Abstracts L

Jean-Sébastien Laberge, Hétérogenèse, écosophie et dissensus.

Au même titre que l’éthique est indissociable de la métaphysique chez Spinoza, je considère que de la métaphysique de la différence, majoritairement définie par Deleuze, suit une éthique, l’écosophie, principalement développée par Guattari. En ce sens, il est pertinent de remarquer que le concept guattarien d’hétérogenèse que Deleuze utilise pour définir sa propre philosophie (Deleuze, 2003: 338), et qui a ainsi une acception métaphysique, est central dans l’écosophie de Guattari, ayant alors une acception esthético-éthico-politique. De surcroit, c’est conformément à la causalité immanente de l'être univoque que Guattari soutient qu'« il n’est pas juste de séparer l’action sur la psyché, le socius et l’environnement » (Guattari, 1989: 32) et qu'il fonde ainsi la concaténation écologique qu'il nomme écosophie. Les implications pratiques de la philosophie de la différence, et ainsi sa relation avec le pluralisme politique, sont exposées le plus explicitement dans l'écosophie guattarienne qui offre « la perspective d’un choix éthico-politique de la diversité, du dissensus créateur, de la responsabilité à l’égard de la différence et de l’altérité. » (Guattari, 2014: 33) Après avoir exposé les liens qu’il existe entre leur utilisation respective de l’hétérogenèse, je traiterai du dissensus impliqué et valorisé par l’écosophie qui permet d'aborder de manière concrète le défi de la cohésion que pose un pluralisme assumé.

Doctorant à l'Université d'Ottawa — École d'études politiques


Jean-Sébastien Laberge est doctorant à l’École d'études politiques de l’Université d’Ottawa. Après s'être intéressé dans le cadre du programme EuroPhilosophie à l'appropriation deleuzienne de la métaphysique de Spinoza à travers son interprétation de la genèse de Dieu dans les premières propositions de l’Éthique, ses recherches portent maintenant sur la relation entre la philosophie pratique de Spinoza et les travaux de Deleuze et Guattari. Il s’intéresse plus particulièrement aux liens qui peuvent être établis entre une écologie politique spinoziste et l’écosophie guattarienne ainsi que sur ce qu’elles peuvent apportées au traitement des enjeux liés à la biodiversité et à la diversité culturelle.


Larissa Lai, Becoming Racial, Becoming Relational: Sovereignty and Species Difference

Recent turns in animal rights discourse have used critical race theory to argue for animal justice in ways that parallel human rights discourses. Predicated on identitarian notions of both human and animal subjects, such analogies are productive but only in limited ways. In this paper, I turn to Deleuze and feminist posthumanism, specifically the concepts of becoming and autopoieisis to interrogate the fields of possibility, or what Deleuze calls the virtual, to seek alternate ethics and alternate forms of relation that are not necessarily predicated on identitarian politics. I ask further what forms of sovereignty become newly accessible when racialized and animal beings are open to the process of becoming rather than constructed as traumatized subjects of the past in need of restitution, recognition and healing. Reading Madeleine Thien’s Dogs at the Perimeter, Kyo MacLear’s The Letter Opener and Leanne Simpson’s Islands of Decolonial Love I propose forms of Asian/Indigenous relation that are not triangulated through the colonial state, though they still depend on processes of becoming that may be violent or forgetful. Via always changing animal or object states we stumble into relation, differently.

Larissa Lai is the author of two novels, When Fox Is a Thousand and Salt Fish Girl; two books of poetry, sybil unrest (with Rita Wong) and Automaton Biographies; a chapbook, Eggs in the Basement; and most recently, a critical book, Slanting I, Imagining We: Asian Canadian Literary Production in the 1980s and 1990s. A recipient of the Astraea Foundation Emerging Writers' Award, she has been shortlisted for the Books in Canada First Novel Award, the Tiptree Award, the Sunburst Award, the City of Calgary W.O. Mitchell Award, the bpNichol Chapbook Award and the Dorothy Livesay Prize. She directs The Insurgent Architects' House for Creative Writing at the University of Calgary.


Gregg Lambert, "Who are Deleuze and Guattari's Conceptual Personae?"

My talk will address the notion of the personnage conceptuel that appears in Deleuze’s later philosophical reflections with Guattari concerning the special nature of “philosophical enunciation.” While in some respects, “conceptual personae” originate and function very much like clichés in language, and they circulate and are reproduced through the powers of repetition and abstraction. Consequently, like clichés, in order to achieve a maximal degree of repetition and consensus, by means of the conceptual personae entire philosophies are pared down and a few simple features or sentences that are extracted from the work in order to convey an abstract image of thought. What interests me most, however, is the nature of those philosophers and their conceptual personae that produced such an extreme range of positive and negative evaluations concerning the fundamental expression of their philosophies, and so the changing nature of the conceptual personages can be made dramatically evident in these special cases (e.g., Plato and Platonism, Descartes and Cartesianism, Spinoza and Spinozism, Kant and Kantianism, Hegel and Hegelianism and here we might also add several contemporary personages associated with the philosophies of Bergson, Deleuze, Derrida, etc.); that is, each proper name must be accompanied by multiple conceptual personae that begin with the prefix “anti-.”


Jay Lampert, Future and Future Tense

Is the future filled with virtual events, or is the future the empty form of time? Deleuze's analysis of the future in "Difference and Repetition" leads in both directions. But how can there be dark precursors if the future is “the emptiness of pure time”? If the pure past is the past that never was, is the pure future a future that never will be? Is there anything about the future that can be expressed in future tense?"

Jay Lampert teaches Philosophy both at Duquesne University (USA) and at the University of Guelph (Canada). His past books have included Deleuze and Guattari's Philosophy of History, Simultaneity and Delay, and Husserl's Concept of Synthesis. His future books will include "The Future of Decisions" and "Short Term".


Andrew Lapworth, Sex, death, and ‘becoming-bull’ in Pedro Almodovar’s Matador

In elaborating the immanent ethics of a pluralist empiricism Deleuze frequently turned to the ontogenetic terrain of the arts. The art-encounter, for Deleuze, is defined in terms of its capacities to induce thoroughly nonhuman individuations and becomings, a thought he continues to trace through his two-volume study of the cinema. Here Deleuze constructs the cinematic screen as a machinic space for the expression of new “signs”, impersonal sensations or pure qualities, which act as multiplicities of perception and duration without ontological mooring in human subjects. It is precisely in terms of cinema’s pluralist empirical experiments in nonhuman becoming that I frame the spaces of encounter in Pedro Almodovar’s 1986 film Matador. Set a decade after the death of Franco, Matador presents characters caught within the repressive excesses of a Francoist plane of organisation, which subtends their sado-masochistic search for new material forms of sensibility and ethological modes of alliance. Rather than merely representing these thresholds and forces of animal becoming on screen, Almodovar’s use of irrational cuts and tactile close-ups of indiscernible flesh amplify the molecular speeds, relations and affects of the protagonists’ becoming-bull. By dramatizing these intensive forces of nonhuman individuations, the filmic encounter unravels the molar semiotics and identitarian logics of thought that continue to structure the bodies, institutions, and experiences of contemporary society.

Andrew Lapworth is a Senior Associate Teacher in the School of Geographical Sciences, University of Bristol. His research interests lie at the intersection between theories of art (particularly cinema), empiricism, and the politics of individuation. Drawing on the philosophies of Deleuze, Guattari, Simondon, and Whitehead, his PhD thesis explores the production of new collective emergences, nonhuman experiences, and transversal encounters in contemporary practices of ‘art-science’. This research has recently been published in the journal Cultural Geographies and (forthcoming) in Theory, Culture and Society.

Senior Associate Teacher, School of Geographical Sciences, University of Bristol (UK)

Leonard Lawlor, Three Ways of Speaking

The question that has animated all of my research over the last several years is this: what is required from us in order to retreat from the will to the worst violence? It seems certain that we need a new way of thinking that is not based in determinate genera and species, determinate categories and concepts. In other words, what we need is a new way of speaking (and writing) that is adequate to the fundamental dis-adequation, dis-identification, in-exactitude and injustice that is fundamental to all experience (what Derrida has called “transcendental violence”). So far, I have discovered three candidates for this new way of speaking. There is the idea of speaking-frankly (parēssia) given to us by Foucault in his last three courses at the Collège de France; there is the idea of teleiopoesis given to us by Derrida in his Politics of Friendship; and finally, there is the idea of speaking-for given to us by Deleuze and Guattari in their final collaborative book, What is Philosophy? The focus of my talk be Deleuze and Guattari’s valorization, in Chapter 4 of What is Philosophy?, of “speaking for” as the philosophical utterance.

Leonard Lawlor received his Ph.D. in philosophy from Stony Brook University in 1988. He taught at the University of Memphis from 1989 to 2008 where he became Faudree-Hardin Professor of Philosophy. In 2008, he became Edwin Erle Sparks Professor of Philosophy at Penn State University, where he continues to teach and serves as Director of Graduate Studies in Philosophy. He is the author of seven books: Early Twentieth Century Continental Philosophy (Indiana University Press, 2011); This is not Sufficient: An Essay on Animality in Derrida (Columbia University Press, 2007); The Implications of Immanence: Towards a New Concept of Life (Fordham, 2006); Thinking Through French Philosophy: The Being of the Question (Indiana, 2003); The Challenge of Bergsonism: Phenomenology, Ontology, Ethics (Continuum Books, 2003); Derrida and Husserl: The Basic Problem of Phenomenology (Indiana, 2002); and Imagination and Chance: The Difference Between the Thought of Ricoeur and Derrida (The SUNY Press, 1992). He is one of the co-editors and co-founders of Chiasmi International: Trilingual Studies Concerning the Thought of Merleau-Ponty. He has translated Merleau-Ponty, Derrida, and Hyppolite into English. He has written dozens of articles on Derrida, Foucault, Deleuze, Lyotard, Bergson, and Merleau-Ponty. He is the co-editor of The Cambridge Foucault Lexicon (forthcoming 2013). Lawlor is currently working on a new book called Violence against Violence (for Edinburgh University Press).


Oleg Lebedev, Les machines désirantes ne meurent pas: la mort impersonnelle et sentiment d'éternité

La condition de l’inconscient machinique est la mort qui désire, le corps sans organes comme moteur immobile qui nous force à déposer les organes ; mais le fonctionnement de ce même inconscient est la vie qui désire, la réappropriation des organes miraculés par ce corps sans organes lui-même. La grande santé du cycle des machines désirantes est ce passage, cette conversion même, où le mouvement est à double sens : tantôt la remontée de l’état catatonique où l’intensité est à son degré zéro vers une expérimentation de devenirs et sentiments intenses, tantôt la redescente à partir de toute intensité vers la mort qu’elle enveloppe et qui la fait naître. La présente communication se propose d’éclairer la difficile théorie de la double mort, de la mort comme modèle et de la mort comme expérimentation, que Deleuze et Guattari empruntent à Blanchot. Quelle est cette mort qui n’a rien à voir avec moi et sur laquelle je n’ai aucun pouvoir ? Plus particulièrement, on sera attentifs à l’affirmation que les machines désirantes ne meurent pas, et au lien qu’elle établit avec l’idée spinoziste d’un sentiment d’éternité, où la mort est certes nécessaire, mais d’une nécessité qui appartient simplement aux accidents et qui vient du dehors. En ce sens, la mort ne concerne ni notre essence singulière éternelle, ni nos rapports.

Oleg Lebedev is a teaching assistant in philosophy at the Université Catholique de Louvain (Belgium). His research interests focused so far on cinematic realism (especially among French theoreticians and film critics influenced by Bazin, such as Daney or Comolli), and on the conceptualisation of the link of politics and aesthetics proposed by Jacques Rancière. His current research pertains to the theory of subjectivity and individuation in the philosophy of Deleuze.

Kanakis Leledakis, The Locus of Desire

Deleuze and Guattari bring to the forefront the question of power and the creation of desire. It is not simply discourse, which structures subjectivities; it is also, and more importantly, desire. Desire does not emanate from a coherent subject, it is not pre structured. On the contrary, it creates the subject. However: 1.Desire may not have a unitary origin, a center, but it does have a locus: It always refers to the individual as subject, and Desire may be externally constructed and a correlative of power. Yet, it cannot function anywhere: its locus, the subject, has a history and this history influences the possibility of purchase of desire. Deleuze and Guattari are critical towards Freud and Lacan. Lacan does indeed, especially in his early phase influenced by existentialism, presuppose a subject either as lack or as a project. Paradoxically, part of the Freudian corpus indicates the possibility of avoiding such an essentialism. Thus, If desire is to structure, to create subjectivities, this cannot be done mechanically. It cannot be a case of simple fluid mechanics: channeling, diverting. Α mechanism has to be there and in the concept of identification, Freud provides us with precisely such a mechanism.


Sandra Lemeilleur, Le web comme territoire interstitiel de subjectivation

Le territoire, composante de l’agencement de désir avec l’état de chose, le type d’énoncés et la déterritorialisation semble évoluer avec l’avènement du web. En effet, la fiche de profil d’un internaute complexifie l’agencement car elle réunit sur une « même page », le territoire, le type d’énoncés et la déterritorialisation. Même si, les quatre composantes de l’agencement ne sont jamais à penser comme des entités séparées, le web modifie les mouvements entre elles. C’est plus la porosité de ces composantes l’une vers l’autre, l’autre tendant vers l’une qui importe. Le web devient alors un territoire de l’entre-deux, un territoire interstitiel grâce aux marques laissées par les internautes. Cette évolution travaille les flux de lutte pour la subjectivation qui s’y projettent. Nous posons l’hypothèse d’un sujet, las de devoir s’auto-définir pour répondre au bio-pouvoir et ainsi à chercher dans le web un moyen d’œuvrer pour sa subjectivation. Afin de façonner une forme d’expressivité de sa multiplicité, il tente de se dégager des dualismes qui lui sont imposés. Cette communication vise à interroger la production de subjectivité à la lumière des nouveaux agencements rendus possibles par la machine du web. De plus, elle s’attache au sujet alternant entre aliénation aux dispositifs des institutions et lutte pour la liberté de sa subjectivation. Ce flux d’affrontement est motivé par la volonté de dépasser ce dualisme. C’est plus cette volonté de tendre vers la fin des dualismes qui serait la véritable motivation de la production de subjectivité.

Sandra Lemeilleur est doctorante en sciences de l’Information et de la Communication au laboratoire Média Information Communication Arts à l’université Michel de Montaigne Bordeaux 3. Ses recherches s’orientent vers une anthropologie des usages des NTIC plus particulièrement sur l’expressivité de l’intime dans les réseaux sociaux et les sites de rencontres et sur les processus de subjectivation mis en œuvre dans ces nouveaux territoires.


Amalia Liakou, Δημιουργία κι αντίσταση. Aπό τον Ντελέζ στη φωτογραφία

Δημιουργώ σημαίνει αντιστέκομαι , ισχυρίζεται ο Ζυλ Ντελέζ σε συνέντευξή του. Mε αφετηρία αυτήν την ρήση επιχειρούμε έναν στοχασμό για τη σχέση τέχνης κι αντίστασης, και θέτουμε έναν προβληματισμό για μια τέχνη που, αν και δεν φαίνεται να απασχόλησε ιδιαίτερα την σκέψη του φιλοσόφου, μοιάζει ωστόσο να σχετίζεται άμεσα με τις θέσεις του αναφορικά με την αντίσταση του καλλιτέχνη και του έργου τέχνης. Αναφερόμαστε στη φωτογραφία. Σύμφωνα με τον Ντελέζ, στη βάση της τέχνης βρίσκεται η ιδέα μιας κάποιας ντροπής του να είσαι άνθρωπος. Έτσι λοιπόν η τέχνη τείνει να απελευθερώσει τη ζωή που φυλάκισε ο κι αυτό είναι αντίσταση. Η ιδέα της ελευθερίας φαίνεται να υποβόσκει

στην καλλιτεχνική δημιουργία. Ας θυμηθούμε επίσης τον Σπινόζα που στην Ηθική του διατείνεται ότι η σοφία του ελεύθερου ανθρώπου είναι μελέτη όχι του θανάτου αλλά της ζωής. Μιλώντας για την φωτογραφία αναπόφευκτα ενδιαφερόμαστε για το πραγματικό, με το οποίο, ακόμα και στην πιο αφηρημένη της εκδοχή, συνδέεται άρρηκτα. Η φωτογραφία, ανάμεσα σε ντοκουμέντο και τέχνη, σύμφωνα με τον γάλλο θεωρητικό Andre Rouille, φαίνεται να θεμελιώνεται τόσο σε μια εξωτερική, όσο και μια εσωτερική αναγκαιότητα. Τι είναι λοιπόν ένας φωτογράφος απέναντι στην εποχή του; Ποια ζωή φυλακισμένη απελευθερώνει μέσα από τις εικόνες που δημιουργεί; Προκειμένου να στοχαστούμε τη σχέση δημιουργίας - ειδικότερα φωτογραφίας- κι αντίστασης, προτείνουμε τρεις καλλιτέχνες, την αμερικανίδα Diane Arbus, τον γάλλο Mathieu Pernot και την ελληνίδα Λυδία Δαμπασίνα

Η Αμαλία Λιάκου είναι ερευνήτρια Αισθητικής και φωτογράφος. Σπούδασε Φιλοσοφία και Ψυχολογία στο Αριστοτέλειο πανεπιστήμιο Θεσσαλονίκης και στο πανεπιστήμιο Ιωαννίνων. Στα πλαίσια του μεταπτυχιακού της στην ιστορία της φιλοσοφίας στο Α.Π.Θ., παρακολούθησε μαθήματα φιλοσοφίας της τέχνης στο πανεπιστήμιο Paris I Pantheon-Sorbonne. Με υποτροφία του ιδρύματος Αισθητικής Μιχελή πραγματοποίησε διδακτορικές σπουδές στο Παρίσι στο τμήμα Τεχνών, Φιλοσοφίας κι Αισθητικής του πανεπιστημίου Paris 8 και το 2013 υποστήριξε τη διατριβή της σχετικά με την Αισθητική του υπερρεαλιστικού φαντασιακού και την ελληνική φωτογραφία. Τα ερευνητικά της ενδιαφέροντα αφορούν στη φιλοσοφία της τέχνης, τη θεωρία της φωτογραφίας, τον υπερρεαλισμό, την μοντέρνα και σύγχρονη τέχνη, την πρωτόγονη τέχνη, την τέχνη και την ψυχανάλυση, την τέχνη και την πολιτική. Έχει συμμετάσχει σε ημερίδες και συνέδρια στο Παρίσι και το Βέλγιο, ενώ άρθρα της βρίσκονται σε συλλογικούς τόμους στη Γαλλία. Συμμετείχε σε ομαδικές εκθέσεις φωτογραφίας στη Γαλλία και τη Βραζιλία και η πρώτη της ατομική έκθεση φωτογραφίας θα πραγματοποιηθεί το 2015.

Sebastian Hsien-hao Liao, Vitalism in the Middle: Reconnecting with Life via “force” in Deleuze and Taoism

Deleuze has on several occasions described his thinking as “vitalistic”. In addition to being intentionally scandalizing, he also did this with some self-justification. But if he could be considered vitalistic, his form of vitalism does not fit into the dichotomy of vitalism versus mechanism. Rather, it should be labeled “machinic vitalism” or “practical vitalism” where he endeavors to reconnect with Life without however submitting to the idea of a transcendent will presiding over all becomings. In his later phase, Deleuze puts even more emphasis on an energetics of Life where “force” or “desire” serves as the material manifestation of Life. As Deleuze's famous remark "It’s organisms that die, not life" has made clear, Life is a realm of pre-individual multiplicities or non-organic forces, which exceed biological existence. This immanently “vitalistic” tendency finds a strong echo in Chinese Taoist philosophy where Life is construed immanently and materialistically and manifested as “qi” or vital forces. The concept of “qi” dissolves the centrality of the subject by construing “individuation” as the folding of the “qi,” a purely material process. And reconnection with Life via the “qi” enables one to transcend the organismic existence and thereby participate in a world of multiplicities called the Tao. Albeit the culmination of a minor tradition in the West, Deleuze’s (and Guattari’s) “machinic vitalism” can not only help bridge the gap between Western and Chinese philosophies but also contribute to illuminating the various practices based on the idea of “qi” that have hitherto remained in the realm of the esoteric.

Hsien-Hao Liao is Professor of English and comparative literature at the Department of Foreign languages and literatures at National Taiwan University. He received his Ph.D. from Stanford University and was post-doctoral fellow at Harvard University. He was visiting professor at University of Washington (Seattle), and visiting fellow at Princeton University, Chicago University, Chinese University of Hong Kong, Charles University (Czech), and University of Melbourne. In addition to being chief editor for three important literary journals Chung-wai Literary Journal (literature Chinese and Foreign), Studies in Languages and Literature, and Journal of Anglo-American literature, he also served as President of the Comparative Literature Association of Taiwan (ROC) (Hsien-hao Sebastian Liao 2002-04) and Director of the Department of Cultural Affairs of Taipei City Government (2003-2006). His research interests include comparative poetics, literary and cultural theories (with a focus on Lacan, Deleuze, postcolonial and transnational theories), modern Anglo-American fiction, modern Taiwanese literature and culture, the Chinese diaspora, and cultural policy formation. His most recent publications include “Becoming Butterfly: Power of the False, Crystal Image and (Taoist) Onto-Aesthetics” in Deleuze and Asia, eds. Ronald Bogue et al (Cambridge Scholar, 2014), “From Poetic Revolution to Nation-(Re)building: Vicissitudes of Modernity in Modern Chinese Poetry” in Modern China and the West, eds. Isabelle Rabut et al (Brill, 2014), and “Becoming God, and Dog: Taoist You, Deleuzian Nomadism and God, Man, Dog.” in Deleuze in China, eds. Paul Patton et al. (U of New South Wales & Henan U). He is currently working on two projects-- “The Sino Maritime” and “Deleuze and Taosm”.

Elena Loizidou Suicide As a Way to friendship

According to Antonakakis and Collinsat (2014) between 2009 and 2010 one person per day committed suicide in Greece and 50% of these suicides were due to austerity.For Camus, suicide constitutes a real philosophical question while for Derrida, suicide left behind a wish for an improvised conversation amongst friends/philosophers (between Derrida and Deleuze). Derrida, in the eulogy at Deleuze’s funeral, turns to Deleuze’s philosophy, to address his friend’s suicide, to search for a reason, a way of thinking about suicide. He directs us to a quote from Joe Bousquet that Deleuze uses in The Logic of Sense as a cursor to the kind of movement that takes place when one inclines towards death: it is a movement of the body that gestures towards what is to come and that can only occur in the leap itself. This movement - we can call it a scream - the scream of thinking after Nietzsche’s Prologue 5 of Thus Spoke Zarathustra; a movement that cannot be scripted or if it is to be put down in writing it has to remain the unfolding of thinking or a way. The paper wishes to pose the following questions: what kind of testament, what sort of scream(s) or pathways are these austerity related suicides asking us to sense? What do I sense? In addressing these questions I will turn to ethics and the question of friendship.

Elena Loizidou is a Reader in Law and Political Theory at the School of Law at Birkbeck College. She is the author of Judith Butler: Ethics, Law, Politics (2007) and the editor of Disobedience: Concept/Practice (2013). She is currently writing a monograph on Anarchism as an Art of Living.