Difference and Repetition

In the proposed study, I summarize the key ideas from the materials that helped me understand the meaning of Difference and Repetition of Deleuze.

Deleuze criticizes the comparison on a representative basis and points out that the work does not begin with solving the problem, but with the formulation, the formation of this problem. It is not the idea of ​​the difference that must be sought in metaphysics, because something embodying the absolute creates a line of differences. Deleuze notes that such a line of differences varies in quantity and quality. Here he concludes that the differences are always single-plane and that there is no difference in quality from quantity. And if there are no such differences, then it is impossible to measure with qualitative and quantitative principles as it has done in philosophy before.

Also, checking for truth and falsity should be applied to the problems themselves. For example, a teacher at a school is endowed with powers under which the student may not even have the idea to question the correctness of the question posed by the teacher. So, according to Deleuze, it was with philosophy. Wrong questions posed unnecessary discussions. He distinguished problems that were incorrectly posed by degree and by nature.

An incorrect problem in degree means posing the problem from denial - disorder, bad. Such a problem cannot be resolved, according to Deleuze, because it is not posed correctly. For example, order and mess. It seems to us that we see disorder first and only then we return the order, but at the level of logic, order precedes disorder. Thus, the disorder is more than order, since the experience of lack of something precedes the experience of availability. The bad is added to the good, thus the bad include the good and is bigger than it. Such a difference between the smaller and the bigger (where the smaller, for example, is incorrectly called incompleteness, since the completeness is bigger) is incorrect since it does not form the essence of the problem. For example, thought and action, what was first and what is bigger? It seems to us that the thought of action is added to this action, but Deleuze claims the opposite. The action is big and the thoughts are smaller. The problem of an incorrect composite is a comparison by nature. It arises when we compare incorrect concepts. For example, pleasure and happiness or beauty and pleasure - these concepts are independent, they cannot be mixed, the distinction is made in them, not by nature. Differences in nature will be valuable, significant, Deleuze called it a singularity.

…a singularity is a critical point, a turning point, a point at which a system changes qualitatively. (Protevi, 2010)

Deleuze formulates the concept of Simulacrum is a symbol, that is, a sign because it includes the conditions of its own repetition. The simulacrum captures the constitutive dissimilarity of the thing, which it deprives of the rank of the image.

A simulacrum is an instance that includes the difference as (at least) the difference of the two divergent rows with which it plays, eliminating any similarity, so that from this moment it is impossible to indicate the existence of the original or copy.

Thus, sameness is more likely an illusion, and the difference arises in repetition.

Deleuze redefines the Nidshian concept of eternal return. It is assumed that time is linear, where nothing repeats. For example, invention, the advent of science, a flight into space, the speed of exchange of information increases, etc. And there is a traditional time that is repeated - the celebration of the anniversary.

Wikipedia, Romantic history painting. Commemorates the French Revolution of 1830 (July Revolution) on 28 July 1830. https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Свобода,_ведущая_народ#/media/Файл:Eugène_Delacroix_-_La_liberté_guidant_le_peuple.jpg

So there is a big and small circle of repetition. In a small circle, things that are not correctly understood are repeated, here things are reproduced in their vulgar form, therefore, such a repetition cannot bring anything new, and here the first ideal model always precedes. And in a big circle, essential things return. This is not a return of the previous one, this is not a copy, but a return of the same. For example, Bastille Day. «With respect to this power, repetition interiorizes and thereby reverses itself: … it is not Federation Day which commemorates or represents the fall of the Bastille, but the fall of the Bastille which celebrates and repeats in advance all the Federation Days.» (Deleuze, 1994 p.1) A singularity is what Deleuze called a special novelty, which, repeating itself, produces new types of novelty. Thus, such a repetition is not boring, on the contrary, interesting. This repetition with novelty is the embodiment of creativity.

According to Deleuze, if we rethink things through creative activity, we will leave the small circle and create something new based on the previous one. So, through a seemingly familiar subject, and interpretation of its differences, we can repeat the story, but create a new precedent.

It is important to note that the concept of Derrida difference is also different from the concept of Deleuze difference. The latter also considers it necessary to establish differences between them. But on the example of form and matter, Deleuze comes to a comparison in one direction. To compare form and matter, you need to put this form between them in order to compare the correct composite. You cannot return from form to matter since the very difference between these concepts is form. The two terms are distinguished by Derrida's differer. Here, the differer is a temporary process, it is like reading a written book. It was written in the past, and we read it in the present. This book is represented by signs now, but the understanding of this book as it would be postponed. Thus, as Deleuze concludes, in order to understand the difference between difference and differer it would be necessary to put a single component between different concepts, this difference, but this cannot be done.

Summing up the meaning of difference and repetition in the interpretation of Deleuze, we can conclude next: Philosophical thought compared representative things, not metaphysical, but if we want to understand the essence, we must get away from materiality; The difference is not a negation and the opposition of something to something, as well as the difference must be compared with a single composite, singular things; Pure repetition is possible when it is significant; Only a repeating singularity can create something new and important.

Bibliography and references

1. 1Deleuze Gilles (1994) Difference and Repetition, Columbia University Press

2. Great philosophers. Gilles Deleuze Великие философы. Жиль Делёз At: https://youtu.be/dB0LpY80mHg (Accessed 28.01.2020)

3. Deleuze Gilles (1998) Различие и повторение [in Russian] (Difference and Repetition) Translated by N.B. Mankovskaya

4. Protevi John, PREPARING TO LEARN FROM DIFFERENCE AND REPETITION, Draft of version that appeared in Journal of Philosophy: A Cross-Disciplinary Inquiry (Nepal) Winter 2010, Vol. 5, No. 11: 35-45. [online] At: http://www.protevi.com/john/LearnDR.pdf (Accessed 27.03.2020)

5. Derrida, J. (2000) Письмо и различие. [in Russian] (Writing and Difference). Translated by V. Lapitsky

6. Philosophy of Science, Reader (2005) T.G. Shchedrina, Moscow "Progress-Tradition" [in Russian] Философия науки, Хрестоматия (2005) Т.Г. Щедрина, Москва "Прогресс-Традиция"

7. Skoropanova I.S. (2001) Russian Postmodern Literature, Study Guide, Mokva, "Flint" [in Russian] Скоропанова И.С. (2001) Русская Постмодернистская Литература, Учебное пособие, Моква, "Флинта"

8. Wikipedia [online] At: https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Делёз,_Жиль#Онтология_различия (Accessed 27.03.2020)

9. Introduction to modern philosophy: Deleuze (Alexander Smulyansky) Введение в современную философию: Делёз (Александр Смулянский) [online] At: https://youtu.be/0qatb8O00EM (Accessed 27.03.2020)