Rumi is full of “longing “.

Couldn't get anymore gay than that. Deleuze called it pathological production of desiring machines.

Interesting point, that love is a response to a presence. However, my push back would be that it’s not that the person you meet adds something to you, it’s that you were always lacking but never new your own deficiency until you met this person. “You don’t know what you’re missing” is a common phrase for a reason. Put it this way: if human beings form social groups because of some level of individual deficiency we all have, where the collection of humans corrects these deficiencies, then it must be the case that it is necessary for humans to come together. If we severally had no deficiency, then we would NOT need each other, and so coming together would just be arbitrary. Likewise, when we love the person, if we have no lack in ourselves severally, then there’s no real need, or no principle of necessity to love one another except that for how it makes one feel. So it seems. Love would just be arbitrary. Then again, if the love is not necessary, then perhaps it makes it more genuine. But then that makes it whimsical as there’s no reason, and maybe there is, but it appears there’s no reason for it other than subjective feeling, on the supposition that we aren’t Inna state of lack. If one believes in God, why then does God love? It’s this agape love it, where it’s not that you love to satisfy a need or deficiency for yourself, it’s that you love others for their sake and well being. But here again, deficiency is in the equation. For to love someone for them is to suppose they need your love that without which would result in a harm. This is the parental Love, whence Father.

Husserl's motto 'zur Sachen selbst' (mentioned at 7:50) translates as 'to the things themselves', not 'to the things in themselves'. The difference between these two phrases matters, since Husserl specifically rejected Kantian 'Dingen an sich' or 'things in themselves'. The things themselves that Husserl enjoins us to go back to are of course phenomena, not noumena. These include religious phenomena. But Husserl himself also worked explicitly towards a 'transcendental phenomenological metaphysics' as well as a phenomenological theology. These are taken up in some of his manuscripts and later works.

Thank you for bringing up this matter in a public accessible sphere.

Very useful, thanks!

did you guys know that vid. was pub. when I was 3 years old right

That was a great talk, very helpful for my own Phd research. Thank you for sharing.

I'm glad I came across this video; my username on here perhaps betrays my philosophical proclivities and I'm generally unacquainted with Levinas so I'm curious to see how Levinas's theory of desire intersects and diverges with a Deleuzian desiring-production.

viskers you are no philosopher -

KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK JON

i enjoy the lecture....thanks

looks good! i would like to read this book

how old is this

Is there a video of Dr. Kjellmark's speech?

@easyst1180 Thanks for the encouragement!

@funkeykong Thanks for the comment - I'm usuing a digital reverb pedal running into an analog delay pedal both of which are going into a pitch shifter. Also I use a fuzz box during part of the solo. All put together it kind of has a flanger effect (which maybe you could use to by-pass using all the pedals), but I like the warmth and depth of the sound without the flanger effect. Hope that helps...

Hey the sounds coming out are cool. What sorta pedals are u using?