[D-G] dividual secret

[.Sylvia_Jenepi.]

hello.
i am meditating on guattari and deleuze (yes, again..)
i wanted to state i set previous talk i did into question.

communist typical autocritique .

i indeed said something like :
deleuze in logic of sense said:
« one same aliquid for what passes by, and
what is said .. »
i said : deleuze after meeting guattari in 1968
gave up the idea of making real the
« Spinoza adequate idea » expressed in the los « same aliquid » 
statement,
because he wanted to experiment « dividuality » with working with 
guattari.
i presented hypothesis: ao and 1000 plateaus, are
works of schizophrenia in the sense they are joined thoughts, not 
thoughts
expressing the holy ghost (cfr DH Lawrence elaborations on the 
uniqueness of the individual being)
but a cut through the holy ghost.
i said deleuze retrieved his adequate ideas expression after the death 
of guattari in 1992.


i did not say it like that but i was thinking that way and do no longer 
think that way.

there might yet be some truth in this theory.

deleuze wanted to « experiment » self expression within a context of 
dividual thoughts &-creativity, of that i am certain.

but i am now reconsidering: so many « adequate ideas » in what is 
philosophy.

when so saying i am intending to say:
what is the « proof » that a written work of any philosophy,
is or is not adequate idea?

i do not want to say.
i think truth is something secret.

so it should not be « proovable ».
but my discovery is that an adequate idea does not need to correspond to 
the statement:
« one same aliquid for what passes by and what is said »

who is to measure « the sameness » of the aliquid, once you consider it 
is absolutely infinite speed fast, the aliquid.

besides « aliquid » is aswell « quelconque » as in spinoza expression 
problem:
the affection quelconque determining the mode at the early stage of 
natural right.

(in opposition to « affection collective » recieved in exchange for 
giving up the « natural  right » to be determined by aliquid /quelconque 
affections.

)
all this chain of reasoning is bias, unbalanced, and adequate so much 
only as far if you understand why deleuze wrote that.

But precisely: as soon as you understand the reason, or the secret, why 
deleuze wrote what is philosophy, with guattari, the bias is revealed 
and you understand thru or out of adequate ideas, the « concepts » 
exposed in the writing.

Sylvia ..