Jump to content
Bennett

DnG?

Recommended Posts

Do you have a specific part of Deleuze and Guattari's philosophy you want explained?

 

Mainly how they're used in debate. I know they kritik Lacanian psychoanalysis, but beyond that I don't know anything else. Definitions/explanations of their jargon like "rhizome", "becoming-X", "schizoanalysis", their views on production/capitalism, "bodies without organs", territorialization/deterritorialization etc would be nice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Can someone explain how DnG are used in debate and give a general summary of their philosophy?

 

You should first ask which part of D&G you want to use...they can be used multiple ways, you should look at the Johnny23 Kritik thread in the Critiques forum, or you can ask either Lazzerone or TheScuSpeaks, as they seem to know the most about the topic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

here are some notes on their essay 'toward freedom',

http://www.cross-x.com/vb/showthread.php?t=987735

[...a good place to start.]

 

some clarifications on what's going on in 'anti-oedipus',

http://www.cross-x.com/vb/showthread.php?t=980303

[...my first real post in the thread is #15]

 

lengthy explanations of their notion of 'becoming-minority',

http://www.cross-x.com/vb/showthread.php?t=954345

 

some notes on the final chapter of their book on kafka,

http://www.cross-x.com/vb/showthread.php?t=989810

 

a sketch of a possible 1n.c. that relies on their work,

http://www.cross-x.com/vb/showpost.php?p=1019101&postcount=1

 

an in-depth post on the terms and concepts in 'anti-oedipus',

http://www.cross-x.com/vb/showpost.php?p=1000192&postcount=11

 

discussion of a deleuzian's critique of lacanian psychoanalysis and derridean deconstruction,

http://www.cross-x.com/vb/showthread.php?t=994538

 

some posts on zizek's book on deleuze,

http://www.cross-x.com/vb/showthread.php?t=948918

 

and a reply to a critical remark zizek made about d&g's work,

http://www.cross-x.com/vb/showthread.php?p=1752686#post1752686

 

 

// hope all that helps some. .k

Edited by Lazzarone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
here are some notes on their essay 'toward freedom',

http://www.cross-x.com/vb/showthread.php?t=987735

 

some notes on the final chapter of their book on kafka,

http://www.cross-x.com/vb/showthread.php?t=989810

 

a sketch of a possible 1n.c. that relies on their work,

http://www.cross-x.com/vb/showpost.php?p=1019101&postcount=1

 

an in-depth post on the some of the terms and concepts in 'anti-oedipus',

http://www.cross-x.com/vb/showpost.php?p=1000192&postcount=11

 

some more clarification on their notion of schizophrenia,

http://www.cross-x.com/vb/showthread.php?t=980303

 

lengthy development of their notion of 'becoming-minority',

http://www.cross-x.com/vb/showthread.php?t=954345

 

 

// hope all that helps some. .k

 

so when it comes to kritiks, which use of D&G seems the best to you? as a generic K arg. Also, would it be possible to go about making this a topical aff for the 10-11 topic?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yes, the use of d&g that seems best to me is the one i tried to develop on the j23 thread - a position which i do not believe to be "a generic K", since it links to very specific debate practices. of course there are many ways to use d&g in debate, and as to your topical question, they have a lot to say about just that in this text: http://mitpress.mit.edu/catalog/item/default.asp?ttype=2&tid=8851

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
yes, the use of d&g that seems best to me is the one i tried to develop on the j23 thread - a position which i do not believe to be "a generic K", since it links to very specific debate practices. of course there are many ways to use d&g in debate, and as to your topical question, they have a lot to say about just that in this text: http://mitpress.mit.edu/catalog/item/default.asp?ttype=2&tid=8851

 

Cool, would it hurt the kritik to use standard T blocks with it, and from the neg position, running other neg arguments with it? I know performative contradictions good is an option, but the kritik seems to weigh itself before even that, so i would think that J23 would own my own performative contradictions good arguments seeing as it indicts the entire forum of debate...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cool, would it hurt the kritik to use standard T blocks with it, and from the neg position, running other neg arguments with it? I know performative contradictions good is an option, but the kritik seems to weigh itself before even that, so i would think that J23 would own my own performative contradictions good arguments seeing as it indicts the entire forum of debate...

 

Yeah you're gonna wanna run J23 as a one-off. And don't spread the story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We had a team in our circuit read DnG against a Zizek Cap k w/ the Do Nothing alternative... I didn't watch the round until the 1nr so I wasn't sure how it was applied. Does anybody know in what context DnG's Schizoanalysis (Anti-Oedipus) answers the Do nothing Cap K?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be fair, I think there's a difference between doing nothing and "engaging in nothingness" which I'm pretty sure is the alternative that Winston is referring to. (Just a guess, I was judging some of the teams he's talking about last week.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yeah, you're likely to trip over your own arguments if you run j23 with standard topicality blocks, considering they'll probably link to what deleuze refers to as 'the orthodox image of thought' - which i go over briefly in these two posts:

 

http://www.cross-x.com/vb/showpost.php?p=1329853&postcount=126

http://www.cross-x.com/vb/showpost.php?p=1336881&postcount=138

 

however, (1) nothing in the shell explicitly contradicts having to keep to a given topic, and in fact, one could argue that the critique itself, like topicality, is meant to safeguard the quality of debate practices, and (2) there's always the chance your opponents won't point out the contradiction, or will let it go if you make the standard 'just a test'-retort.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...