Deleuze's Concept of Difference and Repetition

 

Deleuze's exploration of difference and repetition includes both critical and constructive aspects. He criticizes traditional philosophy for being trapped in a mindset that prioritizes identity over difference and repetition. This tendency, which he calls the "transcendental illusion," is deeply ingrained in philosophical thought and requires ongoing critique to overcome. Deleuze aims to uncover this illusion and demonstrate how it distorts genuine intellectual progress.

 

In contrast to this critical stance, Deleuze offers a positive vision for philosophy. He suggests that philosophy should strive to directly engage with reality by apprehending things in their unique individuality. This notion of precision underscores his belief that philosophy's goal is to grasp the essence of things as they truly are, distinct from everything else. For Deleuze, difference isn't just an intermediate concept but rather the primary aspect of philosophical inquiry, crucial for achieving true understanding.

 

This pursuit of understanding echoes the longstanding philosophical endeavor to grasp the essence of things, as seen in Plato's dialogues and Aristotle's metaphysics. However, Deleuze contends that traditional approaches, which rely on a simplistic notion of identity, fall short in capturing the richness of individual objects of thought. Thus, he advocates for a shift towards appreciating the uniqueness and singularity of each thing, which he believes is essential for genuine philosophical inquiry.

 

Deleuze's examination of identity in "Difference and Repetition" reveals its role as a tool for managing difference. Essentially, identity functions by either grouping qualities or things as identical across various instances or by dividing concepts based on contrasting attributes. This approach, exemplified by Aristotle's genera and species model, relies on defining essences or natures, which exclude contingent differences such as those related to time, space, or individual cases.

 

Attempts to expand concepts to encompass even the most contingent details, as advocated by Leibniz's principle of sufficient reason, raise questions about the nature of concepts. For instance, if a concept applies only to one thing, is it still a concept? Deleuze argues that concepts typically designate a set of things with common characteristics, making them repeatable and communicable. The challenge arises when confronting the singularity of contingent moments in space and time, as exemplified by Hegel's critique of sense-certainty.

 

Deleuze's critique extends to the notion of representation, which posits identity as the central reference point for thought. He contests the idea that thought's aim is merely to re-present what exists non-conceptually, arguing instead for a disruption to the regular course of affairs. While representation serves well in the realm of everyday experience, where objects are recognized and ordered according to habit, Deleuze sees it as inadequate for understanding thought, which involves disruption and exception.

 

Deleuze's perspective on thought is dynamic, seeing the thinker not as a passive spectator but as an active participant at the edges of a system, initiating and revolutionizing thought. Thus, he challenges the passive role assigned to the thinker in traditional representations of thought, advocating for an engaged, dynamic approach to philosophical inquiry.

 

Deleuze contrasts the traditional model of thought, based on representation through concepts, with what he calls "dramatization." Instead of focusing on defining the essence of a thing, Deleuze suggests asking questions like "Who?", "How?", "When?", and "Where?" This approach, often dismissed in philosophy as merely empirical, considers empirical examples and circumstances as essential to understanding philosophical problems.

2

Deleuze draws inspiration from Plato's dialogues, which he sees as dramatizations of central problems rather than straightforward inquiries into essence. This contrasts with Kant's distinction between concepts and Ideas. Concepts relate to our experience and form the basis of objective representations, while Ideas guide our actions and are unattainable by knowledge alone.

 

Deleuze sees thought as responding to problematic objects or events that exceed our usual ways of understanding. These encounters provoke us to engage all our faculties, creating a dynamic interplay between sense, memory, imagination, and thought. The singularities of a problem—such as "Who?", "How?", "Where?", and "When?"—shape the conditions for its resolution.

 

In contrast to Hegel's emphasis on conceptual relations, Deleuze sees thought as a response to unique events, not just a representation of them. Thought emerges from the encounter with the unknown and creates something new in the process.

 

Deleuze's notion of the Idea as a problem maintains indeterminacy, both in the world and in thought itself. Thought confronts its outside—the unthinkable—and is driven by this confrontation, without any common measure between them. This absolute difference is the highest object of thought for Deleuze, representing the challenge of thinking the unthought.

 

In Deleuze's view, the Idea persists beyond any resolution, while the act of determination is subject to conditions, particularly time. Time serves as the meeting point between the conditions of thought and the excess of the Idea, highlighting their disparity rather than their identity.

 

Despite the complexity of Deleuze's ideas, events in thought aren't necessarily grand or historically significant. They can also be imperceptible and subtle, akin to "little glimmers of the Idea" beneath the surface of everyday happenings.

 

Deleuze's model of thought rejects the idea of a common ground or shared reality that typically shapes the conditions of thinking and communication. Instead, he presents thought as a solitary yet collective activity. While he acknowledges the solitary nature of thought, characterized by passionate individual engagement, he also emphasizes its collective aspects and the importance of teaching and learning.

 

In Deleuze's view, the conditions of thought inherently contain the principle of its continuation. Thought is dedicated to an ideal of repetition, where each thinker and each thought reproduces the configuration involved in the initial event of thought. This repetition is not about reproducing the same, but about producing differences. Thought is transmitted through a relay where the injunction is to repeat as different, with each instance animated by the spirit of the first.

 

This form of communication, termed "rhizomatic" by Deleuze and Guattari, spreads horizontally without a fixed origin or end-point, unlike the hierarchical "tree-system" prevalent in traditional philosophy. In this rhizomatic mode, each act of thought is a new beginning emerging from contingencies, thinking with past thinkers as contemporaries and companions.

 

For Deleuze, difference is both methodological and ontological, meaning we cannot separate its being from its pursuit and development. Thus, precision in philosophy involves determining the specific context, conditions, and unknowns of a problem rather than isolating a conceptual essence.

 

Despite acknowledging threats to thought, Deleuze maintains an optimistic tone, focusing on the micro realm of the contingent as a site of production and revolution. His commitment lies in affirming chance and embracing the creative potential inherent in contingent events.