From the Question Concerning Being to the Being of the Question. Two Misunderstandings around Deleuze and Heidegger

Mostrar todas las versiones(2)

This paper aims to clear two regular misunderstandings when comparing the thoughts of Gilles Deleuze and Martin Heidegger: firstly, the alleged opposition between Heideggerian negativity and Deleuzian positivity; secondly, the assumed contrariety between Deleuzian immanence and Heideggerian transcen...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:
Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Pachilla, Pablo
Formato: Artículo revista
Lenguaje:Español
Publicado: Facultad de Filosofía y Letras, Universidad de Buenos Aires 2020
Materias:
Deleuze
Heidegger
fold
negativity
transcendece
negatividad
pliegue
trascendencia
Acceso en línea:http://revistascientificas.filo.uba.ar/index.php/CdF/article/view/10856
Aporte de:
Cuadernos de Filosofía de Universidad de Buenos Aires
id I28-R247-article-10856
record_format ojs
spelling I28-R247-article-108562021-12-13T18:25:59Z From the Question Concerning Being to the Being of the Question. Two Misunderstandings around Deleuze and Heidegger De la pregunta por el ser al ser de la pregunta. Dos malentendidos en torno a Deleuze y Heidegger Pachilla, Pablo Deleuze Heidegger fold negativity transcendece Deleuze Heidegger negatividad pliegue trascendencia This paper aims to clear two regular misunderstandings when comparing the thoughts of Gilles Deleuze and Martin Heidegger: firstly, the alleged opposition between Heideggerian negativity and Deleuzian positivity; secondly, the assumed contrariety between Deleuzian immanence and Heideggerian transcendence. In this fashion, the proposal is not so much to point at coincidences as to underline the fact that the differences are not where they are usually sought. The method used consists in taking Deleuze’s mentions to Heidegger in Difference and Repetition (1968) as a common thread for tracking the Deleuzian use of Heideggerian concepts. We will attempt to show that both aspects of the Deleuzian transcendental field, the virtual and the intensive, hold a certain “negativity” and “concealment”, respectively, which runs against the picture of Deleuze as a philosopher of thorough and unconcealed manifestation. We will likewise argue that Heideggerian transcendence is not necessarily opposed to Deleuzian immanence, and that the Heideggerian concepts of Zwiefalt and Selbe are used by Deleuze in order to think of immanence. We contend that the distinction between the negative and the problematic allows Deleuze to speak of being even while accepting ontological difference. El presente trabajo se propone despejar dos malentendidos habituales en la comparación entre el pensamiento de Gilles Deleuze y el de Martin Heidegger: en primer lugar, la supuesta oposición entre la negatividad heideggeriana y la positividad deleuziana; en segundo lugar, la contrariedad presunta entre la inmanencia deleuziana y la trascendencia heideggeriana. Se propone de este modo no tanto señalar coincidencias como subrayar que las diferencias no están allí donde se las suele buscar. El método utilizado consiste en tomar como hilo conductor las menciones a Heidegger en Diferencia y repetición (1968) para rastrear a partir de allí el uso que Deleuze hace de conceptos heideggerianos. Intentaremos mostrar que los dos aspectos del campo trascendental deleuziano, lo virtual y lo intensivo, revisten una cierta “negatividad” y un “ocultamiento”, respectivamente, lo cual se contrapone a la imagen de Deleuze como un filósofo del darse pleno sin sustracción. Argumentaremos asimismo que la trascendencia heideggeriana no necesariamente se opone a la inmanencia deleuziana, y que los conceptos heideggerianos de Zwiefalt y Selbe son utilizados por Deleuze para pensar la inmanencia. Sostenemos que la distinción entre lo negativo y lo problemático le permite a Deleuze hablar del ser aun aceptando la diferencia ontológica. Facultad de Filosofía y Letras, Universidad de Buenos Aires 2020-06-01 info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion application/pdf text/html http://revistascientificas.filo.uba.ar/index.php/CdF/article/view/10856 10.34096/cf.n74.10856 Cuadernos de filosofía; Núm. 74 (2020): Enero-Junio; 51-66 2362-485X 0590-1901 spa http://revistascientificas.filo.uba.ar/index.php/CdF/article/view/10856/9704 http://revistascientificas.filo.uba.ar/index.php/CdF/article/view/10856/9714
institution Universidad de Buenos Aires
institution_str I-28
repository_str R-247
container_title_str Cuadernos de Filosofía
language Español
format Artículo revista
topic Deleuze
Heidegger
fold
negativity
transcendece
Deleuze
Heidegger
negatividad
pliegue
trascendencia
spellingShingle Deleuze
Heidegger
fold
negativity
transcendece
Deleuze
Heidegger
negatividad
pliegue
trascendencia
Pachilla, Pablo
From the Question Concerning Being to the Being of the Question. Two Misunderstandings around Deleuze and Heidegger
topic_facet Deleuze
Heidegger
fold
negativity
transcendece
Deleuze
Heidegger
negatividad
pliegue
trascendencia
author Pachilla, Pablo
author_facet Pachilla, Pablo
author_sort Pachilla, Pablo
title From the Question Concerning Being to the Being of the Question. Two Misunderstandings around Deleuze and Heidegger
title_short From the Question Concerning Being to the Being of the Question. Two Misunderstandings around Deleuze and Heidegger
title_full From the Question Concerning Being to the Being of the Question. Two Misunderstandings around Deleuze and Heidegger
title_fullStr From the Question Concerning Being to the Being of the Question. Two Misunderstandings around Deleuze and Heidegger
title_full_unstemmed From the Question Concerning Being to the Being of the Question. Two Misunderstandings around Deleuze and Heidegger
title_sort from the question concerning being to the being of the question. two misunderstandings around deleuze and heidegger
description This paper aims to clear two regular misunderstandings when comparing the thoughts of Gilles Deleuze and Martin Heidegger: firstly, the alleged opposition between Heideggerian negativity and Deleuzian positivity; secondly, the assumed contrariety between Deleuzian immanence and Heideggerian transcendence. In this fashion, the proposal is not so much to point at coincidences as to underline the fact that the differences are not where they are usually sought. The method used consists in taking Deleuze’s mentions to Heidegger in Difference and Repetition (1968) as a common thread for tracking the Deleuzian use of Heideggerian concepts. We will attempt to show that both aspects of the Deleuzian transcendental field, the virtual and the intensive, hold a certain “negativity” and “concealment”, respectively, which runs against the picture of Deleuze as a philosopher of thorough and unconcealed manifestation. We will likewise argue that Heideggerian transcendence is not necessarily opposed to Deleuzian immanence, and that the Heideggerian concepts of Zwiefalt and Selbe are used by Deleuze in order to think of immanence. We contend that the distinction between the negative and the problematic allows Deleuze to speak of being even while accepting ontological difference.
publisher Facultad de Filosofía y Letras, Universidad de Buenos Aires
publishDate 2020
url http://revistascientificas.filo.uba.ar/index.php/CdF/article/view/10856
work_keys_str_mv AT pachillapablo fromthequestionconcerningbeingtothebeingofthequestiontwomisunderstandingsarounddeleuzeandheidegger
AT pachillapablo delapreguntaporelseralserdelapreguntadosmalentendidosentornoadeleuzeyheidegger
first_indexed 2023-06-27T21:02:05Z
last_indexed 2023-06-27T21:02:05Z
_version_ 1769891142437961728

Ejemplares similares