Eu e Deleuze (e o Nietzsche também)
[i]t is rather hard to understand the emergence of the language of the Absolute within Nietzsche. If we follow Deleuze, Nietzsche is the anti-dialeticist par excellence, and yet, the notion of Absolute Immanence is fundamental for Deleuze’s understanding of Nietzsche. How does one then disassociate the language of the Absolute from the resentment of recognition (and dialectics in general)? It seems to me that Deleuze is suggesting a return to a monistic understanding of the continuum that is expressed by the universe. However, such understanding cannot be tamed by the atomistic reflex of Greek philosophy – Heraclitus, as always, is an exception. It must be understood, as Spinoza might have though it, as a permanent appearance that is lived by a conating individual. The field where all these forces relate to each other is the field of Absolute Immanence, it is in the terrain of absolute immanence that the game of becoming (of genesis) is played.
Interessante este tal de Deleuze, hein?