qdatk

I'm trying to think through some concepts from early Deleuze (mostly D&R) and need to check my understanding. I'm going to try to lay things out as plainly as I can, so as to hopefully make any misconceptions obvious.

So, starting from the critique of Kant, in which the categories of the Understanding and space and time as the transcendental conditions of experience are criticised for being too wide like baggy clothes: they only condition possible experience, but not real experience. In contrast, the entire conceptual apparatus of the virtual (the problem, the idea, etc.) is meant to form the conditions of real experience. The virtual sticks to every actual individual like a shadow,

Hello everyone. This is an announcement about an update to the subreddit rules. The first rule on quality content and engagement now directly addresses LLM-generated content. The complete rule is now as follows, with the addition in bold:

We are interested in long-form or in-depth submissions and responses, so please keep this in mind when you post so as to maintain high quality content. LLM generated content will be removed.

We have been removing LLM-generated content regularly, as it does not meet our requirements for substantive engagement. This update formalises this practice and makes the rule more informative.

Please leave any feedback you might have below. This thread will be

On p255 of the English translation, we find this passage:

While local increases in entropy may be compensated by a more general degradation, they are in no way comprised in or produced by the latter. Empirical principles tend to leave out the elements of their own foundation. The principle of degradation obviously does not account either for the creation of the most simple system or for the evolution of systems (the threefold difference between biological systems and physical ones).

p328 in French:

Si la remontée locale d'entropie est compensée par une dégradation plus générale, elle n'est nullement comprise ni produite par celle-ci. C'est le sort des principes empiriques de l

My optometrist’s office is straight out of Star Trek

https://www.reddit.com/r/interestingasfuck/comments/1ka5jj1/my_optometrists_office_is_straight_out_of_star/

In the first part of Proust and Signs (the originally published half), the big-picture architecture of Deleuze's argument is that the signs of art reach spiritual essence in the purest way, while those of involuntary memory, love, and society are degenerated versions of signs of art by being to various degrees contingent and dependent on their material supports.* Hence the structure of chapters 4-6, which cover in sequence art, memory, love, and society.

Chapter 6, "Series and Group", begins by discussing the repetition of love objects in a way that is very familiar from D&R. But I begin to get lost in the discussion of deception and, later, hermaphroditism, which seem to carry a specifi