 Hello, we're back with our reading of what is philosophy by Gilles Deleuze and Felix Gattahy translated by Graham virtual and you Tomlinson so When you're reading Deleuze and Gattahy It is not an analytical experience of reading so it takes patience I Can understand that some readers Become irritated by the Tendency to Progress Without the typical form of demonstration and a little demonstration, so it might seem that they are often Claiming without backing up with evidence, but I think that the The coherence the reward and the inspiration of such a reading comes One once we've reached the end and we read the book so at the moment we are discovering the book and And we're discovering that concepts are very strange Type of entity for them and For example, they call it a point of coincidence Condensation or accumulation of its own components so this is connected to a metaphor that they have a State of survey and the French term is Surveil and this is a reference to Remoyer who has Less known philosopher of the 60s who spoke of consciousness as Overview in terms that Suggest that of course the concept is as they write an incorporeal But at the same time It is incarnated or effectuated in bodies. So that sounds almost contradictory unless there is a movement not only from the Incorporal to the real but also from the real to the incorporeal An intuition we might have at this point of the reading is that well It is not only the concept that performs An action upon the world is also the conceptual character The carrier of the concept the philosopher that also performs a form of disembodiment Let's go slowly and continue our reading as The pages present themselves quite mysteriously for example they Agree or they admit that the Concept is an act of thought which is the sort of a traditional definition But then they had it is this is done at infinite speed does that mean Does it have to do with? the opposition between the finite discreet and the Continuous Another paradox they say is that the concept is self-referential and Here They had that the relative and the absolute are united in the concept Again, this sounds quite Hegelian and we will need to understand how This is possible concepts are centers of vibrations Philosophy extracts concepts, which must not be confused with general or abstract ideas Whereas science extracts Prospects propositions that but not become must not be confused with judgment and Art extracts Persons and Effects which must not be confused with perceptions of feelings. So this is a three modes of creation of Different human Spheres so for them the concept is really the sphere of philosophy and they give an example Which is Descartes Cogito so to Be able to explain the Cogito or to to unfold it There are three moments that is the moment of doubting that is often forgotten it is Because I can doubt of everything But not of the fact that I am doubting that emerges the second moment Which is the moment of Thinking and the third moment is the moment of being because if I am thinking I am doing something I am Right and they have this diagram that looks like a Head of an insect for the Concept of Cogito and this is for example to exemplify that if you change one param parameter You change the concept for example Let's admit that Instead of having a systematic doubt and therefore Edifying philosophy upon Ground that is like a black hole basically the black hole of nihilism perhaps We could Try to build philosophy on the ground of faith right We could imagine a Cogito that would have Instead of doubting as a first as an element as one of the three elements components It could have faith. I have faith in everything or in something and Therefore and this is what whitehead does when you insist on the Concept of importance is trying to see what what connects all forms of living beings Even those which have a very Minimal form of consciousness and he says well They all have this Sense of some Things that are more important than others therefore they have the concept of importance Right, which might might or might not be grounded on The idea of survival For a human being what is important is not necessarily what is Good for the survival They have this digression and they say well Actually digressions are important philosophy. They have this digression Against the idea of debates democratic debate discussion They say philosophy has a horror of discussions and Concepts are not about Trying to find consensus But of course then the reader the first Objection that might come to the mind of the reader is socrates And they actually of course admit that objection in Socrates was philosophy not a free discussion among friends Is it not as the conversation of free men the summit of Greek Sociability well in fact socrates they write Constantly made all discussion impossible both in the short form of the contest of questions and answers and Along in the long form of a rivalry between Discourses he turned the friend into the friend of the single concept and the concept into the pitiless monologue that Eliminates the rivals One by one and we must understand that elimination of rivalry Not as something that happens in real life Otherwise it would be debate But as an internal monologue in fact probably Plato's internal monologue, so the concept in the mind of the philosopher is a sort of a Milestone or philosopher stone or some something that they must Hold on to as they Constantly contradict themselves as the agony of thought Deploys itself into their body and the concepts slowly that the the concept that is embodied by the given philosopher which might be composed by several quasi concepts well that concept is in fact The axis that remains after The battles that emerged from the internal battles That's it for today We continue tomorrow as usual we keep every session around 10 minutes