[D-G] attributes in Expressionism in Philosophy

Harald Wenk hwenk at web.de
Wed Oct 5 13:18:05 PDT 2011

Dear Peter,

I did notfound yiur references and read

Attributes are "substances with one quality", so to speak. (1)

For "extension" you may take "physics" and almost all clears up.

As "Substances" are "nota per se", notions of its own,
notions with a "self-setting" , things are very clear.

The attributes "constitute" the substancece ontologivcal by a very
radical knew "devivce" of
being "real"  different, without any possibility of
action, causality on one another.

So, the in substance "god" has as "expressions", qualities,
the irreducible attributes, constuting its "essence".

The attributes are not substances of their own.
But you may see for padgogical reasons  for a first understanding.
This is done in a way in zthe first propositions of the Book  I of the 
Ethics (generally referred to as E 1 (E I)).
The "Notion"
refers to the "intra-cogitif"
real difference and the "extra-cogitif" difference of Gueroult, known by 

The first is, that is thinking we are able to think "physics" and 
"thinking", psyciscs,  as "real" different,
without any  causality between them,
but THINKING it in an idea, that is a way of

The we are know only two attributes is expresed by"physics" and "psychics".
The worls  of physics interacts a lot and the one of  psychics, thinking, 
mind,  too.

Other things, a real different  infinite  quality  ,  we do indeed not know.

Here a chance tio thonk  self  is given.
I do not see any alternative to the truth of the proposition.

But there "are" infinity many of them.

This last point is very interesting, but another discussion.

"Attributes and divine names" pp 44 in the french edition (wherefore I  got 
a page concordance).

greetings harald

From: "Peter Connolly" <peterjohnconnolly at gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2011 4:24 AM
To: <deleuze-guattari at lists.driftline.org>
Subject: [D-G] attributes in Expressionism in Philosophy

> Dear List,
> In Expressionism in Philosophy there appears to be two notions of what
> attributes are, most succinctly identified with the following two quotes:
> 1. "attributes are thus truly Words" (p.45, Zone edition)
> 2. "Such is not the case withattributes. We know of only two. Extension 
> and
> Thought" (p. 118, Zone edition)
> The first suggests many particulars and the latter suggests two realms. In
> relation to understanding how Deleuze-Spinoza conceive of expression, can
> someone help me reconcile these or point to a discussion that does?
> Peter
> _______________________________________________
> List address: deleuze-guattari at driftline.org
> Info: 
> http://lists.driftline.org/listinfo.cgi/deleuze-guattari-driftline.org
> Archives: www.driftline.org

More information about the Deleuze-Guattari mailing list