3 Jan 2013

Pt2.Ch4.Sb6 Somers-Hall’s Hegel, Deleuze, and the Critique of Representation. ‘Conclusion.’ summary

Corry Shores
[Search Blog Here. Index-tags are found on the bottom of the left column.]

[Central Entry Directory]
[Deleuze Entry Directory]
[Henry Somers-Hall, Entry Directory]
[Hegel, Deleuze, and the Critique of Representation, Entry Directory]

[Note: All boldface and underlining is my own. It is intended for skimming purposes. Bracketed comments are also my own explanations or interpretations.]


Henry Somers-Hall


Hegel, Deleuze, and the Critique of Representation.

Dialectics of Negation and Difference


Part 2: Responses to Representation

Chapter 4: The Virtual and the Actual

Subdivision 6: Conclusion

Brief Summary:

By basing his ideas on Bergson’s continuously integrated heterogeneous multiplicity, which can be characterized by Riemann multiplicities and topological phase spaces, Deleuze was further able to avoid the problems of representation. We still need to examine Deleuze’s and Hegel’s nonrepresentational renditions of differential calculus, but first we will see Hegel’s treatment of finite representation.


Deleuze’s metaphysics avoids the problems of representation. His metaphysics is based on Bergson’s rejection of spatialized time. Deleuze expands Bergson’s ideas: “The virtual, which operates according to a different logic to actual states of affairs, allows Deleuze to explain the genesis of the form of representation itself, and thereby both explain the errors of representation, and why these errors naturally develop in our interpretation of the world”. (123) We will need to examine Deleuze’s use of early calculus, before it was grounded in set theory. We will also look at Hegel’s non-representational rendition of calculus. But first we will look at Hegel’s approach to the problem of finite representation.




Somers-Hall, Henry (2012) Hegel, Deleuze, and the Critique of Representation. Dialectics of Negation and Difference. Albany: SUNY.

No comments:

Post a Comment