Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] Leibniz & Ideology (3): Bibliography

[CeJ]

>>OK, I see your links viz. Leibniz & Deleuze.  I don't see a reference
to Negri's writing on Leibniz, however.<<

I'm no scholar of Negri, so I can't give a definitive answer, but from
reading him in excerpt and secondhand (such as summaries), I think
Negri deals with Leibniz in dealing with Spinoza. He dislikes Leibniz,
he loves Spinoza.
Deleuze likes much of both and wants to use them, in part, to show
that modern rational philosophy does not start with Descartes but with
Leibniz and Spinoza.

CJ

___
Marxism-Thaxis mailing list
Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] Leibniz & Ideology (3): Bibliography

[Ralph Dumain]

OK, I see your links viz. Leibniz & Deleuze.  I don't see a reference 
to Negri's writing on Leibniz, however.

At 10:55 AM 2/7/2010, CeJ wrote:
>I don't know if the little bit of info. Amazon offers will give any
>clue as to the value of these works. There is no info. about the Negri
>book.
>
>http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0816636702/ref=cm_cr_asin_lnk
>
>http://www.amazon.com/Spinoza-Practical-Philosophy-Gilles-Deleuze/dp/0872862186/ref=pd_bxgy_b_text_b
>
>http://www.amazon.com/Expressionism-Philosophy-Spinoza-Gilles-Deleuze/dp/0942299515/ref=pd_sim_b_1
>
>
>
> From Library Journal
>In this intricately argued work, Deleuze claims that expression is a
>key to understanding Spinoza's philosophy: If A expresses B, then A
>perfectly reproduces all of B's essential characteristics. Nature, for
>instance, expresses God's essence. Deleuze thinks that Spinoza's use
>of expression revolutionizes philosophy; God is no longer seen as the
>world's creator but is identical with it. Furthermore, expression
>characterizes not only the nature of reality but also the manner in
>which Spinoza presents his philosophy, for the order in which Spinoza
>presents his conclusions is supposed to copy the movement of reality.
>Deleuze maintains that Leibniz shared Spinoza's revolutionary stress
>on expression. By their use of this idea, they founded modern
>philosophy. In Deleuze's view, Descartes counts as pre-modern, since
>he did not use the notion of expression. While Deleuze's grasp of
>Spinoza's thought is penetrating, his study is suitable only for
>scholars.
>- David Gordon, Bowling Green State Univ., Ohio
>Copyright 1990 Reed Business Information, Inc. --This text refers to
>an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.
>Product Description
>Expressionism in Philosophy is both a pivotal reading of Spinoza's
>work and also a crucial text within the development of Deleuze's own
>thought. It was the culmination of a series of monographic studies by
>Deleuze (on Hume, Bergson, Nietzsche, Proust, Kant, and
>Sacher-Masoch), and it prepared the transition from these abstract
>treatments of historical schemes of experience to the nomadology of
>Capitalism and Schizophrenia. In this extraordinary work, Deleuze
>reflects on one of the thinkers of the past who most influenced his
>own sweeping reconfiguration of the tasks of philosophy. For Deleuze,
>Spinoza, along with Nietzsche and Lucretius, conceived of philosophy
>as an enterprise of liberation and radical demystification. Gilles
>Deleuze is Professor of Philosophy Emeritus at the University of Paris
>VIII, Vincennes/Saint Denis.
>
>___
>Marxism-Thaxis mailing list
>Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu
>To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
>http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis


___
Marxism-Thaxis mailing list
Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] Leibniz & Ideology (3): Bibliography

[Ralph Dumain]

I'm aware of Deleuze's and Negri's books on 
Spinoza. I found The Savage Anomaly unreadable. 
But folks can judge for themselves:

http://www.generation-online.org/p/fpnegri17.htm

I'm not aware of these authors' takes on Leibniz. 
Please point me to the appropriate writings.

Any comments on Negri's book on Descartes?

Antonio Negri
Political Descartes: Reason, Ideology and the Bourgeois Project
Translated and introduced by Matteo Mandarini and Alberto Toscano
Verso, January 2007.
Radical Thinkers 2
344 pages
http://www.versobooks.com/books/nopqrs/nopq-titles/negri_a_political_decartes_RT2.shtml
 


See also this review:

Reasonable ideology? Negri's Descartes
Issue: 114 International Socialism
Posted: 10 April 07
Dan Swain
Antonio Negri, Political Descartes: Reason, 
Ideology and the Bourgeois Project (Verso 2007), £6.99
http://www.isj.org.uk/index.php4?id=319&issue=114


At 10:42 AM 2/7/2010, CeJ wrote:
>Leibniz & Ideology (3): Bibliography
>
>
>I'm not sure what the criteria for inclusion is here, but if you are
>interested in modern philosophers who work with Leibniz's and
>Spinoza's philosophy, Deleuze and Negri make much of Spinoza and
>Leibniz. Deleuze's work had quite an impact on Negri apparently
>(notable because Negri is usually dismissive of most 'post-mo' stuff).
>A few years back I was delving into Machiavelli and Hobbes as a 'side
>project' and that led to taking another look at Leibniz and Spinoza,
>among others. I doubt if most Americans are used to thinking of
>Deleuze as an academic philosopher--nor Negri for that matter.
>
>
>
>Leibniz & Ideology (3): Bibliography
>
>Deleuze
>
>(1968) Spinoza et le problème de l'expression (Paris: Minuit); tr. as
>Expressionism in Philosophy: Spinoza, by Martin Joughin (New York:
>Zone Books, 1990).
>
>
>(1981 [1970]) Spinoza: Philosophie pratique; (Paris: PUF); tr. as
>Spinoza: Practical Philosophy, by Robert Hurley (San Francisco: City
>Lights Books, 1988).
>
>(1988) Le Pli: Leibniz et le Baroque (Paris: Minuit); tr. as The Fold:
>Leibniz and the Baroque, by Tom Conley (Minneapolis: University of
>Minnesota Press, 1993)
>
>Negri
>
>Antonio Negri, Subversive Spinoza: (Un)Contemporary Variations, edited
>by Timothy S. Murphy, translated by Timothy S. Murphy, Michael Hardt,
>Ted Stolze, and Charles T. Wolfe, Manchester: Manchester University
>Press, 2004.
>
>
>Online stuff of Deleuze
>
>http://www.webdeleuze.com/php/liste_texte.php?groupe=Leibniz
>
>http://www.webdeleuze.com/php/liste_texte.php?groupe=Spinoza
>
>
>A wiki piece about that one term that often comes up in modern/post-mo
>discourse about discourse--'multitude'. The wiki piece doesn't seem
>too well written, but
>
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multitude
>
>Multitude is a political term first used by Machiavelli and reiterated
>by Spinoza. Recently the term has returned to prominence because of
>its conceptualization as a new model for organization of resistance
>against the global capitalist system as described by political
>theorists Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri in their international
>best-seller Empire (2000) and expanded upon in their recent Multitude:
>War and Democracy in the Age of Empire (2004). Other theorists which
>have recently used the term include political thinkers associated with
>Autonomist Marxism and its sequelae, including Sylvère Lotringer,
>Paolo Virno, and thinkers connected with the eponymous review
>Multitudes.
>Contents
>[hide]
>
>* 1 History
>* 2 Reiteration by Negri and Hardt
>* 3 See also
>* 4 External links
>
>[edit] History
>
>The concept originates in Machiavelli’s Discorsi. It is, however, with
>Hobbes's recasting of the concept as the war-disposed, disolute pole
>of the opposition between a Multitude and a People in De Cive, that
>Spinoza’s conceptualization seems, according to Negri, contrasted
>(See: The Savage Anomaly pp. 109, 140).
>
>The multitude is used as a term and implied as a concept throughout
>Spinoza's work. In the Tractatus Theologico-Politicus, for instance,
>he acknowledges that the (fear of the) power (potentia) of the
>multitude is the limit of sovereign power (potestas): ‘Every ruler has
>more to fear from his own citizens […] than from any foreign enemy,
>and it is this “fear of the masses” […that is] the principal brake on
>the power of the sovereign or state.’ The explication of this tacit
>concept, however, only comes in Spinoza's last and unfinished work
>known as the Political Treatise:
>
>It must next be observed, that in laying foundations it is very
>necessary to study the human passions: and it is not enough to have
>shown, what ought to be done, but it ought, above all, to be shown how
>it can be effected, that men, whether led by passion or reason, should
>yet keep the laws firm and unbroken. For if the constitution of the
>dominion, or the public liberty depends only on the weak assistance of
>the laws, not only will the citizens have no security fo

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] Leibniz & Ideology (3): Bibliography

[CeJ]

I don't know if the little bit of info. Amazon offers will give any
clue as to the value of these works. There is no info. about the Negri
book.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0816636702/ref=cm_cr_asin_lnk

http://www.amazon.com/Spinoza-Practical-Philosophy-Gilles-Deleuze/dp/0872862186/ref=pd_bxgy_b_text_b

http://www.amazon.com/Expressionism-Philosophy-Spinoza-Gilles-Deleuze/dp/0942299515/ref=pd_sim_b_1



>From Library Journal
In this intricately argued work, Deleuze claims that expression is a
key to understanding Spinoza's philosophy: If A expresses B, then A
perfectly reproduces all of B's essential characteristics. Nature, for
instance, expresses God's essence. Deleuze thinks that Spinoza's use
of expression revolutionizes philosophy; God is no longer seen as the
world's creator but is identical with it. Furthermore, expression
characterizes not only the nature of reality but also the manner in
which Spinoza presents his philosophy, for the order in which Spinoza
presents his conclusions is supposed to copy the movement of reality.
Deleuze maintains that Leibniz shared Spinoza's revolutionary stress
on expression. By their use of this idea, they founded modern
philosophy. In Deleuze's view, Descartes counts as pre-modern, since
he did not use the notion of expression. While Deleuze's grasp of
Spinoza's thought is penetrating, his study is suitable only for
scholars.
- David Gordon, Bowling Green State Univ., Ohio
Copyright 1990 Reed Business Information, Inc. --This text refers to
an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.
Product Description
Expressionism in Philosophy is both a pivotal reading of Spinoza's
work and also a crucial text within the development of Deleuze's own
thought. It was the culmination of a series of monographic studies by
Deleuze (on Hume, Bergson, Nietzsche, Proust, Kant, and
Sacher-Masoch), and it prepared the transition from these abstract
treatments of historical schemes of experience to the nomadology of
Capitalism and Schizophrenia. In this extraordinary work, Deleuze
reflects on one of the thinkers of the past who most influenced his
own sweeping reconfiguration of the tasks of philosophy. For Deleuze,
Spinoza, along with Nietzsche and Lucretius, conceived of philosophy
as an enterprise of liberation and radical demystification. Gilles
Deleuze is Professor of Philosophy Emeritus at the University of Paris
VIII, Vincennes/Saint Denis.

___
Marxism-Thaxis mailing list
Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis

[Marxism-Thaxis] Leibniz & Ideology (3): Bibliography

[CeJ]

Leibniz & Ideology (3): Bibliography


I'm not sure what the criteria for inclusion is here, but if you are
interested in modern philosophers who work with Leibniz's and
Spinoza's philosophy, Deleuze and Negri make much of Spinoza and
Leibniz. Deleuze's work had quite an impact on Negri apparently
(notable because Negri is usually dismissive of most 'post-mo' stuff).
A few years back I was delving into Machiavelli and Hobbes as a 'side
project' and that led to taking another look at Leibniz and Spinoza,
among others. I doubt if most Americans are used to thinking of
Deleuze as an academic philosopher--nor Negri for that matter.



Leibniz & Ideology (3): Bibliography

Deleuze

(1968) Spinoza et le problème de l'expression (Paris: Minuit); tr. as
Expressionism in Philosophy: Spinoza, by Martin Joughin (New York:
Zone Books, 1990).


(1981 [1970]) Spinoza: Philosophie pratique; (Paris: PUF); tr. as
Spinoza: Practical Philosophy, by Robert Hurley (San Francisco: City
Lights Books, 1988).

(1988) Le Pli: Leibniz et le Baroque (Paris: Minuit); tr. as The Fold:
Leibniz and the Baroque, by Tom Conley (Minneapolis: University of
Minnesota Press, 1993)

Negri

Antonio Negri, Subversive Spinoza: (Un)Contemporary Variations, edited
by Timothy S. Murphy, translated by Timothy S. Murphy, Michael Hardt,
Ted Stolze, and Charles T. Wolfe, Manchester: Manchester University
Press, 2004.


Online stuff of Deleuze

http://www.webdeleuze.com/php/liste_texte.php?groupe=Leibniz

http://www.webdeleuze.com/php/liste_texte.php?groupe=Spinoza


A wiki piece about that one term that often comes up in modern/post-mo
discourse about discourse--'multitude'. The wiki piece doesn't seem
too well written, but

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multitude

Multitude is a political term first used by Machiavelli and reiterated
by Spinoza. Recently the term has returned to prominence because of
its conceptualization as a new model for organization of resistance
against the global capitalist system as described by political
theorists Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri in their international
best-seller Empire (2000) and expanded upon in their recent Multitude:
War and Democracy in the Age of Empire (2004). Other theorists which
have recently used the term include political thinkers associated with
Autonomist Marxism and its sequelae, including Sylvère Lotringer,
Paolo Virno, and thinkers connected with the eponymous review
Multitudes.
Contents
[hide]

   * 1 History
   * 2 Reiteration by Negri and Hardt
   * 3 See also
   * 4 External links

[edit] History

The concept originates in Machiavelli’s Discorsi. It is, however, with
Hobbes's recasting of the concept as the war-disposed, disolute pole
of the opposition between a Multitude and a People in De Cive, that
Spinoza’s conceptualization seems, according to Negri, contrasted
(See: The Savage Anomaly pp. 109, 140).

The multitude is used as a term and implied as a concept throughout
Spinoza's work. In the Tractatus Theologico-Politicus, for instance,
he acknowledges that the (fear of the) power (potentia) of the
multitude is the limit of sovereign power (potestas): ‘Every ruler has
more to fear from his own citizens […] than from any foreign enemy,
and it is this “fear of the masses” […that is] the principal brake on
the power of the sovereign or state.’ The explication of this tacit
concept, however, only comes in Spinoza's last and unfinished work
known as the Political Treatise:

   It must next be observed, that in laying foundations it is very
necessary to study the human passions: and it is not enough to have
shown, what ought to be done, but it ought, above all, to be shown how
it can be effected, that men, whether led by passion or reason, should
yet keep the laws firm and unbroken. For if the constitution of the
dominion, or the public liberty depends only on the weak assistance of
the laws, not only will the citizens have no security for its
maintenance […], but it will even turn to their ruin. […] And,
therefore, it would be far better for the subjects to transfer their
rights absolutely to one man, than to bargain for unascertained and
empty, that is unmeaning, terms of liberty, and so prepare for their
posterity a way to the most cruel servitude. But if I succeed in
showing that the foundation of monarchical dominion […], are firm and
cannot be plucked up, without the indignation of the larger part of an
armed multitude, and that from them follow peace and security for king
and multitude, and if I deduce this from general human nature, no one
will be able to doubt, that these foundations are the best and the
true ones.

The concept of the multitude resolves the tension that scholars have
observed in Spinoza’s political project between the insistence on the
benign function of sovereignty (as witnessed in the quotation above)
and the insistence on individual freedom. It is, we see here, a truly
revolutionary concept, and it is not difficult to see why Spinoza’s
contemporaries (an