewconcepts hat anfollow.15 ithout hisnversionfcommon enseand thisrupturewith the doxa thatupholds the logical ideal ofrecognition; ithout generalheoryf heroblem,hat eases to modelthought n supposedly reexistingsolid"propositions,nordertoposittheproblemas the extrapropositionaleneticelement of theproduction fthetrue;without his ffirmationf theproblematicas a differentialntensityf deas themselvesn theirmovement fimmanence rreducibleboth to theAnalytic nd to theDialecticbecause it introducesduration ntothoughtbyreconciling ruthand creation tthe evel ofproblems nd ofconcepts. . .Well,forlack ofthis peculativempiricismhat s led in thisway o affirmheoppositionof theBergsonian differential"ntuitiono theanalysisofthe"readymade,"ndwithout hegeneral nversionhat ngagestheroblematicaturend essencef eingtselfhe"famous opernicanRevolution mounts onothing."16Now if t is truethatthisformula f Deleuze (in "The ImageofThought," chapterthat seems to constitute he heartbeatofDifferencendRepetition)oes not refer xplicitlyo theBergsonianrevolution,t is still n Bergsonthatwe can in a certainwayfindtheaffirmationf thenecessityfDeleuze's Bergsonism.n effect,Deleuze asks, ifphilosophy sunderstood n thisway,s there nychancethat philosopher an find n advance or can foreseewhatanotherphilosopherwill ind?This s not t all mpossiblef hishiloso-pher lsounderstandshe hilosophicalethod.. . "17 n this ase,themethodwill notbe able to encountertimeas a possibleobjectofthought, utas the bjectivemode ofBeing-Thinking,eterminingthephilosopher o"measure heeffects f the ntroduction ftimeinto a problem"18- nd the otherphilosopherto rediscover hegenerativedea ofBergsonismn theform f an ontologyfbecoming.We will eave asidehere thequestionofknowingfBergsonhimselfhadforeseen nythingfthis xperience nhiscontactwithGabrielTardeinorderto note theresonanceofthis emarkwith he thesisof thetranscendence f all philosophyn respect o thehistorical



8/22

232 Discourse0.3time nwhich t has been written.n this,Bergsonconnectswithprofoundly ietzschean dea ofwhichwe know ll thatDeleuze willbe able to extract rom t(becoming s nothistory)It is in anycase from n entirely ergsonianpointofview hatDeleuze follows The Image ofThought"with chapterentitled"Ideal SynthesisfDifference,"nd thenanother till, he last ofDifferencendRepetitionbearingthetitle, Asymmetricalynthesisof theSensible," hapters nwhichhe elaboratestheproblematicprinciple f differentialhilosophyccording o the dea of mul-tiplicitynseparable rom virtualiy hat olerates nodependenceon the dentical n either hesubjector theobject."For withbothDeleuze and Bergson (and Tarde), it s themetaphysicalnvestmentof nfinitesimalalculus hat eterminesntologyy onferringt with hecharacteristicone f heterogenesis,y ntroducingime hich onstitutesanddifferentiatesn a singlemovementinbeingnd nthought-ime sthevitalityfbeingand genitalityfthinking.he notion of truthis thrown nto crisis.Weknow hat hetheme fthe nversionf"readymade"beingin favor f a becoming"thatbecomes" and of a movementmoreinternal to me thanmyself,"hat determines he fluidityf theconceptsof thisthinkingn duration hosephilosophicalct consistsin invertinghehabitual irectionfthe abor f thoughtis explicitlyrelatedbyBergson, n a famoustextreproduced n La pense t emouvantto the inversionn the manner ofthinking utforwardfor the first imeby nfinitesimalnalysis.twillbe designated s"themostpowerful f all methodsof nvestigationvailableto thehuman mind"throughwhat tborrows rom he concrete ealityfmovementnd oftime.Now f quantitysalways ualityna nascentstate,"t s "natural hatmetaphysicsdoptsthegenerativedea ofour mathematicsn order to extendit to all qualities, hat s, torealityngeneral. . . Let'ssay, hen . . thatone f he bjectsfmeta-physicsonsistsneffectingualitativeifferentiationsnd ntegrations"19Given that hisgenerativedea is itself fmetaphysical rigin ndthat tparticipatesnanintelligencef ife hat s sufficiento affirmthesuperiorityfbiology verthe other ciences .. itfollows hatifthe greatscientific iscoverieshave been "so many soundingsmade in pureduration," themore iving herealityouched,thedeeperthe measurement."20t is in thisway hat ife s the fieldofaffirmationfthefull ealityfthevirtual,venwhile t snot ctual.The differentialheme husmakesclear theonto-geneticature fidentity ositedbyBergsonbetween heontology fbecoming ndtheontology f thevirtual.Now nthechapters fDifferencendRepetitionhat pen onto alongelaboration edicatedto theesoteric istoryfthephilosophy



9/22

Fall 1998 233of differentialalculus Mamon,Wronski, ordas-Demoulin)De-leuzewill n a waygo beyondBergsonianprocessuality y ntegrat-inghis differentialistitalismwiththe objectivedefinition f theproblemas Idea.21 An Idea whose differentialenesisamountstodisplacingthe dualityof the concept and intuition nsofar s itgoesfrom hevirtual o ts ctualization,rom he conditions f thedeterminabilityf a problemto the cases of determined olutions,as a source fthe roductionfrealobjectsn theredprocalenesis fdifferentialelations.Thisis,"explainsDeleuze, "thesubstanceofIdeas inso far s they athe nthethought-elementfqualitability"(DifferencendRepetition73). In thusextracting ergsonfromhislasttiesto Kantby nvestingMamon' critiquen order toexplodethe extrinsicityf the concept and intuition n the Idea- whichis equivalentto positing differencefdegreeetween the sensibleand the ntelligible-Deleuze elaborates n idealBergsonismf ost-Kantiannspiration22By nscribingt thebase ofontologyhebeingoftheproblematic s an internalmultiplicityertainingo theeventand to theproductionof the newthrough n ideal generation fdiscontinuities,e isable todevelopa differentialntology apableof affirminghe reality fthevirtual s characteristic f the Ideaand reason of the Sensible in themathematico-biologicalystemof differentiation: here differentiationefers o determinationthroughdifferential elationsof thevirtual ontent of the Idea,and diffrenciationefers o the actualization f thisvirtualityndistinctpeciesand parts orresponding ocasesofsolutionof theproblem.However t is intensity,hrough heessentialprocessofintensiveuantities,hatdetermines hedifferentialelations obeactualized n thequalitiesand extensions t createsthroughndi-viduation. . . Deleuze thus ffects n operation la BergsoneyondBergson y referringhe Bergsonian critiqueof intensityin theEssai sur es onnesmmdiatese a conscience)o that transcendentalphysicalllusionwhichmeansthatweonlyknowntensitysalreadyactualized n extension nd disguised nqualities ending o annulthe difference fintensityhat s alienated in its"explication." twill nonethelessbe maintained hattherewe have,at least atfirstglance,a "slippage"rather han a "breakage."How can we in factqualify hismovement hat onsists n disengaging heontologicalprinciple f Difference rom heempiricalprinciple f dentity yasserting 1) that"extension is] precisely he process bywhichintensive ifferences put outside of itself, istributed n such away hat t s castout,compensated, qualized, and suppressed nthe extensionthat t creates" 300) and (2), because, contraryothe falsemovement f realization hatprioritizesheresemblanceof the real to thepossiblewhereas he atterwas tself etroactively



10/22

234 Discourse0.3conceivedin the image of the real,actualization s the differen-tiationproductive f a true creationthat does not resemble thevirtualitiesonstituted f the differentialelations t ncorporates?How thus can thismovement e qualifiedexcept,once more,asBergsonian?Furthermore, eleuze is the first o remindus thatby examining he double genesisofquality nd of extension inMatiretmmoire)Bergson"rediscoverst theheart of durationthe mplicated rder of that ntensity hichhad been denouncedonlyprovisionallynd fromwithout"DifferencendRepetition39)A rediscoveryhatwillgiverise to L'volution ratricend to theconvergence fbiology nd infinitesimal athematics.quote thepassageon the"englobing" unction fbiology: Insofar s can beforeseen, heprocedurebywhichwe wouldgo from he definitionof a certain ital ctionto thesystemfphysico-chemicalacts hatit mplieswould notbe withoutnalogywith heoperation ywhichwe movefrom he function o the derivation . . ,"23 hat s,fromdifferentialirtualityo ts ormsf ctualization.t s thus iathedis-tinction etween hetwo ypes fmultiplicity-nternal ualitativemultiplicitiesnd externalquantitativemultiplicities,ontinuousmultiplicities ertaining o the order of thevirtual hat ssentiallybelongsto duration, hanging n nature whendividing tself e-cause it s not constitutedy sum of distinct erms, atheringhenew n tsbecoming nsofar s t snecessarily eterogeneous owhatprecedes t .. , and the actual discontinuousmultiplicitiesepre-sentedbyhomogenous pace according otheregime fpartesxtrapartes-thatBergsonism resentstself oDeleuze as the ntensivesource of modern ontology s a philosophy f difference "thisphilosophy f Differencewhichthewhole of Bergsonism epre-sents,"he writes Differencend Repetition39). If it is true thatdifference etweenspace and duration, nd the actual and thevirtual,makespossibledifferencetself,t s theentiretyfDeleuze'sBergsonismhat s mobilized n the affirmationf a philosophy fdifferencensofar s "philosophys the theory fmultiplicities,"according othe formula hatfunctions s theopeningto the ast,posthumouslyublished ext. hesefew ensepageswhose itle ndcontent ould not be moreBergsonian: the ctualand thevirtual,"inwhichfor the last time theessential or "the nassimilable") sformulated, amely hatwe will each theplaneof mmanence nlyby onferringhevirtual ith full ealitynwhich ts ctualization,insofar s it s a diffrenciationntegratedna determined ctuality,depends.Such that the ctual s thecomplement r theproduct,the object of actualization, ut this atterhas onlythevirtual sitssubject."24 nd as its "subjectbyright,nasmuch as it makesitself . . , life, s a bearer ofsingularities."hat this astsentence,



11/22

Fall 1998 235extractedfromhis Foucaultdesignatesfor Deleuze theveritablehorizon of the Foucaldian workwill not surprize he reader whodiscerns hegeneral Bergsonianmovement f hisreading.25Withthisfoundation hephilosophy f difference ould onlyrediscover nd developfor tself hegreatvitalistntuition hathadinspiredBergson's discovery f the possibilityf a newmonism,the monismof the lan vital as theproblematizationnd becomingfthe ndividuationf eing,26 philosophy fvital ifferenceresentingthe iving eing n tsmultiplicitys theproblematic eingparexcel-lence,considering ecoming s thedimension fthe iving hroughindividuation,he theater f individuation fbeingand of think-ing nvitalbecoming.For individuation annotsupposeanypriordifferentiationr specificationhat,bya processof abstraction,wouldrefer nd reduce differenceo identities nd resemblancesbetween tates s so many onditions accordingto "theordinaryartifice fSpencer'smethod," onsistingn "reconstitutingvolutionusing ragmentsfthe volved") On the contrary,twillprovokethem, twillengenderthem, twillcreate hem on the basis of anintensepre-individualield, ingularized olely hrough ifferencesof ntensityor individuating ifferences,hat s,vitaldifferences)that urn ife nto an "immensityfvirtuality"ith s many zonesofindtermination"s there are livingbeings. . .28As RaymondRuyer tates,who s moreBergsonianhere thanhe thinks,he x ofindividualitys beneathctual existence- such that t is the sourceof unitarydifferentiation,29hich willappear "as constituted fmultiple ifferences,omplementaryo each other. . ."30 hus wecan nowunderstandhow Deleuze can affirm hatanyconfusionbetween oth ndividuationndspecification,ndindividualityndthe form f theSelf"compromises hewhole ofthephilosophy fdifference"DifferencendRepetition58). It would be tantamountto renouncinggenesisand constitutionn order,followingRantand even Husserl'sexample,toremainwith simpleranscendentalconditioningccordingowhich he onditioneferso he onditionedhoseimaget racesccordingo hemodelf he ossible pheld y hilosophiesfrepresentationItwouldthusbe equivalent orenouncing hegrasp feach existent n tsnoveltynd toconfusinghevirtualwith hepos-sibleonce it sposited hat what iffrencitestselfswhat irst f lldiffers ith tself,hat s,thevirtual."31t willthusbe necessary, yway f circular rocess, oapprehend hetheoryf nowledgend thetheoryf ife s being nseparablefrom ne another. or, f a theoryof ife hat s notaccompaniedby critique fknowledgesrequiredtoaccept, uch as they re,theconcepts hatunderstandingmakesavailable to it,"32nversely,s soon as the livingbeing is takenintoaccountaccordingto itsspecific endenciesnd theempirical



12/22

236 Discourse 0.3character fthelanvital srecognized, here s- following anguil-hem's formulation- "resistance f thething,not to knowledge,but to a theory fknowledge hatproceedsfrom heknowledgeto the thing."33t is thus the livingbeing that n thiswaymarksthe need for a superiormpiricismeplacingthe conditionsof allpossibleexperiencewith he conditions f realexperience.And"iftheseconditions an and must e grasped n an intuition,"eleuzeemphasizes, it sprecisely...) becausetheymustnot be broaderthan theconditioned,because theconceptthey orm s identicalto itsobject."34 erewegraspwhattiesDeleuze, so intimatelyndexclusively,o theBergsonianperspectivend to its continuationsinRuyer nd Simondon sinceonly n integral italisman affirmthe point of view of ontogenesis n the constitutivedentity fphilosophy nd ontology. hat iswhyDeleuze so often eturns othe first hapterof Matire t mmoirethis book that s liberatedfrom sychologyhrough hethemeof attentiono ifeforewordothe seventh dition) short-circuitinghe distinction f thesubjectand theobject through istheory f"images," ergsonreachestheplane of mmanence s pure experience, pure mmanence f ifewith tself isplacing heoppositionof ife nd matter owards anentire ontinuityfdurations," ith, etweenmatter nd spirit,llthepossible ntensities f a pure memorydentical o thetotalityfthepast, "pastngeneral" hat xistsn tselfnthemode of virtualcoexistence"thepastis pure ontology"35); complete equality fbeingand lifemplying coextensivitynprinciple fconsciousnesswith ife, hat husverifiests ndependence n relation o the Selfthrough he identityfmemorywithduration tself.36 his ideathat not everythings given (in a formthatnecessarily efers othequestionofthesubject) because thevirtual s the ivingwhole,willbringback to the heart of L'volutionratricehe Nietzcheantheme fthe vercomingfmanbymeansf is wn hinkingowardife37Andeffectively:f"philosophy an onlybe an effort nce againtomelt nto thewhole,"38o "overcome he human condition"39 nd"create reators,"40heexperienceofthoughtwillhaveto be life'sovercomingf he ived hroughheivingAphilosophy f ife orwhich,according othe uthor ftheDeux ourcese a moraletde areligionmoralitytself s "essentiallyiological" fwe accept granting thewordbiologyhevery omprehensiveense tshould have and thatperhaps twillhave one day;"41n ontology fthe iving nd not aphenomenologyfthe ived.According o theregime fDeleuzianideality,he objectivityf the Idea here meetsthe subjectivationof the thinker: Every ody, very hingthinks nd is a thoughtinasmuch s,reduced to its ntensive easons, texpresses n Ideawhose ctualization tdetermines. utthethinker imself r herself



13/22

Fall 1998 237makesfrom llmanner fthings isorher ndividual ifferences;nthisway he thinkersresponsible or tones nd diamonds,plants,and 'evenanimals.'"42

*Tying ogetherndintertwining,s I haveustdone,the imsofDeleuze andBergsonby aking sa guiding hread he"foundation-workfromwhichthewhole oeuvre is derived"43.DifferencendRepetition, everythinguggests hattherelative uccess of the en-terprisewhichtends to define Deleuze's Bergsonismwithin heperspectivef thegenesisof histhought lso marks he realfailureof the projectto characterize he novelty f Deleuze in respectto Bergson. n such a waythat once theBergsoniancentralityfthisthought s verified, verything appens as if the monstrouschild engenderedin Bergsons back would onlybe the effect fDeleuzian philosophynits aterdevelopments in short: rom hemachinic onceptionof desire and ofthought o thetheory f theconceptthatfollows, oingviathe nvestmentf the abyrinthean

complexityf theBaroque fold n Leibniz,betweenmonadologyand nomadology). .. Asifthemonstroushild orn f he ergsonianproblematologyere one therhan eleuze imselfn hismetamorphosingconceptology.. .Thishypothesiss sustained rom he fact hat,whether t thelevel of the method that determines he coherence of Deleuze'swritings,r at thepointof tstheoretical tarting ointand focusgivenbythequestionof the status fdifference,t is Bergsonweencounter- in the dentityf methodand theory,nd thepassagefrommethodology o ontology,uch as they re immediately ug-gested, n a Bergsonianashion, s soon as a multipledifferentialis conceived as an internal difference. his is well knownandadmirably econstructedn the two articles f 1956,especiallyn"La conceptionde la diffrence hez Bergson."The method ofdifference s only nvolved n an ontology f duration nsofar s"duration, endency,sthe difference f selfwith heself; nd whatdiffers ith tselfs mmediatelyheunityf he ubstance nd the ub-ject,"the"unityf thething nd theconcept," indingtsprincipleinlife tself"life stheprocessofdifference")hanks o the notionof thevirtual "duration s thevirtual"), hat ontainsno negationand dismisses ll dialectical method (forreason of a still xternaldifference:lato; or of a merelybstractifferenceelying n overlygeneral oncepts:Hegel) , 4but lsodismisses,asically or he amereasons, phenomenological ype fapproach. Bergson herefore,inorder obefree fHegelorofHusserl;Bergsonpresentnthefirst



14/22

238 Discourse 0.3book on Hume at the evel of a generalconceptionofphilosophywhichdismisses heprincipleof "objections" ased on a critiqueof solutions n the name of a "critique fproblems";45 ergson nwhomDeleuze knew ll thathisrupturewith ritical hilosophiesowedtoEnglish mpiricism. . .46Ifwe privilege he articleon difference o the detriment fitsgenerictwin, aught n the constraintf thePhilosopheslbresand thereforemerelyntitled Bergson"-a Bergson tudiedwithinthe perspective f the progressof his philosophy, uite close tothe schema of Bergsonism,ut ultimately einscribedwithinthehistory f philosophy:what led Deleuze to dissociate the "pro-foundly ew"methodfrom heproject, not bsolutely ew, ven nFrance . ."47- it salso a function f the extreme mphasisplacedon the questionfthe oncept.orwhat s sketched ut in thistextis thepassagefrom hepure onceptfdifference,dentifiedwith hevirtual, o the nature fthe ureconcept hose uration"differencefromtself,"heprinciple fdeterminabiliy) memory"coexistenceof thedegreesofdifference,"heprinciple freciprocaldetermi-nation),and lanvital "diffrenciationfdifference,"rinciple fcompletedeterminationwhoseproducts re "objects n absoluteconformityith heconcept ...) becausethey renothing therin truth han thecomplementary osition f the differentegreesof the conceptitself')form hreespects- he hreeergsonianevelsofthe chematismfthe onceptn its concreteeing48 Such that theDeleuzian readingconsists n identifyinghe "cut" of a conceptappropriate o an objectdetermined ccordingto the movementof the "trueempiricism" hatgoes fromthings o "tailor-made"concepts,moldedupon thesuppleforms f ntuition- "conceptofwhich t can barelybe said that t s a concept,"Bergsonpointsout49- to the inversemovement, o longerthatof "the habituallabor of ntelligence,"rom ready-made"oncepts othings, ut ofthegenesisofthings ased on the diffrenciationf theconcept.In theway nwhichBergsonwoulddefine the notion of colorby"having light]pass through convergingens"with ts thousandnuances nordertobring hem o a singlepoint:thentherewouldappear "purewhite ight" in tsundividedunity" romwhich achnuancedraws ts pecific oloration.Then,Deleuze concludes,thedifferentolorsre nolonger bjectsubsumableunder a concept,butthe egreesrnuances f he oncepttself'justas things ave becomenuances or degreesof theconcept,theconcept tself as becomethething."50Yetthisdevelopment-which ended to extract veritable on-ceptology ftheBergsonianproblematologynd allowedthe na-ture of Deleuze'sBergsonism o be discernedas well as could be



15/22

Fall 1998 239expected (from philosophy f difference o an ontology f thevirtual s theoryof the concept)- is no more akenup again inthe work n Le bergsonismehan n laterpublications.AlreadywithDifferencendRepetitioninwhich, s we haveseen,an Idea ofpost-Kantian nspirationtrangelyook overfromwhatwas heraldedofa heterogenetic onceptionof the conceptbriefly eferred acktoBergson.An Idea that learlymarks,byway fMamon (and ofGurouls readingofMamon51), n essentialrelaybetweentheworks n Kant and on Spinoza,and a keystone or possible- andsoonnecessary-return o Leibniz.But above all an Idea that omesto occupytheplace left acantby Bergsonand hiscritiqueof the"static," solid," geometrical,"r "utensilary"dentityf thecon-cept in representation; iventhatBergsondid not develop theconceptualityftheconceptas a "fluid eing," or tself,hat s,thebiologicalonception ftheconceptthathe neverthelessmobilized,and that s a result emaineda prisoner f thereality fconceptsinbiology, ounded ntheir ctualityn specific esemblance.Thisis themovementwhichCanguilhem umsup, underscoringhat nBergson"resemblance y specificationsprolonged n the humaninvention f theconceptwhich s one with hehuman nvention fthe tool: bothconceptand tool are mediations."52We thus are confronting chiasmatic tructuren which thenon-conceptualization y Bergsonhimself f his ownpracticeofthe conceptin a conceptof the conceptwhichwould no longerbe that of itsidentitywithgeneral,abstract deas, etc., . . findsitself ifferentiatednd counteracted yDeleuze in a conceptologythatonlyexists nd functions o integrate,t thelevelof methodand in theconcept,the sumofBergsons theses.Whence a seconddegreeeadingthatwill systematizehesethemes on the basis of aconceptoftheconceptthat epresentshis irtual enter or eleuze,this unique point"evokedbyBergson,which s so extraordinarilysimple n itsoriginal ntuition nd so complex n theabstractionsthat ranslate t that philosophers ave never ucceededinstatingit."53 xceptthatDeleuze is not gnorant f the fact hat orBergsonthismpossible xpressions determined y he ncommensurabilityfintuitiono he onceptnd theystem.. .54Thus Lebergsonismes thereto show hat heslippages, reakages, nd all these ecret missionswhich Deleuze spoke to us in his negotiationswithhimself akepart nthismajor decentering hat nmy pinionwillno longerbemadeexplicit s suchbecause tuses thedirection ftheBergsonianoeuvrefortheproduction nd genesisof Deleuzian philosophynitsmostspecificmovement o affirm he vitalism f the concept.Bymeans ofwhich,ALL thatDeleuze haswrittensvitalist- s hehimself laims.55



16/22


17/22

Fall 1998 241The oldadage:omnis otusundaturn mmobilit bsoluton no sensehasthemeaningnslavedo the maginationhatt swrongfullyiven.."("La philosophieuverte" 8-89).Wekeepin mindHenri Gouhier'sdemonstrationhat nderscoresowtheChristologyf theDeux ources"eliminatesheology"y eekingo be "strictlyhilosophical."f.Bergsondans 'histoiree apenseccidentaleParis: rin, 989)119.Merleau-Pontyforhispartwas bleto shed ight n the pre-Christian"lement f thismysticism;f. Bergsonefaisant"nSignesParis: allimard,960)238-39.Inrespectfwhichhe party"inupper nd ower ase)thatuccessfullyfoughtn theeve of theGreatWar o outlaw ergson rom heChurchseems oberetrospectivelyustifiedn their equest.3 GillesDeleuze,"Lettre un critiquevre," ourparlersParis:Minuit,990)14-15.This ext adbeenpublishedn1973, hus enyearsbefore he ooks n cinemanwhich eleuzewas o ompose verytrangecinematographicergsonism.4 Henri ergson,L'intuitionhilosophique,"'volutionratrice49(OeuvresParis:UF, dition uCentenaire,959] 05) Followingustom,I shall ontinue oprovidehese wo eferences,hefirsteing hat f helast dition fBergson'book.5 Gilles eleuze ndClaire arnet,ialoguestrans. ughTomlinsonand Barbara abberjamNewYork: olumbia P,1987)13,15. Deleuzemight avebeenthinkingf these inesofBergsonn a letter o H. M.Kallen,he uthor fWilliamamesndHenriergson"Formedistinctnityandmultiplicityreonly iewsaken nsomethinghat akes artnbothwithouteing ither he one or theother,nd that call a 'qualitativemultiplicity,'ra multiplicityfreciprocalenetration,'r duration.' yentireffortromhe ay begano hilosophizeasbornenthis onsiderationfa multiplidtyuigeneris, hich hilosophersave lwayseft sidebecausethey erceive f durationnlyn itsspatial ymbol,nd whichs realityitself.." The etter ndsby voking "preestablishedarmony"etweenthe heme f"duration"nd theJamesianstreamf onsciousness"Oc-tober 8, 1915, eprintednBergson, langes191-94.)6 Pourparlers5-16. t squite ymptomatic'hat his laborationnthe perverseaste" hatNietzscheiveso"say imple hingsnone'sownname" sorganizedround heBergsonianotion fmultiplicity.. .7 HenriBergson,L'intuitionhilosophique,"apenset emouvant120-21/1348.8 GillesDeleuze,DifferencendRepetitiontrans. aul PattonNewYork: olumbia P)

9 "It salways ifferenceshat esemble achother,hat re analo-gous, pposedor identical: ifferencesbehind verything,utbehinddiferencehere snothing"DifferencendRepetition7)10HenriBergson,ntroductiono La penset emouvantpart ne)1/1253.



18/22

242 Discourse 0.311DifferencendRepetition8 (translationlightlyodified)12 (Paris:Minuit,980)31.Thousandlateaus:apitalismnd chizo-phreniatrans,ndforewordyBrianMassumiMinneapolis: ofMin-nesota ,1987)18-19.13LebergsonismeParis: UF, 966)chapters& 5.14"De la positionesproblmes,"ntroductionsecondpart) o Lapenset e mouvant.learlyhe ritiquef the metaphysicsf anguage"ledbyNietzsche omes o mind. ee especially heTwilightf he dols 5: "Language, y irtuef ts rigins,oesback o the ime fthemostrudimentaryorm fpsychology:obecome ware f he nitial onditionsof metaphysicsf anguage r,more learly,f reasonis to enter ntogrosslyetishisticentality."15Bergson,ettreFLDelattreDecember 935)MlangesParis: UF,1972):1528.Cf. lso L'volutionratrice:eknow, owever,hat thedeathatwemay ave o create romcratch,or new bject, new oncept,perhaps newmethod f hinking,sdeeply epellentous" 48/535).16DifferencendRepetition62 translationlightlyodified).17Bergson,ettreFLDelattre528.18BrunoParadis, Indterminationt mouvemente bifurcationchezBergson,"hilosophie2 (1991)12.19Bergson14-15/1422-23..Millet asbroughtogethernd com-mentatedhe umofBergson's ritingsn the "infinitesimal"hemenBergsont e calculnfinitsimal,u la raison t etempsParis: UF,1974).Bergsonmakes xpliciteferenceotheNewtonian ethod f fluxions,"no doubt hinkingf he elebratedassage rom heTheoryf he uadra-turefCurveshat ntroduceshenotion: Ido not onsidermathematicalmagnitudess formedy arts owevermallheymay e,but s describedina continuous ovement. . ." t s on thebasis f his otion ffluxionthatBergson imselfthus ndsupwith luid onceptshat anfollowrealitynall of tsmeanderingsndadopt he erymovementf he nnerlife f hings"Paris: UF,1974).Forwhat s at staken thisBergsonianreadingf heCalculus ne needs nlyuxtapose .Benda's eBergsonisme(Paris, 912)NoteE,toEd. LeRoy, apense athmatiqueureParis: UF,1960)Chapter VIII.Gabriel ardesBergson'sreat redecessornhismetaphysicalnvest-mentnthe differential"pistemologicalevolutionhat lso eadshim oa doctrine f lanvital nd ofcreativevolution. number fBergson'sformulasn thoughtuch s "integration-differentiation"swell s "thegreat istinctionetween he tatic nd thedynamic, hichlso ncludesthatf pacend Time[which]uts he ntire niversentwo" Les ois el'imitationParis, 890]159) aredirectlyerived rom arde'swritings.For the nfluencefTarde on Bergson,f.J.Millet,Gabriel arde t aphilosophiee 'histoireParis: rin, 970)386,388. Deleuzehas dedicated



19/22

Fall 1998 243many evelopmentso Tarde especiallynDiffrencet ptitionnd Milleplateaux)Gilbert imondon asdeveloped he notion f transductionn thebasis f he cheme f integration-differentiation.Cf. 'individut agensephysico-biologique1964) Grenoble:d.J.Milion, 995)"The undamentaltypef ital ransductionsthe emporaleries hats tonce ntegrativenddifferentiating;he dentityfthe iving eing s madeof ts emporality"(161-62) Inotherwords,in veryompleteital perationrecoalescedthe wo spectsf ntegrationnd differentiation"207)20Bergson,apenset emouvant17-18/1425.21Whereas orBergson,he dea,alongwith heentiretyf Greekphilosophy,articipatesnthe inematographicllusion.Eidos sthe tableview aken n the nstabilityfthings,"f. L'volutionratrice13-17/760-63.22See thehomage oHermann ohen DifferencendRepetition98)In a recent rticle rnaudVillaniwas able to show hat he effect f aconvergenceetween hephilosophiesf Deleuze andWhitehead asgiven n thegroundsf a common hilosophico-mathematicalounda-tion unning hrough amon nd hisuse ofthe nfinitesimalrinciple.Withoutnalyzingtclosely,e evokes t thebeginningf his articletriangulationfDeleuze-Whitehead-Bergson.eeArnaud illani,DeleuzeetWhitehead,"evue eMtaphysiquetde Morale (1996), especially249-51.23Bergson,'volutionratrice2-33/521-22.24Gilles eleuze, L'actuel t evirtuel,"ublisheds anappendixothenew dition f heDialoguesith laire arnet180-81)25Suchas Frdric ros n hisbeautifulrticle n "Le Foucault eDeleuze:une fiction taphysique,"hilosophie7 (1995):53-63,nwhichheconcludes:... todream fFoucault iscoveringnBergsonfraternaldouble."Cf.Foucaulttrans. en Hand (Minneapolis: ofMinnesota,1994)for he uotationfDeleuze 87).26 nfollowingheDeleuzian eading ere, borrow his xpressionfrom .Simondon, ho somnipresentnthese haptersfDifferencendRepetition:Becomings notthebecomingf the ndividuatedeingbutthebecomingf he ndividuationfbeing"234)27Cf.Henri ergson,'volutionratrice63/802. ee also"Introduc-tion" /493. ergson ill efuseo ome ut nfavorf ithermechanismrfinalismn ofar s nboth he creationsf ife" re qually redeterminedandtime s conceived ithoutny ealefficacy.n thefoundingoleofthis ritiquefSpencer or ergsonianhought,f. a Penset a mouvant2-5/1254-1256.28Cf.HenriBergson,ettreLon runschvicgFebruary6,1903),Mlanges85.



20/22

244 Discourse0.329Raymond uyer,lmentsepsycho-biologieParis: UF,1948)141.ButRuyerhooses o steer lear fthevirtual-intensiveimensionfthelan ital s a "source fdifferentiationndependentf he ctual"nordertoreproach ergsonor is rrationalism242-43).On this oint eleuzeunderscoresuyer's rofound ergsonismnLebergsonisme03nl.30HenriBergson,Significatione l'lanvital,"nLesdeux ourcesela moralet e areligion20/1073.31Gilles eleuze, Laconceptionela diffrencehezBergson,"esEtudesergsoniennes(Paris: UF, 956)97.32Bergson,'volutionratrice"Introduction"X/ 92.33Georges anguilhem,Leconceptt avie,"nEtudes 'histoiret ephilosophiees dencesParis: rin,968)351.Weknow,nthe ntroductiontoLa connaissancee a viethis ormula, arked ith heBergsoniantamp:"The houghtf he ivingmust ake rom he ivinghe dea of he iving"(Paris: rin, 989)13.34Gilles eleuze, Laconceptione ladiffrencehezBergson"5-86. t s nthis ontexthat hefirstccurrencefthe dea of "superiorempiricism"ppearsnDeleuze.35G.Deleuze, eBergsonisme,p.cit., 1. nan articleited yDeleuze("Aspectsivers e la mmoirehezBergson"),eanHyppolite akes seofGerman o connect hepast gewesenand essenceWesen).Ontologymust e possible"44)- this ffirmation,hisDeleuzian ry nspireshebookonBergsonn ts ntirety.36 n his courses f 1947-48Merleau-Pontyenounced Bergson'sblindnesso he pecifc eing f onsciousness,o ts ntentionaltructure"whereuponit s impossible, ithin isperspective,o place ourselveswithin hedynamismf a constitutingubject,"n L'union e 'me tducorpshezMalebranche,iran tBergsonParis: rin, 978)81-82.Raymond

Ruyerlarifieshecritiquefphenomenologicalntentionalityromhestandpointf philosophyfgenesis:Primaryonsciousnesssneitherheconsciousnessf perceiving ind-subject,or he onsciousnessf realor dealObject. onsciousnessseveryctive ormationn ts bsolute c-tivity,ndeveryormationsconsciousness."nthename f . sycho-biology,hewill evelop isphilosophyfmorphogenesisnthe asis f n dentityform-potential-subjectivitylocatedoutside"f he hysicist'space-time),or consciousness-morphogenesisnderstoods "inventiventelligence."Thus "man sconscious,ntelligent,nd nventivenly ecause ll ivingindividualitysconscious,ntelligent,nd nventive"-f.Raymonduyer,"Philosophiee lamorphogense,"nLa gensees ormesivantesParis:Flammarion,958)chapter2.37Cf. .Trotignon,ide e ie hezergsont acritiquee amtaphysique(Paris: UF, 968):"Theovercomingfman s a distinctionetweenifendconsciousnessn man t the amenstanthat understandhedentityf ifendconsciousnessnconsdousness(279).ReferringoBergson's recautionsntheuse ofthisatter erm"forackof better ord ...). But t s not



21/22

Fall 1998 245a matterf this iminishedonsciousnesshat unctionsneveryne ofus . ."] the uthor or eedynderlineshatifesmorerindpallyonscious-ness hanmyonsdousness509) Only y onceivingntologyssomething"static"an P.Trotignononcludehat ergsonianhilosophys "an bso-lute henomenologyhatefersono ntologyecauset uppresseshe istinctionbetweenhen-itselfheor-itselfnd hen-itselffor-itselfnshe himselfrites,"the hreere ne ndthe amemovement:he urationf ang . ." (592)38L'volutionratrice93/658.39Lapenset emouvant18/1425.

40Lesdeuxourcese a moraletde areligion70/ 192.41Lesdeux ources03/1061.42DifferencendRepetition54 translationlighdy odified)43ArnaudVillani,Mthodet thorie ans 'oeuvre e GillesDe-leuze,LesTemps odernes86 1996) "Everyook hus eingike refinedexplorationnone of hedirectionspenedby his ook-event"142).44"Laconceptione la diffrencehezBergson"9,81,92, 100, 6-97. 45Gilles eleuze, mpirismet ubjectivitParis: UF, 953)118-20.46Cf. GillesDeleuze,"Bergson,"esphilosopheslbresdirected yMauriceMerleau-onty,d. LucienMazenod, 956: 99, nfine.47"Bergson".48GillesDeleuze,"La conception e la diffrencehezBergson"99-100.49Lapenset emouvant97/1408,uoted yDeleuze:80-81.50Lapenset emouvant79-80/ 455-56: xtractedrom he peruon "La vie et 'oeuvre e Ravaisson,"hat ergson imselfdmits avingbergsonified.uoted ndcommentedyDeleuze98.51Cf.M.Gueroult,a philosophieranscendantalee Salomon amon(Paris:Alean, 929), specially emark o. 2, 161-71, n the dea as ana priorionditionfexperiencencetheuniquely ormal alueof theprinciplef dentitys denounced.52Canguilhem53.53Lapenset emouvant19-20/1346-47.54 nhis ommentary. de Lattreerfectlyums pthe ifficultyndthe"discomfort"f theBergsonianituation.'Gobeyond,' earetold,concepts hich earefurthermoreold hatwecannot owithout;liber-ate' ourselvesromhem ven hough ecannot ispense ithhem..."inBergson:ne ntologiee acomplexitParis: UF, 990)284.55"Everythinghave written asvitalistic,t least hope so," nDialogues96.



22/22

246 Discourse0.356Dialogues66-67.57A.Badiou, eleuze:La lameure 'tre"Hachette,996)25.Badiouwell aw hatBergsonsDeleuzes "truemaster,"uthe stillmentions"Bergson-case."58Accordingothereportf the Course t theCollgede Francein1910-11 cf.Mlanges46);the dea of Spinozan artisianismsthus"entirelyuperficial."59This houghtsexpressedna letter o F.Vanderem,ated ebru-ary 7,1914 Mlanges040).60 nthe etter-prefaceoJean-Cletartin, ariations:aphilosophieeGilles eleuzeParis: ayot,993)7.61Seemy a signatureumonde,uqu5est-ceue aphilosophieeDeleuzeet Guattari?Paris:Editions u Cerf, 993) 36 (and chapter : "Onto-thologiques")

Éric Alliez - On Deleuze's Bergsonism

Documents

Transcript of Éric Alliez - On Deleuze's Bergsonism