this is great stuff on KZbin... but the hype man saying "right" after every statement is a little distracting.

10:57

a shot for every time Todd says.....right

Great lectures! Unfortunately, there are now so many commercial interruptions, (upwards of 18 per video) that I can no longer listen to them.

funny how Deleuze wrote the book titled logic of sense, and yet a Deleuzian scholar can't make any sense of it🙃

Dejligt med et menneske der selv føler sig hævet højt over hans medmennesker, synd for vedkommende selv.

For me its unclear, what the story of the selling of the car, the sincere with background of deception, the machinery of that imperative etc... what exactly that exemplifies, is he still referring to the structure of thought from before: remarquable, important the intereseting. Or is it simply the point, that that imperative doesnt create any new consequences?!

To all those clickity-clacking away in the background, we salute you.

Jeg er en stor beundrer af Ole’s bøger der sætter grænseløse verdener i spil både som mester af ord og begreber - og et begreb ( ord) som er blevet hængende fra min læsning er “ det synkinæstetiske” som jeg ser som et edderkoppespind af bevægelse og den samlede musikalitet af alle vores sanser der som spindelvæv anbringer os svævende i ethvert øjebliks mulighed - en kæmpestor tak til Ole og Hans skønne værker der i hvert fald kan åbne oplevelsen af øjeblikke ind i det grænseløse 🎶🦉🪲🐝🐞🐦‍⬛♥️🧡💛💚💙💜🖤🩶🤍🙃🙂

Some mfs show up to these things just to cough

Possible could not be virtual even with infinite possibilities. Possible means possible identities. But virtual field is difference

Boring

Mega inspirerende! Mange tak herfra.

Der er noget, der siger mig, at jeg ikke er den første, der oplever Allan Holmgrens videoer er let forståelige og yderst motiverende. Tusind tak for dit bidrag, Allan!

Great class! Thank you so much for sharing this ❤

Slow but unfortunately x1.5 speed makes for uncomfortable listening.

18:40

Our postmodernists and post structuralist the same?

1:56:05

50:46

He looks like Michel Foucault

8 30 41 51 not inside or outsude ir yes n no in processes

I found the Mel Brooks/Carl Reiner routine: kzbin.info/www/bejne/g6vYf6aNp6tsgqs

So, when Todd said, okay let's stop for 5 mins, I was like THANK GOD, still trying to process which was good sense and which was common sense... forgetting, of course, that I'm watching on KZbin and could actually stop the recording whenever I want.

These page numbers are an issue...

The typing in the background soothes me. Like raindrops.This one and Nathan Widders intros to Deleuze on KZbin are gold.

Very helpful (except his pronunciation of 'Deleuze' 😂 sorry 🤷🏼‍♂️)

hi, there is one thing i'd like to ask with regards to aristotle's subordination of difference to identity (his conceptualizaion of difference as opposition): can this subordination be said to take place in the mode of potentiality, or only in the mode of actuality? for example, aristo writes (in metaphysics theta 1046) that all potentiality is impotentiality of the same and with respect to the same (dynamis, adynamia). agamben writes on this in potentialities, and i'm trying to see how this idea can be thought together with the one mentioned in the lecture (difference as opposition, for aristo). thanks!

When you bang your hand against the wall in different ways, remarkable, interesting and important things might happen. It is truth. But what kinds of truth might happen when you bang your hand on the wall? Who wouldn't want to see you accidentally knock the whole whiteboard over. This is why I think art is so essential and love Neitzsche's conception of the ancient Greeks and their tragedies. Create new truths that reflect difference and through dramatic performance and portray difference in itself through a drama.

Sikke en gang manipulerende sludder fra en teoretiker, der tydeligvis ikke gjort sig mange erfaringer med ledelse i praksis 😞

This guy is the spitting image of Foucault

thank you so much for sharing free knowledge

Todd May sounds like a Philosopher version of Michael Pollan

I've gone down this rabbit hole, for better or for worse. I've just read some parts of Difference and Repetition, but it would take a long time to get through the whole thing. Immediately my reaction is that Deleuze is confusing different areas and that the attempt to conjure 'pure difference' relies on the Kantian intuitions of time and space as primary, in other words, even when trying to escape the idea that difference relies on 'difference from' and therefore 'identity', it still relies on the identity of time and space as prerequisites for trying to conjure the metaphysical notion of difference, and therefore of the identity of those. So in that sense it appears to me that it makes no sense to try and get away from the notion of identity being primary. Once time and space are presupposed as the realm in which difference does its thing, difference no longer seems like a metaphysical concept, but rather a way of describing the transitions of substance in space over time, and here we have a prerequisite of something along the lines of 'substance'.

Todd may is such a good lecturer. I love this series before I read D&R. I read anti oedipus and got most of it but there were a lot of terms like different synthesis that are all referencing D&R

in all the capitals they talk, walk and think fast, not only in your fucking NY

im still confused about the relation structuralism and post structuralism have to identity as both seem to explain them using structures be it socioeconomic standing for example for structuralism and history for example for post structuralism

D god

todd cool

Really curious what kinds of students he is delivering to? Are they grad students? Seems like a psych (-ology/-iatry) program? So impressive how fast he ramps up to sophisticated ideas, even given their seemingly very mixed level of knowledge coming in...

Een ezel kun je niets kwalijk nemen

I'm so surprised how respected these philosophers are in academic philosophy, given that it is so obviously nonsense. There are many philosophers who DO consider it to be nonsense, but the surprise is the big big population of those who do not. I can't understand the part about alternate practices where the professor suddenly acts being a dunk Yiddish-speaking person. What's this about do not eat paper? And what's a Dakkr Hal Danish? Does someone have the transcript? I listened to it several times and I can't understand it.

Does anyone have more information on the chemical swap? I'm super curious about it.

Using the virtual/actual concept to re-interpret Confucianism, is Confucianism (particularly the relational identity terms) overall an attempt to actualize the virtue realm of kinship (blood relationship), with the purpose of reducing the intensity of the unknown complexities into a kind of actual ordering, therefore trade creativity with stablization (harmony)? So the eternal return expressed through the WAY, the Taoism is co-existing alongside with Confucianism to maintain the broad and pure virtual realm into a balance?

the beginning mindmap is a great summary and re-presentation.

what is the meaning of relation in the context of "the realm of relation as the virtual field"

We can sense it (virtual field), but we cann't bring it in front of us. We cann't investigate it the way as we investigate what is actual----can this structure also been used to describe the meta-communication?

Is playing cards a game of virtual or possibilities?

Can those 'smart' students stop interupting the lecture?

every actual contains a virtual----why not "every virtual contains an actual"? suppose the meta contain the actual?