• úvod
  • témata
  • události
  • tržiště
  • diskuze
  • nástěnka
  • přihlásit
    Ztracené heslo?
    TUHONew materialism — All memories are machines
    TUHO --- ---
    CICHLASOMA: PALO_FABUS: dik! ja si vic ujasnim v tydnu otazky a asi vas budu jeste obtezovat .]
    TUHO --- ---
    Deleuze a Critical Reader, 1996
    Introduction, Paul Patton
    Concepts do not provide a truth which is independent of the plane of immanence upon which they are constructed. Thought is act of creation and truth is creation of thought.
    Nomad thought rejects the ideal of philosophy as a closed system, which puts Deleuze strongly against Hegel.
    Concepts has no reference, it is self-referential it posits itself and its object at the same time as it is created.
    D&G say that criticism of one philosophical concept form the standpoint of another is a futile exercise. Concepts can only be assessed as a function of their problems.
    What is the purpose of such concepts then? D&G proposes that philosophy is knowledge through pure concepts and it is not in knowing and is not inspired by truth.
    Creation of concepts is possible only on the ground of pre-philosophical presuppositions - which they call plane of immanence.
    In What is Philosophy? thought is considered as absolute deterritorialization because it is essentially creative and critical, it has potential to controvert all ideas and values.
    Deleuze sees problems as the sources of all truths: problems are the differential elements in thought, the genetic elements in the true. Problems are seen not as questions which are possible to answer but underlying and unanswerable questions which governs production of knowledge in given domain. Deleuze builds on Kant, which defines Ideas "as problems to which there is no solution".
    Deleuze uses also mathematical notions and describes Ideas as multiplicities defined by the internal relations between differential terms.

    The transcendental empiricism implies a conception of thought as open-ended and bounded only by the historically variable set of problems with which it engages at any given time.
    The concept is obviously knowledge - but knowledge of itself, and what it knows is the pure event, which must not be confused with the state of affairs in which it is embodied. The task of philosophy when it creates concepts, entities, is always to extract an event from things and beings...(Deleuze)
    In WIP is philosophy described as creation of concepts, which provide knowledge of events.
    Deleuze tried to explore in all his books the nature of events, it led him to attempts of creating of ontology of open multiplicities whose mode of individuation is that of events rather than essences.
    Sense = pure events which are expressed in language. Language itself is the set of order-words current in a given milieu at a given time. Relation between language and the world is then rather of effectivity than representation.
    Every concept shapes the event in its own way, the greatness of philosophy is measured by the nature of the events to which its concepts summon us or that it enables us to release in concepts (Deleuze)
    Both concepts and events are described as virtual entities which gained consistency on the plane of immanence (pre-philosophical thought) that sections the chaos. Furthermore, the concepts are described as identical with events as the "pure sense" runs through their components. E.g: Hobbes concept of the Social Contract expresses the event of incorporation of a legal and political system. This is a pure event which cannot be reduced to its historical actualizations, it is rather the sense of immanent cause of those actual events.
    Philosophy can offer guidelines for well-formed concepts but it cannot offer criteria in terms of truth or falsity. Ideally the events discovered by philosophy can lead to another future.
    Philosophy extracts events from bodies and states of affairs and in doing so enables us to affirm the sense of what happens.

    5 Deleuze-Bergson: an Ontology of the Virtual
    Constantin V. Boundas
    Only intensive multiplicities are virtual, internally differentiated structures which actualize themselves through differenciation, or again only different/cation is able to account for the qualitative heterogeneity of movement.
    Riemann: Discrete multiplicities are those whose metric principle is within themselves, because the measure of their part is given in the number of elements that they have. Consequently, discrete multiplicities are quantitative and denumerable.
    Continuous multiplicities are those whose metric principle is outside of them - in the forces for example, which act upon them from the outside. Consequently, continuous multiplicities are qualitative and non-denumerable.
    For Deleuze, there is another definition of multiplicities:
    Discrete multiplicities are extended magnitudes whose nature remains the same after they have been divided.
    Continuous multiplicities are intensive magnitudes whose nature changes each time they are divided.
    These definitions choose between two tendencies: extension and intensity, space and duration...
    Multiplicity dos not convey the sense that Deleuze wishes, one needs a noun like "the multiplier" or gerund like "the multiplying" as a qualifier of multiplicity which is responsible to different/ciation.
    Movement is to become other than itself, it makes a qualitative change.
    Deleuze's critique of phenomenology: Phenomenology gives natural perception a privilege which makes movement relative to "poses". According to Deleuze (and Bergson) the starting point is a world of continuously changing movement-images - a world of matter in constant flux, with no anchorage or assignable points of reference.
    Phenomenology needs the notion of subject to assign natural perception and movement. For Deleuze-Bergson movement is not subordinate to a subject which undergoes it. We are dealing with inhuman world having a privilege over the human world of phenomenology. For Deleuze-Bergson, things are luminous with nothing but themselves to light them.
    Deleuze-Bergson start with the intensive singularities of the "pre-human" world which is account for the formation of closed "extended" systems inside the open-ended intensive chaosmic virtual.
    Tendencies are real, not merely possible. They have the reality of the virtual which exists in order to be actualized. In opposition to the virtual, the possible has no reality. The possible has to be realized, and works under rules of resemblance and limitation. The real is supposed to be in the image of the possible that it realize. On the other hand, actualization of the virtual, we find to be ruled by difference and divergence: the actual does not resemble or represent the virtual which it embodies.
    Transcendental empiricism is a method whereby the actual is divided according to its virtual tendencies which, in turn, constitute the sufficient reason of the actual.
    Everything that comes to be is correlative of an order of intensity. Intensity tends to cancel itself out in extension and in quality. Self-concealing nature of intensity is what constitutes the diversity of the sensible. The fact that intensity annuls itself within extended quantitative systems does not make intensity disappear.
    Deleuze calls differentiation the totality of the diacritic relations which occur inside an Idea-structure, and differenciation the process of actualization of such structure.
    Elan vital is the forces at work each time that a virtuality is being actualized. Elan vital is difference passing into action.
    Virtualities generate disjunctions as they begin to actualize the tendencies which were contained in the original unity and compossibility.
    Duration and space are what we get when we decompose the mixture according to the procedures of transcendental empiricism. Space is a multiplicity of exteriority, simultaneity, juxtapoistion, quantitative, differentiation and difference of degree. It is discontiunous and actual.
    Duration is a multiplicity of succession, fusion, heterogeneity, qualitative discrimination and of difference of nature. It is continuous and virtual.
    Duration always becomes, it is always incomplete, heterogeneous and continuous emergence of novelty.
    The past, which has ceased to act, has not ceased to be. The past seems to acquire the status of being itself. Once we understand duration as an intensive rather than as a discrete multiplicity, the present can no longer be thought of a becoming past after a new present has come to replace it, nor can the past be thought of a being constituted after it has ceased to be present.
    Instead we must think that memory, through an active synthesis of time which belongs to it, represents the old present, qua old, in the actual present, in which case the past coexists with every new present in relation to which it is past.
    The present is constituted as past at the same time that it is constituted as present.
    Irreversibility of duration. No identical repetition of an event is possible, because the total survival of the past guarantees the production of difference.
    Duration for both Bergson and Deleuze is the essence of things, things themselves endure.
    Space can no longer be the absolute form of exteriority. Space and time cannot be separated from each other, all distances are spatio-temporal.
    Deleuze: A mixture is divided into two tendencies, one of which is the simple and indivisible duration; at the same time, duration is differentiated along two directions, one of which is matter. Space is divided into matter and duration, but duration is differentiated as contraction and dilation, dilation being the principle of matter... Dualism, therefore, is overcome toward monism, but monism gives us a new dualism which, this time, is mastered and dominated. The division of the mixture and the differentiation of the simple are not done in the same way.
    Duration is one of the two tendenciess; spatialization is the other. But the nature of duration is to differ from itself, that which it differs from is still duration. When the mixture is divided, we are left with duration and space. The former is the bearer of all the differences of nature, since as an intensive manifold it has the property of varying qualitatively from itself. The latter, as a discrete multiplicity, varies only according to degrees.
    Difference of nature is one of the tendencies (duration) and matter is the indifferent, that which repeats itself, being incapable of changing its own nature and, therefore, varying only in terms of degrees.
    From the point of view of dilation and contraction, all degrees coexist in a single nature which is expressed, on one hand, in differences of nature and, on the other, in differences of degree.
    How can primacy given to duration can explain the existence of relatively stable and solid things? How the differenciation take place inside the flux of duration?
    Deleuze answers the question on the basis of rhythm and movement. Duration is characterized by rhythmic contractions and dilations of varying intensity. Between the maximum contraction which corresponds to the Spirit and the maximum dilation which characterizes inertia and matter, one can find the varying degrees of intensity corresponding to the many real things.
    Different degrees of spatiality correspond to different degrees of durational tension, whereas the acceleration of the temporal rhythm generates extension.
    Symmetrical relation between matter and energy supports the conclusion that matter and vibrating energy are similar or, at least that matter, just like vibratory energy, must have undulatory and rhythmic characteristic. If a particle stops vibrating, it would stop being.
    It follows that the initial problem is no longer how matter vibrates, but rather how vibration acquires its material aspects.

    PALO_FABUS --- ---
    CICHLASOMA: dovolím si upřesnit: možné přichází teprve až poté, co je vytvořeno (tj. po aktualizaci virtuálního), a jakmile je už je jednou vytvořeno, pak už se může pouze realizovat

    a máš pravdu, že tato naše zjednodušení těm konceptům trochu křivdí, už jen v té větě s DeLandou, je vidět rozpor: nejdřív říkám, že aktuální reálné, a pak že možné je zároveň aktuální a nereálné - ale to je DeLanda, já jsem u Deleuze na pojmy reálné/nereálné sám nenarazil a ony jsou vlastně v rovině imanence zbytečné
    CICHLASOMA --- ---
    PALO_FABUS: Ono to asi lze vidět tak, že Bergson vlastně říká, že _taková_ "možnost", která jako jediná přichází na mysl některým upadlejším filosofům či učebnicím filosofie, pochopitelně přichází až po realisaci. No a těm skutečně otevřeným neurčitým možnostem Bergson a následně Deleuze, narozdíl od jiných filosofů, neříkají "možnosti".

    (V Bergsonismu je to, nakolik se pamatuju, poměrně jasně podaný, ale snad nejsystematičtěji je to v Diferenci a opakování, lucidní to tam ovšem je o něco méně.. Co jsem teď koukal do nějakých článků, tak někteří autoři mají dost problém sladit různá pojetí virtuálního z různých Deleuzových spisů; mně myslim zatim přišlo, že ten základ, co jsem psal, většinou orientačně odpovídá, ale teda kdybych měl vyložit někerý relevantní pasáže z Logiky smysu, asi bych se přinejmenším dost zapotil.)
    PALO_FABUS --- ---
    TUHO, CICHLASOMA: Klíč k Deleuzově pojetí možného lze najít u Bergsona, a že jde o upadlou formu je docela přesné, jenže pochopit proč, vyžaduje u Bergsona přistoupit na to, že mnoho "záchýtných" pojmů jako je např. "prostor", "nic" nebo také "možné" chápeme jakoby naruby. Věci nejsou v prostoru, ale prostor ve věcech, nic není míň než něco, ale víc, protože je v něm vždy něco plus negace, možné není kategorií budoucnosti, ale minulosti (Hamlet se stává možným až když je napsán - předtím možný nebyl, i když nás láká si to myslet). Bergson z tohoto viní rozum, který se na trvání (tj. čas jako čirá kvalita, tj. vznikání, stávání se atd.) podílí pouze ex post, ale rozdíly, které v něm dělá, vsouvá do minulosti jakožto pre-existující - to je důvod, proč je chápeme naruby (a proč o vědě - tj. panství rozumu - říká, že jde o skutečnost inverzního řádu).

    s DeLandou lze říct, že aktuální i virtuální jsou oboje zcela reálné, možné je nereálné ale jakožto hotové je také aktuální, takže při své realizaci získává pouze existenci

    jinak o prostoru a virtualitě a jejich vzájemeném poměru v historii myšlení budu mít ve čtvrtek přednášku v Šalounově ateliéru, info dodám brzo
    CICHLASOMA --- ---
    TUHO: Nevím, jak jemné nuance Ti unikají, ale v hrubých rysech to imho jde říct tak, že "virtuální" říká poli napětí a sil, do kterého je zasazeno vše aktuální a v němž se rýsuje a z něhož se rodí to, co bude. Jde o oblast neurčitých a nerozhodnutých potencí či potencialit. Naproti tomu slovo "možné" reservuje Deleuze většinou pro zcela vulgární a upadlé pojetí možností (s nímž se lze setkat třeba v tomismu), kdy ono ne-reálné, ne-aktuální myslíme či si představujeme jako hotovou a zcela určitou eventualitu, stav, který se od aktuálního liší jen tím, že není a nemůže být teď přímo vnímaný, ale je jen představovaný ("to že 'tužka leží na stole' je teď reálné, to, že 'tužka leží na posteli (na Měsíci, na dně moře, whatever)' je možné, je tomu tak "v možnosti".
    Myslím, že tato Deleuzova terminologie může být matoucí mj. proto, že mnozí starší filosofové, když mluvili o "možném", blížili se více či méně myšlení toho, čemu D. říká "virtuální" (a stejně tak v přirozeném jazyce nemluvíme vždy o možném jen oním výše naznačeným "vulgárním" způsobem).

    (Je to samozřejmě bez záruky, už proto, že v posledních pár letech jsem Deleuze četl velmi málo; feedback uvítám.)
    TUHO --- ---
    btw je tady nekdo, kdo ma pocit, ze fakt chape matrici actual/virtual versus real/possible? zaplatim vam utratu, kdyz se mnou pujdete na pivo :]] ja uz z toho silim, furt mam pocit, ze mi neco unika.
    TUHO --- ---
    tohle je sice trosku bokem, ale myslim, ze ne az zas tak tolik...

    This civilization is already over, and everyone knows it. We’re in a sort of terminal spiral of thanaticism. The paths to another form of life seem blocked, so it seems there’s nothing for it but to double down and bet all the chips on the house that kills us. But there might be something to be said for an attentiveness to how all this came to pass. When the wheels stop spinning we may want to know how and why we lost it all.

    Jason W. Moore’s Capitalism in the Web of Life: Ecology and the Accumulation of Capital (Verso 2015) is an important book, in that it brings together the immense resources of world systems theory, critical geography and a certain strain of ‘green’ Marxism. Even though it refuses such terms, it does signal work in thinking through what the Marxist strand of historical sociology needs to be in the Anthropocene.
    TUHO --- ---
    A na https://anarchistwithoutcontent.wordpress.com/ za poslednich par tydnu tri novy posty, necetl jsem jeste...
    TUHO --- ---
    Celkem peknej clanek shrnujici Deleuzeho projekt a mozny pouziti ve vyzkumu mezinarodnich vztahu (respektive vztahu D&G ontologie a empirickyho zkoumani) od Petera Lenca:

    (Re-)Introducing Deleuze: New Readings of Deleuze in International Studies

    tady z toho nejaky rychly vypisky, kdyby nekoho zajimalo:

    (Re-)Introducing Deleuze: New Readings of Deleuze in International Studies
    Peter Lenco
    Lenco oponuje tvrzení, že systematická analýza Deleuzeho myšlení je nemožná, protože celý základ stojí na tom, aby se vzpouzel fixnosti a totalizaci. Nicméně to neznamená, že nevytvořil koheretntní, i když radikálně otevřený systém.
    Deleuze je striktně anti-esencialistický a oponuje tak Platónovi a jeho teorii forem, která předpokládá fixní, věčné modely pro cokoliv. Svět je v ní tak tvořen hierarchií "pure line of descent", která prochází od modelu, ke kopii k simulakru.
    V Difference and Repetition se Deleuze věnuje tomu, jak můžeme rozlišit dvě entity a napadá Aristotelovu klasifikaci založenou na klasifikaci druhů a rodů (dále viz http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/aristotle-logic/#SpeGenDif). Toto dělení (definování rozdílů mezi entitami, abychom oddělili genus a species) se ovšem stává nesmyslné od určité míry obecnosti (např. rozdíl mezi organickým a anorganickým), stejně jako na úrovni velké konkrétnosti (rozdíly mezi dvěma individui). Dále také viz Russels Paradox (http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/russell-paradox/)
    Aby se Deleuze vyhnul tomuto paradoxu vytváření ne-reprezentující metafyziku, který stojí na ontologickém principu "univocity of being", který přiřazuje všemu existujícímu Bytí, které je ontologicky stejně relevantní (ovšem co Toscanova kritika o ontologické odlišnosti multiplicit? viz
    https://anarchistwithoutcontent.wordpress.com/2011/04/21/death-to-flat-ontology/). Hlavní
    Podle Deleuzeho vyžaduje Univocity of Being, aby ukázal jak je spojena s odlišností, jak pracuje pole individuace a utváření rozdílných forem, determinace částí a jejich variací.
    Navrhuje proto rozdělení kontinua reálného mezi póly aktuálního a virtuálního.
    Tradiční "reprezentační teorie" se podle Deleuzeho zaměřuje pouze na aktuální a ignoruje chaotickou povahu virtuálního.

    Assemblage se skládá z morfogenetických procesů, které zodpovídají za existující stav věcí.
    Deleuze staví na Foucaultově Archeologii vědění, který používá rozlišení Louise Hjemsleva mezi content (viditelné) a expression (řečitelné), které se vzájemně předpokládají. Deleuze ale přidává ještě osu virtuální-aktuální, která je propojuje a které zodpovídá za změny v systému.
    Formy obsahu tak plodí formy výrazu, které se stávají novými formy obsahu v pokračujícím směrem ke větší komplexitě a stratifikace, zároveň jsou ovšem otevřeny ke změně.
    Všechny věci jsou aktualizovány (z virtuálního do aktuálního) a counter-aktualizovány (z aktuálního do virtuálního) podle odlišných forem obsahu a výrazu. Příklad: forma obsahu třmenu je stabilní distribuce jezdcovy váhy, která zvyšuje jeho bojeschopnost; forma výrazu je nové uspořádání vojenské moci (která může být viděna jako forma obsahu nového politického systému — feudalismu).
    Assemblage analysis odmítá porozumění společnosti skrze nějaké předem dané chápání, ale snaží se najít porozumění věcem, které vychází přímo z nich. Tomuto D&G říkají abstract machines, jsou diagramy asembláže.
    Abstraktní stroje nemají žádnou vlastní esenciální charakteristiku ani obsah a jejich ontologický status je poněkud problematický - označují ho jako dark precursor nebo Událost.
    Použití Deleuzeho v international studies: Deleuze předkládá super-teorii, která nepředkládá teoretickou perspektivu, nicméně základ pro jakékoliv zkoumání reality z ní samé (immanent approach, který je empirický bez toho aby byl pozitivistický, poststruktrualistický, ale zároveň materialistický), je to tedy protiklad meta-teorie, odmítá jakýkoliv transcendentální princip.
    Deleuzeho flat ontology stojí na tom, že actual a virtual jsou ontologicky ekvivalentní.
    Přístup Deleuzeho k empirickému zkoumání je takový, že žádný fenomén nemůže být chápán jako rigidní entita, ale jako unikátní uspořádání prvků. Takový přístup nám umožní stávání (becomings) fenoménů (politických organizací, států, jednotlivců) tak jak se rekombinuje a aktualizuje ve formách obsahu a výrazu.
    TUHO --- ---
    kritika De Landovy interpretace D&G metafyziky jako "flat ontology" od Alberta Toscana v jedno starsim prispevku na anarchist without content...

    death to “flat ontology” | Anarchist Without Content
    TUHO --- ---
    zni zajimave

    Deleuze & Guattari: Emergent Law is an exposition and development of Deleuze & Guattari's legal theory. Although there has been considerable interest in Deleuze & Guattari in critical legal studies, as well as considerable interest in legality in Deleuze & Guattari studies, this is the first book to focus exclusively on Deleuze & Guattari and law. Situating Deleuze & Guattari's engagement with social organisation and legality in the context of their theory of 'abstract machines' and 'intensive assemblages', Jamie Murray presents their theory of law as that of a two-fold conception of, first, a transcendent molar law and, second, an immanent molecular emergent law. Transcendent molar legality is the traditional object of legal theory. And, as explicated here, immanent molecular emergent law is the novel juridical object that Deleuze & Guattari identify. Developing this conception, Deleuze & Guattari: Emergent Law draws out its implications for current and for future legal theory; arguing that it provides the basis for a new jurisprudence capable of creating new concepts of legality.
    Deleuze & Guattari: Emergent Law (Nomikoi Critical Legal Thinkers): Jamie Murray: 9780415496018: Amazon.com: Books
    TUHO --- ---
    dik .]
    PALO_FABUS --- ---
    TUHO --- ---
    nemuezete nekdo stahnout, ehm? .]

    The New Materiality
    Manuel DeLanda

    In the last few decades an entirely new conception of the material world has emerged. Here, philosopher Manuel DeLanda, whose work has become synonymous with this ‘new materialism’, introduces this novel understanding of materiality. Like any other conceptual framework, it has precedents in the history of philosophy - the work of the Dutch philosopher Baruch Spinoza is a good example - but only recently has it become coherently articulated with science and technology. Gone is the Aristotelian view that matter is an inert receptacle for forms that come from the outside (transcendent essences), as well as the Newtonian view in which an obedient materiality simply follows general laws and owes all its powers to those transcendent laws. In place of this, we can now conceptualise an active matter endowed with its own tendencies and capacities, engaged in its own divergent, open-ended evolution, animated from within by immanent patterns of being and becoming.
    The New Materiality - DeLanda - 2015 - Architectural Design - Wiley Online Library
    PALO_FABUS --- ---

    "k příležitosti výstav vychází díky Kvalitáři také kniha OBJEKT která prezentuje současné proudy ve filosofii a teorii médií (zejména objektově orientovanou ontologii, ale také nový materialismus, spekulativní realismus a akceleracionismus)"
    TUHO --- ---
    Prednaska Andrewa Culpa Dark Deleuze na Soundcloudu tady...

    Dark Deleuze UW Talk 6/25/15

    Emerging from scholars concerned with the intolerable condition of the present, the darkness refashions a revolutionary Deleuze; revolutionary negativity in a world characterized by compulsory happiness, decentralized control, and overexposure. The ultimate task of this approach is not the creation of concepts, and to the extent that it does, Dark Deleuze creates concepts only to write apocalyptic science fiction.

    Krome jeho blogu stoji za to skouknout i dizertaci


    This work reimagines autonomy in the age of spatial enclosure. Rather than proposing a new version of the escapist running to the hills, “Escape” aligns the desire for disappearance, invisibility, and evasion with the contemporary politics of refusal, which poses no demands, resists representation, and refuses participation in already-existing politics. Such escape promises to break life out of a stifling perpetual present. The argument brings together culture, crisis, and conflict to outline the political potential of escape. It begins by reintroducing culture to theories of state power by highlighting complementary mixtures of authoritarian and liberal rule. The result is a typology of states that embody various aspects of conquest and contract: the Archaic State, the Priestly State, the Modern State, and the Social State. The argument then looks to the present, a time when the state exists in a permanent crisis provoked by global capitalist forces. Politics today is controlled by the incorporeal power of Empire and its lived reality, the Metropolis, which emerged as embodiments of this crisis and continue to further deepen exploitation and alienation through the dual power of Biopower and the Spectacle. Completing the argument, two examples are presented as crucial sites of political conflict. Negative affects and the urban guerrilla dramatize the conflicts over life and strategy that characterize daily existence in the Metropolis.

    iii Following a transdisciplinary concern for intensity, the work draws from a variety of historical, literary, cinematic, and philosophical examples that emphasize the cultural dimension of politics. The wide breadth of sources, which range from historical documents on the origins of the police, feminist literature on the politics of emotion, experimental punk film, and Deleuze and Guattari’s nomadology, thus emulates the importance of force over appearance found in contemporary radical politics. Departing from many of the accounts of political change given by political theory or sociology, “Escape” shows how the recent politics of autonomy is essential to understanding the struggle against Empire.

    Escape (Dissertation) | Andrew Culp - Academia.edu
    TUHO --- ---
    btw neni jen new materialism, ale spis poststructuralism, ale stejne se vyplati project. par zajimavych shrnuti (od Deleuze, Baudrillard, Badiou, Benjamin, Barthes, Bakhtin a dalsi nejen zacinajici na B)

    In Theory | Ceasefire Magazine
    TUHO --- ---
    Timotheus Vermeulen talks to philosopher Rosi Braidotti about the pitfalls of speculative realism, the movement that has created a buzz in the art world

    Frieze Magazine | Archive | Borrowed Energy
    PALO_FABUS --- ---
    FIDEL: ono taky jak levice tak pravice ve svých nesofistikovaných podobách mají alespoň teoreticky univerzální appeal: jednání, tj. výkon moci, každého jednotlivce má být hodnoceno v poměru k nějaké byť i zcela vyluhované transcendentální etice (stejná pravidla pro všechny) - tázání se po levicovosti nebo pravicovosti proto selhává mj. kvůli tomu, že otázka morálky u stranictví není problematizována tak radikálně, jak to dělá Land, Foucault, Deleuze a především Nietzsche, jehož ti tří rozvíjejí; to je např. Deleuzova imanentní etika, nebo-li etika bez morálky (nietzschovsko-spinozovský komplex), v níž se nevybírá/nehodnotí s odkazem nějaké univerzální hodnoty, ale na to, jestli je moc dovedena až ke svému limitu, jestli se např. člověk stává tím, kým je...

    a právě toto dovádění do důsledků převedeno na makro-sociologickou úroveň chápu jako hlavní motiv akceleracionismu

    "The selection, in short, must be based on the purely immanent criterion of a thing's power or capacities: that is, by the manner in which it actively deploys its power by going to the limit of what it can do, or on the contrary, by the manner in which it is cut off from its capacity to act. An immanent ethical difference (good / bad) is in this way substituted for the transcendent moral opposition (Good / Evil). The "bad" is an exhausted and degenerating mode of existence that judges life from the perspective of its sickness, that devaluates life in the name of "higher" values (the True, the Good, the Beautiful). The "good" is an overflowing, ascending, and exceptional form of existence, a type of being that is able to transform itself depending on the forces it encounters, always increasing its power to live, always opening new possibilities of life."
    Smith, Daniel W. 2012, "The Concept of Simulacrum: Deleuze and the Overturning of Platonism"