Search Results
7/6/2025, 1:44:35 AM
>>24524561
If you reject the univocity of being you don't have any Deleuze left. But Deleuze also argued for univocity from a strawman, setting up a sort of parody of Enlightenment rationalism to make his case, even though Enlightenment rationalism was itself a parody of high scholasticism, and, it should be said, Islamic and Jewish medieval thought.
This is nothing new. Hume makes his entire case for fideism (or, we might suppose, against faith) seemingly blissfully unaware of the Analogia Entis, despite it being the theology of the two dominant branches of Christianity.
If you reject the univocity of being you don't have any Deleuze left. But Deleuze also argued for univocity from a strawman, setting up a sort of parody of Enlightenment rationalism to make his case, even though Enlightenment rationalism was itself a parody of high scholasticism, and, it should be said, Islamic and Jewish medieval thought.
This is nothing new. Hume makes his entire case for fideism (or, we might suppose, against faith) seemingly blissfully unaware of the Analogia Entis, despite it being the theology of the two dominant branches of Christianity.
Page 1