PATOČKA VE DELEUZE FELSEFESİNDE ASUBJEKTİF VE KİŞİSEL OLMAYAN

Deleuze’ün kişisel olmayan ve asubjektif (ilk anlamıyla, göreceli olmayan) felsefesi onun anti-fenomolojik olduğu iddiasına yol açan nedenlerden biridir. Ancak, Patočka tarafından tartışıldığı gibi; fenomoloji, zaten, asubjektiftir. Bu durum Deleuze tarafından geliştirilen deneyleme (yaşantılama) felsefesinin asubjektif bir fenomenoloji olabileceği ihtimalini yeniden değerlendirmenin yolunu açar. Burada karşımıza çıkan; Patočka’nın kişisel deneylemesinden (yaşantılamasından) Deleuze’ün kişisel-olmayan deneyleme yoluyla farklılaştığıdır. Bu noktada; kişisel-olmayan, asubjektif bir fenomenolojinin Deleuze’ün çalışmalarında yer bulup bulmadığını merak etmekteyiz. Bu amaçla öncelikle Patočka’nın Husserl’e karşı geliştirdiği ve fenomenolojiyi “egosal-subjektiften uzaklaştırmanın” sebeplerini araştırmaktayız. Özet olarak; Patočka, öznelliğin verili bir fenomen olmadığını ve fenomolojinin asıl derdinin de bu olmadığını ileri sürer. Böyle bir dolaysız deneyleme (yaşantılama) araştırması aşkınsal öznellik yerine dünyamıza uyguladığımız bir “delme kuvvetini”, (Patočka’nın deyimiyle) bir thrust’ı açığa çıkarır. Benzer biçimde Deleuze’ün deneyleme (yaşantılama) felsefesi de böyle bir self-dışı hareketi, Ferlinghetti’nin “dördüncü tekil şahıs” kavramına olan atfı yoluyla gördüğümüz bu hareketi, araştırır. Hatta Deleuze’ün Peircie’çı “Sıfırıncılık” kavramı da buna delil teşkil eder. Patočka’dan farklı olarak; Deleuze’de, kişi-lik deneyimin temeline konumlandırılmaz, onun çalışmalarında kişisel-olmayan bir deneycilik, paneksperiantalizm vardır.

Anahtar Kelimeler:

Kişi-lik, Öznellik, Patočka, Deleuze, Husserl, Peirce, Fenomenoloji

ASUBJECTIVITY AND IMPERSONHOOD IN PATOČKA AND DELEUZE

The asubjective, impersonal nature of Deleuze’s philosophy is one reason it is often considered to be anti-phenomenological. Yet, as Patočka argues, phenomenology should, in fact, be asubjective in the first place. This opens the possibility of reevaluating Deleuze’s philosophy of experience to see the extent to which it might be considered an asubjective phenomenology. What we find is that Deleuze differs from Patočka in one important respect, namely, that Patočka’s philosophy of experience is personal while Deleuze’s is impersonal. Thus, we wonder if an impersonal, asubjective phenomenology is possible, which might include Deleuze’s views. To this end, we first study Patočka’s reasons for going against Husserl and reorienting phenomenological studies away from an egoic subjectivity. In brief, Patočka holds that subjectivity is not a phenomenal given and thus is not to be of primary concern when doing phenomenology. What an examination of immediate experience uncovers rather than a transcendental subjectivity is instead a “thrust” into the world around us. Deleuze’s philosophy of experience likewise seeks such a movement outside oneself, which we see in his use of Ferlinghetti’s “fourth person singular;” yet, Deleuze’s notion of a Peircian “Zerothness” makes it evident that, unlike Patočka, he does not locate personhood at the basis of experience but rather has in mind a particular sort of impersonal panexperientialism.

Keywords:

Patočka, Deleuze, Husserl, Peirce, Phenomenology, Personhood, Subjectivity,

PDF

___

Andrews, E. (1990). Markedness theory: The union of asymmetry and semiosis in language. Durham: Duke University.
Beckett, S. (2006). Film. In The complete dramatic works (pp. 321–334). London: Faber & Faber. [(1972). Film. In Comédie et actes divers (pp. 111–134). Paris: Minuit.]
Beistegui, M. de. (2000). Toward a phenomenology of difference? Research in Phenomenology, 30(1), 54–70.
Beni, M. (2021). A free energy reconstruction of arguments for panpsychism. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences (published online 08 May 2021. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11097-021-09739-w).
Bernet, R. (2012). Phenomenological and aesthetic epoché: Painting the invisible things themselves. In D. Zahavi (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of contemporary phenomenology (pp. 564–582). Oxford: Oxford University.
Bergson, H. (2004). Matter and memory (N. Paul & W. S. Palmer, Trans.). Mineola, N.Y.: Dover. [(2004). Matière et mémoire: Essai sur la relation du corps à l’esprit (7th ed.). Paris: Quadrige / Presses universitaires de France.]
Blanchot, M. (1982). The original experience. In A. Smock (Trans.), The space of literature (pp. 234–247). Lincoln, Nebr.: University of Nebraska. [(1955). L’expérience originelle. In L’espace littéraire (pp. 313–333). Paris: Gallimard.]
Bogue, R. (2003). Deleuze on cinema. New York: Routledge.
Bogue, R. (2013). Deleuze on music, painting, and the arts. New York: Routledge.
Boundas, C. (Ed.). (2009). Gilles Deleuze: The intensive reduction. London: Continuum.
Bradley, J. (2015). The eyes of the fourth person singular. Deleuze Studies, 9(2), 185–207.
Bryant, L. (2008). Difference and givenness: Deleuze’s transcendental empiricism and the ontology of immanence. Evanston, Ill.: Northwestern University.
Bühler, K. (1982). The axiomatization of the language sciences. In R. Innis (Trans.), Karl Bühler: Semiotic foundations of language theory (pp. 75–164). New York: Springer. [(1933). Die Axiomatik der Sprachwissenschaften. Kant-Studien, 38(1–2), 19–90.]
Chevalier-Karfis, C. (2021). Understanding the French subject pronoun on & pronunciation. Blog post. Retrieved August 15, 2021, from French Today: https://www.frenchtoday.com/blog/french-grammar/understanding-french-on-subject-pronoun/
Chvatík, I. (2015). Patočka’s project of an asubjective phenomenology. In L. Učník, I. Chvatík, & A. Williams (Eds.), Asubjective phenomenology: Jan Patočka’s project in the broader context of his work (pp. 56–70). Nordhausen: Bautz.
Deleuze, G. (1978). Course 1978.03.28 (M. McMahon, Trans.). At The Deleuze Seminars (Purdue University). Paris. Retrieved from https://deleuze.cla.purdue.edu/seminars/kant-synthesis-and-time/lecture-03
Deleuze, G. (1982). Course 1982.11.30 (C. Stivale, Trans.). At The Deleuze Seminars (Purdue University). Paris. Retrieved from https://deleuze.cla.purdue.edu/seminars/cinema-classification-signs-and-time/lecture-03
Deleuze, G. (1988). Spinoza: Practical philosophy (R. Hurley, Trans.). San Francisco: City Lights. [(1981). Spinoza: Philosophie pratique (revised and expanded edition). Paris: Minuit.]
Deleuze, G. (1993). The fold: Leibniz and the Baroque (T. Conley, Trans.). Minneapolis, Minn.: University of Minnesota. [(1988). Le pli: Leibniz et le baroque. Paris: Minuit.]
Deleuze, G. (1994). Difference and repetition (P. Patton, Trans.). New York: Columbia University. [(2003). Différence et répétition (11th ed.). Paris: Presses universitaires de France.]
Deleuze, G. (2003). Francis Bacon: The logic of sensation (D. Smith, Trans.). London & New York: Continuum. [(2002). Francis Bacon: Logique de la sensation. Paris: Seuil.]
Deleuze, G. (2004a). Gilles Deleuze talks philosophy. In D. Lapoujade (Ed.), & M. Taormina (Trans.), Desert islands and other texts, 1953-1974 (pp. 143–145). Los Angeles, Calif.: Semiotext(e). [(2002). Gilles Deleuze parle de la philosophie. In D. Lapoujade (Ed.), L’île déserte: Textes et entretiens, 1953-1974 (pp. 198–201). Paris: Minuit.]
Deleuze, G. (2004b). The logic of sense (C. Boundas, Ed.; M. Lester & C. Stivale, Trans.). London: Continuum. [(1969). Logique du sens. Paris: Minuit.]
Deleuze, G. (2005a). Cinema 1: The movement-image (H. Tomlinson & B. Habberjam, Trans.). London: Continuum. [(1983). Cinéma 1: L’image-mouvement. Paris: Minuit.]
Deleuze, G. (2005b). Cinema 2: The time-image (H. Tomlinson & R. Galeta, Trans.). London: Continuum. [(1985). Cinéma 2: L’image-temps. Paris: Minuit.]
Deleuze, G. (2006). Nietzsche and philosophy (H. Tomlinson, Trans.). New York: Columbia University. [(1983). Nietzsche et la philosophie (6th ed.). Paris: Presses universitaires de France.]
Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (2004). A thousand plateaus: Capitalism and schizophrenia, 2 (B. Massumi, Trans.). London: Continuum. [(1980). Mille plateaux: Capitalisme et schizophrénie, 2. Paris: Minuit.]
Deleuze, G., & Parnet, C. (2007). Dialogues II (Revised edition; H. Tomlinson & B. Habberjam, Trans.). New York: Columbia University. [(1996). Dialogues. Paris: Flammarion.]
Duffy, C. (2008). A schizoanalytic reading of Paradise lost and The waste land. Dissertation. Montreal: University of Montreal.
Ferlinghetti, L. (1960). Her. New York: New Directions.
Ferlinghetti, L. (1967). He. In Starting from San Francisco (pp. 24–27). New York: New Directions.
Geniusas, S. (2011). The question of the subject: Jan Patočka’s phenomenological contribution. In A.-T. Tymieniecka (Ed.), Analecta Husserliana 110.1. Phenomenology/ontopoiesis: Retrieving geo-cosmic horizons of antiquity: Logos and life (pp. 599–611). Dordrecht: Springer.
Husserl, E. (1960). Cartesian meditations: An introduction to phenomenology (D. Cairns, Trans.). Dordrecht: Springer.
Husserl, E. (1973). Experience and judgment: Investigations in a genealogy of logic (L. Landgrebe, Ed.; J. Churchill & K. Ameriks, Trans.). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. [(1939). Erfahrung und Urteil: Untersuchungen zur Genealogie der Logik (L. Landgrebe, Ed.). Prague: Academia.]
Husserl, E. (1982). Ideas pertaining to a pure phenomenology and to a phenomenological philosophy, Book 1: General introduction to a pure phenomenology (F. Kersten, Trans.). The Hague: Nijhoff. [(1976). Ideen zu einer reinen Phänomenologie und phänomenologischen Philosophie, Book 1: Allgemeine Einführung in die reine Phänomenologie (K. Schuhmann, Ed.). The Hague: Nijhoff.]
Husserl, E. (1989). Ideas pertaining to a pure phenomenology and to a phenomenological philosophy, Book 2: Studies in the phenomenology of constitution (R. Rojcewicz & A. Schuwer, Trans.). Dordrecht: Kluwer. [(1952). Ideen zu einer reinen Phänomenologie und phänomenologischen Philosophie, Book 2: Phänomenologische Untersuchungen zur Konstitution (M. Biemel, Ed.). The Hague: Nijhoff.]
Husserl, E. (2001a). Analyses concerning active and passive synthesis: Lectures on transcendental logic (A. Steinbock, Trans.). Dordrecht: Kluwer. [(1966). Analysen zur Passiven Synthesis Aus Vorlesungs- und Forschungsmanuskripten, 1918–1926 (M. Fleischer, Ed.). The Hague: Nijhoff.]
Husserl, E. (2001b). Logical investigations, Vol. 2 (D. Moran, Ed.; J. N. Findlay, Trans.). London: Routledge. [(1984). Logische Untersuchungen, Vol. 2, Part 1: Untersuchungen zur Phänomenologie und Theorie der Erkenntnis (U. Panzer, Ed.). New York: Springer.]
Ianni, L. A. (1967). Lawrence Ferlinghetti’s fourth person singular and the theory of relativity. Wisconsin Studies in Contemporary Literature, 8(3), 392–406.
Jakobson, R. (1987). Language in literature (K. Pomorska & S. Rudy, Eds.). Cambridge, Mass. / London: Belknap of Harvard University.
Klossowski, P. (1988). The Baphomet (S. Hawkes & S. Sartarelli, Trans.). Hygiene, Colo.: Eridanos. [(1965). Le Baphomet. Paris: Mercure de France.]
Kouba, P. (2019). Life without subjectivity: Deleuze, Guattari and Patočka’s asubjective phenomenology. In J. Griffith & K. Dagmar (Eds.), Demos vs. Polis? Essays on civic responsibility and participation (pp. 16–25). Bratislava: Kritika & Kontext.
Leibniz, G. (1908). Correspondence between Leibniz and Arnauld. In T. McCormack (Ed.), & G. Montgomery (Trans.), Discourse on metaphysics, Correspondence with Arnauld, and Monadology (pp. 65–248). Chicago: Open Court. [(1978). Briefwechsel zwischen Leibniz, Landgraf Ernst von Hessen-Rheinfels und Antoine Arnauld (1686-1690). In C. Gerhardt (Ed.), Die Philosophischen Schriften, Vol. 2 (pp. 1–138). Hildesheim: Olms.]
Leibniz, G. (1989). Letter to Coste, on human freedom (19 December 1707). In R. Ariew & D. Garber (Eds. & Trans.), Philosophical essays (pp. 193–196). Indianapolis, Ind.: Hackett. [(1978). Briefwechsel zwischen Leibniz und Coste (1706-1712). In C. Gerhardt (Ed.), Die Philosophischen Schriften, Vol. 3 (pp. 377–436). Hildesheim: Olms.]
Leibniz, G. (1998a). Discourse on metaphysics. In R. Francks & R. Woolhouse (Eds. & Trans.), Philosophical texts (pp. 53–93). Oxford: Oxford University. [(1999). Discours de métaphysique. In Academy of Sciences of Berlin (Ed.), Sämtliche Schriften und Briefe, Series 6: Philosophische Schriften, Vol. 4 (pp. 1529–1588). Berlin: Akademie.]
Leibniz, G. (1998b). Monadology. In R. Francks & R. Woolhouse (Eds. & Trans.), Philosophical texts (pp. 267–281). Oxford: Oxford University. [(1885). Monadologie. In C. Gerhardt (Ed.), Die Philosophischen Schriften, Vol. 6 (pp. 607–623). Berlin: Weidmann.]
Leibniz, G. (2001). Theodicy: Essays on the goodness of god, the freedom of man and the origin of evil (A. Farrer, Ed.; E. M. Huggard, Trans.). Eugene, Ore.: Wipf and Stock. [(1885). Essais de Théodicée sur la bonté de Dieu, la liberté de l’homme et l’origine du mal. In C. Gerhardt (Ed.), Die Philosophischen Schriften, Vol. 6 (pp. 21–471). Berlin: Weidmann.]
Martin, J.-C. (1997). The eye of the outside. In P. Patton (Ed.), & T. Gibson & A. Uhlmann (Trans.), Deleuze: A critical reader (pp. 18–28). Oxford: Blackwell.
Merleau-Ponty, M. (1962). Phenomenology of perception (C. Smith, Trans.). London & New York: Routledge & Kegan Paul. [(2010). Phénoménologie de la perception. In C. Lefort (Ed.), Œuvres (pp. 655–1167). Paris: Gallimard.]
Merleau-Ponty, M. (1968). The visible and the invisible (C. Lefort, Ed.; A. Lingis, Trans.). Evanston, Ill.: Northwestern University. [(2010). Le visible et l’invisible. In C. Lefort (Ed.), Œuvres (pp. 1629–1635). Paris: Gallimard.]
Patočka, J. (1989). Cartesianism and phenomenology. In E. Kohák (Ed.), Jan Patočka: Philosophy and selected writings (pp. 285–326). Chicago; London: University of Chicago.
Patočka, J. (1998). Body, community, language, world (J. Dodd, Ed.; E. Kohák, Trans.). Chicago: Open Court.
Patočka, J. (2015a). Epochē and reduction: Some observations. In L. Učník, I. Chvatík, & A. Williams (Eds.), & I. Chvatík, M. Bower, & K. Maly (Trans.), Asubjective phenomenology: Jan Patočka’s project in the broader context of his work (pp. 41–52). Nordhausen: Bautz.
Patočka, J. (2015b). Husserl’s subjectivism and the call for an asubjective phenomenology. In L. Učník, I. Chvatík, & A. Williams (Eds.), & I. Chvatík, M. Bower, & K. Maly (Trans.), Asubjective phenomenology: Jan Patočka’s project in the broader context of his work (pp. 17–40). Nordhausen: Bautz. [(1971). Der Subjektivismus der Husserlschen und die Forderung einer asubjektiven Phänomenologie. In Studia Minora Facultatis Philosophicae Universitatis Brunensis F 14-15 (pp. 11–26).]
Patočka, J. (2019). What is phenomenology? In J. Drummond & O. Höffe (Eds.), & H. Kee, P. Eldridge, & R. Wilkins (Trans.), Husserl: German perspectives (pp. 84–109). New York: Fordham University. [(1982). Was ist Phänomenologie? Tijdschrift voor Filosofie, 44(4), 643–676.]
Peirce, C. S. (1961). Collected papers of Charles Sanders Peirce (Two volumes in one), Vol. 3: Exact logic (Published papers), Vol. 4: The simplest mathematics (C. Hartshorne & P. Weiss, Eds.). Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap of Harvard University.
Peirce, C. S. (1965). Collected papers of Charles Sanders Peirce (Two volumes in one), Vol. 1: Principles of philosophy, Vol. 2: Elements of logic (C. Hartshorne & P. Weiss, Eds.). Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap of Harvard University.
Peirce, C. S. (1966). Collected papers of Charles Sanders Peirce (Two volumes in one), Vol. 7: Science and philosophy, Vol. 8: Reviews, correspondence, and bibliography (A. Burks, Ed.). Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap of Harvard University.
Peirce, C. S. (1976). Detached ideas continued and the dispute between nominalists and realists. In C. Eisele (Ed.), The new elements of mathematics, Vol. 4: Mathematical philosophy (pp. 331–346). The Hague: Mouton.
Rosenberg, G. (2004). A place for consciousness: Probing the deep structure of the natural world. Oxford: Oxford University.
Rosensohn, W. (1974). The phenomenology of Charles S. Peirce. Amsterdam: Grüner.
Schneider, A. (dir.). (1965). Film [Short]. Evergreen Theatre.
Shores, C. (2012). Body and world in Merleau-Ponty and Deleuze. Studia Phaenomenologica, 12, 181–209.
Smith, D. (2012). Essays on Deleuze. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University.
Strawson, G. (2006). Realistic monism: Why physicalism entails panpsychism. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 13(10–11), 3–31.
Strawson, G. (2017). Mind and being: The primacy of panpsychism. In G. Bruntrup & L. Jaskolla (Eds.), Panpsychism: Contemporary perspectives (pp. 75–112). New York: Oxford University.