Thèse de doctorat : Philosophie : Paris 10 : 2009. Thèse de doctorat : Philosophie : Universidad nacional de San Martin : 2009. / Titre provenant de l'écran-titre.

Gilles Deleuze makes a paradox of ethics. Throughout his oeuvre, he establishes polarities (affirmation versus negation, difference versus identity, rhizome versus arborescence, etc.), and demonstrates rhetorically a preference for one pole over the other. This would seem to constitute, if not an obligation or imperative, at least an urgency, a suggestion that those who find his discussion compelling should favor that one pole and act in such a way as to promote it or move toward it. However, for a variety of reasons, it proves difficult or even impossible to put this 'ethics' into practice. / This thesis examines the reasons for this impossibility through close readings of four of Deleuze's texts, Nietzsche and Philosophy, Difference and Repetition, Anti-Oedipus, and A Thousand Plateaus. In each text, I highlight the polarities, showing where Deleuze's expressed preference lies. Then I demonstrate the obstacles to an implementation of this preference. Moving from text to text, I trace how Deleuze's attempts to deal with the question of ethics change over his career, becoming more sophisticated and opening up new problems and possibilities. / Although the nature of the paradox of ethics varies from case to case, I discover at least two difficulties in general. The first concerns the move from the abstract to the concrete: Deleuze often expresses a polarity in abstract or metaphysical terms, which collapses when extended into the concrete. Metaphysically, affirmation is sharply distinguished from negation; where affirmation creates difference, negation levels difference to produce homogeneity. Practically, however, it is impossible to locate this distinction in the world; no person, place, thing, or event can be said to be either affirmative or negative. / This relates closely to the second general difficulty, the insertion of the subject. Even if it were possible to make a practical distinction between two poles of value, it is impossible to locate the subject in relation to those poles. That is, even if the world can be said to behave affirmatively or negatively, the subject is only accidentally related to this behavior, and so ethics becomes a purely ontological matter, bearing no relation to the will or intention of a subject.

Mémoire numérisé par la Division de la gestion de documents et des archives de l'Université de Montréal / Pour respecter les droits d'auteur, la version électronique de cette thèse ou ce mémoire a été dépouillée, le cas échéant, de ses documents visuels et audio-visuels. La version intégrale de la thèse ou du mémoire a été déposée au Service de la gestion des documents et des archives de l'Université de Montréal.

No description available.

This thesis examines the way in which Gilles Deleuze asserts the ontological priority of events over substances in his 1969 publication, The Logic of Sense, with reference to several philosophers and intellectual movements, namely, the Stoics, Leibniz, Albert Lautman, Gilbert Simondon, structuralism and psychoanalysis. Chapter 1 analyzes the problem which The Logic of Sense sets out to resolve, that is, to determine the ???evental??? conditions of the event if everything is to be understood as ontologically dependent on events. It then examines how Deleuze compares events to Stoic lekta, which are both causal effects and the material of Stoic dialectic. The event is seen to be the juncture of an ongoing ???sense-event,??? simultaneously involving: causal analyses of bodies; the construction of concepts characterizing these bodies; and the development of one???s knowledge of these bodies. Chapter 2 examines how Deleuze extends a number of Leibnizian notions in order to re-describe this sense-event in terms of ???static ontological and logical geneses,??? or ???disjunctive syntheses,??? bearing on divergent ???points of view??? with regard to the events characterizing worldly things. These syntheses bring about a three-fold determination of: a world of individuals common to divergent points of view; the beliefs of persons holding these points of view; and families of concepts which these individuals and persons ???exemplify??? insofar as they belong to a common world. Chapters 3 and 4 explore the way in which, with reference to Lautman, Simondon and structuralism, Deleuze argues that static geneses should be thought of in terms of an underlying structure, wherein the events characterizing things are themselves determined only by other events. Within this structure, events of all orders and types determine each other reciprocally, completely and progressively, and without reference to any substance transcending this system. Chapter 5 shows how, in relation to psychoanalysis, Deleuze understands the structure of events to be produced as an event by speaking persons, even as this structure also produces these persons, and their speech, as events. We are thus able to conclude that the structure of events is both the evental-determination of events characterizing things in general, and itself an event.

Thesis (M.Mus.) - University of Queensland, 2005. / Includes bibliography and discography.

Ce travail parie sur la possibilité de reposer les problèmes éducatifs de Rous-seau à la lumière de certains concepts de la philosophie française contempo-raine. Ainsi, en partant des analyses de Foucault, l’on ne peut manquer d’être frappé par la figure du gouverneur dans Émile ou de l’éducation qui apparaît, stricto sensu, comme la condition de l’émergence de la vérité de la nature, de la vérité de ce qui convient aux hommes, de la vérité de ce que doit être leur éducation. Mais en quel sens peut-on dire que, dans l’Émile, l’éducation est une manifestation de la vérité ? Le problème de la vérité et du pouvoir est an-cien. Michel Foucault le qualifie de lieu commun depuis la pensée politique du XVIIe siècle. Dans ses cours au Collège de France publiés en 2012 sous le titre Le gouvernement des vivants, il s’est efforcé « d’élaborer la notion de gouvernement par la vérité » en étudiant notamment la tragédie d’Œdipe qui lui permet de poser le problème de la conjonction entre le pouvoir et le savoir, entre le gouvernement et la vérité que l’on sait. Le problème du gouvernement de l’enfance peut également être éclairé par le concept deleuzien de devenir. Le devenir a quelque chose à nous dire sur l’enfance, sur l’émancipation de l’individu et sur le projet d’une éducation tout au long de sa vie. / This work is attempt to discuss Rousseau's problematisation of education, using concepts drawn from contem-porary French philosophy. However, if one examines the relation between Foucault and Emile by em-ploying the concept of alèthurgie, one cannot but be struck by the figure of the governor in Emile, who appears in the text to be the guarantor and the condition for the emergence of an idea of truth within the narrative- a truth which is natural, which governs the activities of men, and which is deeply in-volved in the process of education. In his 2012 lectures at the College de France, published under the title ‘The government of the living,’ Michel Fou-cault strove "to develop the concept of government by the truth" through an analysis of the power relations within Oedipus. In particular, Foucault ana-lysed the relation between truth, knowledge, and the exercise of governmen-tal power. In this work, I examine the relation between Foucault’s analysis and Emile Rousseau’s novel Emile. The relation between them may seem paradoxical: after all, Foucault is concerned with truth, and Emile is a work of fiction. The government of childhood can also be illuminated by the Deleuzian concept of Becoming. The Becoming does have something to tell us about childhood, the emancipation of the individual, and about education as a life-long project.

This dissertation is an experimentation in plugging in the work of Deleuze (1990, 1994, 1995), Deleuze and Guattari (1987, 1983, 1994) to create new concepts and methods in educational research. In doing so, I experiment in ‘the real’ through the process of learning, by designing, conducting, and reporting a qualitative empirical study on how second language (L2) writers in an English for Academic Purposes (EAP) program engage with technology in their academic writing, and how plagiarism may, or may not, relate to this process. As such, the research objectives of this study can be understood as: 1) to think differently about the interconnections between plagiarism and technology in L2 writing; and 2) to see what happens to the research when we do so. At the heart of this study, and forming the onto-epistemological lens for inquiry, is a philosophy of immanence, transcendental empiricism, difference, and the actual/virtual. Additional concepts -- assemblage, becoming, affect, rhizome, molar/molecular, order-word, smooth/striated, event, learning, nomad, and war machine – are deployed to reconceptualize how plagiarism and technology shape L2 students’ writing, as well as the treatment of plagiarism within academic learning and educational research. In more concrete terms, this study was conducted at a university-affiliated EAP program designed for international students who hold conditional-admission to their respective degree programs. Seven students and their teachers were recruited over the course of two semesters. Data sources include ongoing in-depth interviews, document analysis of students’ drafts, screen-cast recordings of the students’ writing process, and a researcher diary. Rhizoanalysis, a Deleuzian inspired non-method (Masny, 2016), was used to read the data and map connections between elements. Five cartographic mappings in lieu of ‘findings’ are presented. These mappings do not attempt to provide a complete picture of reality represented in the data, but instead seeks to disrupt and problematize, and then create open space to think of what might be happening and how it might be happening differently. Seemingly straightforward ‘data’ is complicated in terms of: 1) the affective force of plagiarism; 2) the conditions for learning; 3) digital-tools and plagiarism detection; 4) the materiality of text; and 5) researcher-becoming. Consistent with the call for concept creation to generate new thinking, I propose the concept of virtual-plagiarism to un-do our habit of tracing texts (as a response to alleged plagiarism) and move towards mapping the elements, intensities, forces, and flows by which plagiarism is actualized. Put to work, the concept of virtual-plagiarism de/reterritorializes both the student writers’ assemblage and the researcher assemblage, and ultimately disrupts the pedagogic and research practices in L2 academic writing that have long bound the issue of plagiarism to student ethics and/or student aptitude and intention. Just as this project aspires to rethink how plagiarism and technology shape L2 students’ writing and how this phenomenon can be researched, it also invites the reader to follow suit and reimagine how Deleuze- inspired methods and concepts can affect (their own) teaching and educational research practices.

No description available.

No description available.