Well i said i was going to post on Deleuze's discussion of the 'no' as
positive. This is a delicate operation however and would probably be
better to read Deleuze himself. The chapter on Active and Reactive in
NIETZSCHE & PHILOSOPHY should give one a sense of what Deleuze thinks
to be a positive 'no'; also the last chapter, The Overman Against the
Dialectic, especially the section on The Sense of Affirmation. All of
the stuff on the Eternal Return in DIFFERENCE & REPETITION deals with
this too (look in the index for the page numbers.). For an overall
characterization of the 'no' in philosophy, one would really need to read
the whole book. But 'noology' is discussed briefly in ATP and What Is
Philosophy?.
Another remark concerning Derrida and his Saussurianism. Nathan pointed
out that Derrida criticized Saussure's linguistics. This is true, but
only because Derrida believes to privelege language over writing is to
be caught in the metaphysics of presence. Derrida does except the qu
the endless differing of signs: identity = negative difference. He
throws the 'a' in difference to bring in Heideggerian presence/absence and
trace. As far as the stuff of the conditions of possibility tgoes, i
do not think that Deleuze believes that his concepts are the conditions
of the possibility of anything, they are the'effect' of Becoming. THis is
sticky and i really don't know how to explain it. The chapter on the plane
of immanence in WHAT IS PHILOSOPHY? discusses this. I wrote earlier that
differance could be compared to this plane, but the more i think about it
the less sure i am of this. It can be compared if you think of Derrida
in D&G's terms, but they are probably quite different.
chris
------------------