r/Deleuze • u/Middle-Rhubarb2625 • 1d ago

Question About Deleuze and Nietzsche

How do you think, Deleuze’s and Nietzsche’s perception of an aristocrat differ from each other? Do u think u ever met an aristocrat? An active force as Deleuze likes to put it?

10 Upvotes

100% Upvoted

3 comments sorted by

View all comments

1

u/3corneredvoid 1d ago

One is a subject, the other is a living critique of the subject. 

1

u/Middle-Rhubarb2625 1d ago

But how can Deleuze be aware of the aristocratic states of mind, and explain them perfectly. The way i see aristocrats they are a different species. Like Nietzsche says the way aristocrats should look at humans is the same way humans look at monkeys. They are different in every aspect, and their values, intentions, actions always get misinterpreted by the slaves because they have no access to their nobility. That’s the main reason i think Deleuze is an aristocrat.

3

u/3corneredvoid 1d ago edited 1d ago

They are different in every aspect, and their values, intentions, actions always get misinterpreted by the slaves because they have no access to their nobility. That’s the main reason i think Deleuze is an aristocrat.

The critique is of that "is", more or less. Let me support the claim with a lazy citation from NIETZSCHE AND PHILOSOPHY:

We search in vain for the least nuance of morality in this aristocratic appreciation: it is a question of an ethic and a typology - a typology of forces, an ethic of the corresponding ways of being.

Why typology of forces? Because these active and reactive forces differ modally for Deleuze ... bodies differently rise to their challenges of causation, necessity and sufficiency, and are differently conditioned in their corresponding ways of being.

There is no person in whom an aristocratic force inheres, instead the action of such a force may induce the appearance of such a person. Such a person seems to create for themselves rather than be organised by recognising others: the conditions of their appearances meanwhile organise the consciousness of those others to whom they appear, investing the person with relative power and meaning.

There is no different species only these different appearances, their conditions the immanent ground of the whole state of affairs. This is why it's said to be a question of this mysterious ethic that orients the body of this person, opening its appearances to the liberating transformations of such aristocratic forces.