Deleuze and Pragmatism 2

Perspectives on Deleuze: A Practical Dialectic

For the pragmatists, truth is not universal and objective.

Further, we do thinking: theories are tools and instruments that are addressed to certain problems, problem-solving, and never static solutions.

Theories are always fallible, always capable of being wrong, capable of being replaced with new theories that are more illuminating in relation to problems that evolve over time.

The point is to create models to stimulate more thought.

Models can be useful and some have consistency and coherence over others, but none can ever claim transcendent truth, whether this is in the fields of science or ethics.

They can be based on a form of reasoning, but not exclusively and not one that would aspire to universal objectivity.

Models can be based on other things, all of the perspectives a human being might bring to any problem: feelings, relationships, commitments, desires. And models are couched in language that itself has no concrete stability, but is also always in a state of becoming.

Pragmatists believe that theories can be justified based on their consistency and coherence internally, and amongst other theories, that form a body of thought.

And this applies beyond the sphere of science into ethics:

We can see the similarities with a constructivist approach to reality, thought, and ethics:

Thinking is a doing process, at all times contingent on setting and the problems that need to be addressed.

And on closer examination, we find a distinction surfacing in this approach to thought:

That is, real thought always affirms life and nature, but sometimes our thought evolves in a personal manner, on other occasions it necessarily must evolve socially, and politically.

Thought that personally and privately affirms may not always be thought that is remarkable in a social and public sense, and vice versa. Affirmation of life in the private sphere may not always coincide with the affirmation of life in the public sphere.

Concepts are constructed to address specific problems in particular situations and settings. In some situations our thought serves to affirm a personal vision of life; sometimes we must take those same affirmations into the social sphere and find ways to address problems that inherently are social or political.

This is not an attempt to slip into Deleuze’s ethical vision a transcendent morality, objective rules of what one can and cannot do; negativity based in abstraction, all of which he rejects.

I hope you enjoyed this article. Thanks for reading!

Tomas

Excerpt from my forthcoming book, Becoming: A Life of Pure Difference (Gilles Deleuze and the Philosophy of the New) Copyright © 2021 by Tomas Byrne. Learn more here.

Related posts:

The gentle back-hum of technology prying our decisions from our own hands and making us think we chose to buy that weighted blanket, because of our anxiety, when it was really the anxiety that kicked…

My decision to stop going to oncology appointments and forge my own path through cancer by facing up to my vulnerability.

Artificial intelligence is one of the important technological advances of the early 21st century. Already it has meant that machines can read medical images as well as a radiologist, and enabled the…