Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
In Spinoza et la mthode de Gueroult, when reviewing Gueroults twovolume study of Spinoza,5 Deleuze details those elements of Gueroults method of
engagement with Spinoza that he considers to have had a profound effect both on
contemporary Spinoza studies, and also on the role of the history of philosophy in
the contemporary practice of philosophy in general. He argues that Gueroult
renewed the history of philosophy by a structuralgenetic method, which he had
elaborated well before structuralism imposed itself in other domains. Such a
structure is defined by an order of reasons, the reasons being differential and
generative elements of the corresponding system, veritable philosophemes which
only exist in their relations with each other.6 Gueroults admirable book, he
continues, has a double importance, both from the point of view of the general
method that it puts to work, and from the point of view of his Spinozism, which
does not represent one application of this method among others but rather
constitutes the most adequate, the most saturated, the most exhaustive term or
object concluding the series on Descartes, Malebranche and Leibniz. This book
founds the veritable scientific study of Spinozism.7
This characterization of the method of Gueroult actually outlines Deleuzes
own philosophical project in Expressionism in Philosophy. It is there that Deleuze
undertakes the project of renewing the history of philosophy in relation to Spinoza.
The structuralgenetic criteria that Deleuze deploys are determined according to a
logic of expression, which is elaborated in Difference and Repetition in relation to
the differential calculus as a logic of different/ciation. The differential and
generative elements of this logic exist solely in the differential relations that they
have with each other. Expressionism in Philosophy is also doubly important, not
only insofar as it too advocates the scientific study of Spinozism, in particular
Spinozas relation to mathematics and the differential calculus of Leibniz, but also
insofar as it is the final text of a series of works on figures in the history of
philosophy: Hume, Nietzsche, Bergson,8 which constitutes Deleuzes project of
renewing the history of philosophy by constructing an alternative lineage in the
history of philosophy. With this series of texts Deleuze proposes a new way of
reading the figures of the history of philosophy, neither as the possessors of a truth
whose reactualization is being attempted, nor as the objects of an infinite
deconstruction, nor as the occupants of a privileged enclave accessible only to
connections of the historians reading, the individuation of the systems of which is the
material or the discontinuous content (p. 231). All citations quoted from French language
texts are my translations, unless otherwise indicated.
5
Martial Gueroult, Spinoza (t. III, Paris, 196874).
6
Deleuze, Spinoza et la mthode gnrale de Gueroult, Revue de Mtaphysique et
de Morale, 74 (1969), p. 426.
7
Ibid., p. 437.
8
Deleuze later returns to this series with a text on Leibniz.
201.
Cartesian and Hegelian point of view, to that of a more Scotist and even Leibnizian
point of view, thereby determining an alternative lineage in the history of
philosophy.
Deleuze considers Spinozas Ethics to have given expression to the concept of
individuality, whose themes can be found scattered among several other authors of
the seventeenth century: for Deleuzes purposes most notably in the work of Duns
Scotus. In relation to the concept of individuality, the Hegelian categories of
quantity, quality and relation, which articulate differences in the distances or
dimensions of things (quantity), in their nature (quality), and in their order
(relation), are considered by Deleuze to be antedated by the three different
dimensions of the individual as presented by Spinoza, namely relation, power
(quantity), and mode (quality). The individual is characterized as relation insofar as
there is a composition of individuals in relation to one another, or amongst
themselves. In chapter 2 it is argued that the infinitesimal calculus puts into play a
certain type of relation for Deleuze the differential relation which is
characteristic of the compositional relations between individuals. The
characterization of the individual as power (potentia) indicates the individuals
capacity to compose new relations with other individuals. The concept of potentia,
which is translated by the concept of power as force or capacity, is different to that
of potestas, which is translated by power in the juridicopolitical sense of the
term,21 insofar as it expresses that which an individual body can do, and which is
verified by joy. Composition therefore refers not only to the characteristic relations
between individuals, but also to the capacity or potential to create these kinds of
relations, the mechanism of which is determined as operating according to the logic
of different/ciation, and is elaborated in chapter 3. The third dimension of the
individual is characterized as mode, which Deleuze considers to be expressive of
the Scotist concept of an intrinsic mode. Deleuzes characterization of the
intrinsic mode of an individual as the intensive part, or singular modal essence,
of an individual, or of its corresponding finite existing mode, is elaborated in
chapter 4. The mechanism by means of which intensive parts are distinguished not
only from one another, but also from the extensive parts corresponding to them, is
determined as operating according to the logic of different/ciation. The question of
how the intensive parts of different individuals are differentiated from one another
as more or less powerful is then investigated in chapter 5. Chapter 6 raises the
question of whether the power, or capacity, of an individual, which Deleuze
characterizes as its power to act, should be understood to be fixed or variable, and
21
Eugene Holland notes that Martial Gueroult, in his two-volume study of Spinoza, is
one of the first to demonstrate the importance of the distinction between potentia and
potestas in Spinoza (Holland, Spinoza and Marx, Cultural Logic, 2.1 (Fall, 1998), 29).
For a thorough examination of the social and political implications of this distinction in
relation to Spinoza see Antonio Negri, The Savage Anomaly: the power of Spinozas
metaphysics and politics, trans. M. Hardt (Minneapolis, 1991).