Posted February 18, 2013on:
Joshua Ramey’s excellent book and his recent explications on the blogosphere contain one puzzling feature. Despite the invocation of a “gnosis” based on”seeing beyond clear divisions” (p202) Ramey retains certain dualisms that hinder his message and limit its scope. For example he happily endorses Jacob Sherman’s contrast between “making oneself receptive” (baptised the “Hadot-Foucault” approach, although Foucault’s emphasis on “thinking differently” makes of truth itself a matter of non-recognitive creation) and “making oneself creative” (one could call this the “Klossowski-Deleuze” approach, although strangely Klossowski is absent from Ramey’s book). This he ties to the contrast between individual private ordeals and collective public ones. He finds Deleuze “conflicted” between an egalitarian rationalist impulsion and an élitist esoteric tendency.
These dualisms, and various others that crop up in the discussion, are foreign to Deleuze’s text. “Hermeticism” or “spiritual ordeal” leaps to the eye on every page that Deleuze wrote, from his dissolution…
View original post 433 more words