[D-G] attributes in Expressionism in Philosophy
hwenk at web.de
Wed Oct 5 13:18:05 PDT 2011
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)).
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,
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).
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
> 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?
> List address: deleuze-guattari at driftline.org
> Archives: www.driftline.org
More information about the Deleuze-Guattari