David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal of the British Society of Phenomenology 37 (3):228-51 (2006)
This paper will seek firstly to understand Deleuze’s main challenges to phenomenology, particularly as they are expressed in The Logic of Sense and What is Philosophy?, although reference will also be made to Pure Immanence and Difference and Repetition. We will then turn to a discussion of one of the few passages in which Deleuze directly engages with Merleau-Ponty, which occurs in the chapter on art in What is Philosophy? In this text, he and Guattari offer a critique of what they call the “final avatar” of phenomenology – that is, the “fleshism” that Merleau-Ponty proposes in his unfinished but justly famous work, The Visible and the Invisible. It will be argued that both Deleuze’s basic criticisms of phenomenology, as well as he and Guattari’s problems with the concept of the flesh, do not adequately come to grips with Merleau-Ponty’s later philosophy. Merleau-Ponty is not obviously partisan to what Deleuze finds problematic in this tradition, despite continuing to identify himself as a phenomenologist, and is working within a surprisingly similar framework in certain key respects. In fact, in the more positive part of this paper, we will compare Merleau-Ponty’s notion of flesh, and Deleuze’s equally infamous univocity of being, as a means to consider the broader question of the ways in which the two philosophers consider ontological thought, its meaning and its conditions. It is our belief that through properly understanding both positions, a rapprochement, or at least the foundation for one, can be established between these two important thinkers.
|Keywords||phenomenology immanence univocity Merleau-Ponty Deleuze poststructuralism|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Jack Reynolds (2007). Wounds and Scars: Deleuze on the Time (and the Ethics) of the Event. Deleuze Studies 2 (1):15.
Jack Reynolds (2007). Wounds and Scars: Deleuze on the Time and Ethics of the Event. Deleuze Studies 1 (2):144-166.
James Williams (2008). Gilles Deleuze and Michel Henry: Critical Contrasts in the Deduction of Life as Transcendental. Sophia 47 (3):265-279.
Similar books and articles
Bryan Smyth (2011). The Meontic and the Militant: On Merleau-Ponty's Relation to Fink∗. International Journal of Philosophical Studies 19 (5):669 - 699.
Joel Smith (2005). Merleau-Ponty and the Phenomenological Reduction. Inquiry 48 (6):553-571.
Raymond J. Devettere (1973). Merleau-Ponty and the Husserlian Reductions. Philosophy Today 17 (4):297-308.
Sara Heinämaa (1999). Merleau-Ponty's Modification of Phenomenology: Cognition, Passion and Philosophy. Synthese 118 (1):49-68.
M. C. Dillon (1971). Gestalt Theory and Merleau-Ponty's Concept of Intentionality. Man and World 4 (4):436-459.
David Morris (2008). Body. In Rosalyn Diprose & Jack Reynolds (eds.), Merleau-ponty: Key Concepts. Acumen Publishing 111-120.
Sandra B. Rosenthal & Patrick L. Bourgeois (1987). Peirce, Merleau-Ponty, and Perceptual Experience: A Kantian Heritage. International Studies in Philosophy 19 (3):33-42.
Leonard Lawlor (1998). The End of Phenomenology: Expressionism in Deleuze and Merleau-Ponty. [REVIEW] Continental Philosophy Review 31 (1):15-34.
Added to index2009-03-16
Total downloads208 ( #9,678 of 1,780,078 )
Recent downloads (6 months)28 ( #29,677 of 1,780,078 )
How can I increase my downloads?