One may pass from one body to another, however different, simply by changing the relation between its ultimate parts. For its is only relations that change in the universe as a whole, whose parts remain the same.

Gilles Deleuze – Expressionism in Philosophy: Spinoza

Why Spinoza never completed the Treatise on the Intellect

We may suppose, then, that the discovery of the common notions occurs precisely at the end of the edited part of the Treatise, and at the beginning of the writing of the Ethics: in about 1661 – 1662. But why would this discovery have forced Spinoza to abandon the already-existing version of the Treatise? The explanation is that the common notions emerge at a time when they cannot fulfil their functions or develop their consequences. They are discovered too late relative to the text of the Treatise. They would have to establish a new point of departure for philosophy; but the point of departure has already ben set in geometric ideas.
They would have to determine an adequate mode of knowledge of what exists, and show how one passes from this mode of knowledge to the ultimate mode, knowledge of essences. But because the modes of knowledge have already been defined in the Treatise, there is no place left for the common notions or for the series of fixed and eternal things, which are thus shifted over to the ultimate mode of knowledge, with the knowledge of essences. In short, in order to give the common notions their place and function, it would have been necessary for Spinoza to rewrite the entire Treatise. It is not only that they invalidate the finished part, but they would have modified it. Spinoza prefers to write the Ethics form the perspective of the common notions, although it means postponing a new treatise that would have focussed on the practical problems that are merely outlined at the end of the Ethics, concerning the origin, the formation, and the series of these common notions, along with the corresponding experiment.
Deleuze – Spinoza: Practical Philosophy, p. 120 – 121

common notions

Let us consider, then, the way in which one passes from the second kind [of knowledge] to the third. In the Ethics, everything becomes clear in this regard: the second and third kind of knowledge are systems of adequate ideas, but very different from one another. Ideas of the third kind are ideas of essences, inner essences of substance constituted by the attributes, and singular essences of modes involved in the attributes; and the third kind goes from essence to essence.
Deleuze – Spinoza: Practical Philosophy, p. 117

The common notions are more biological than mathematical.
De common notions (algemene begrippen) zijn  het gezichtspunt waaruit de Ethica geschreven is. De common notions vormen de overgang van de tweede naar de derde soort van kennis, we gaan voorbij het verstand en komen in het intuïtieve intellekt als systeem van essentiële waarheden of bewustzijn.

We ervaren de essentie.


de mensheid zou veel gelukkiger zijn als de mens net zo gemakkelijk zou kunnen zwijgen als spreken
Spinoza, Ethica III, stelling 2, commentaar

two faces of the will to power

It is by the will to power that a force commands, but is also by the will to power that a force obeys. To these two types or qualities of forces there correspond two faces, two qualia, of the will to power, which are ultimate and fluent, deeper than the forces that derive from theme, for the will to power makes it that active forces affirm, and affirm their difference: in them affirmation is first, and negation is never but a consequence, a sort of surplus of pleasure. What characterizes reactive forces, on the other hand, is their opposition to what they are not, their tendency to limit the other:  in theme, negation comes first; through negation, they arrive at a semblance of affirmation. Affirmation and negation are thus  the qualia of the will to power, just as action and reaction are the qualities of forces. And just as interpretation finds the principles of meaning in forces, evaluation finds the principles of values in the will to power. Given the preceding terminological precisions, we can avoid reducing Nietzsche’s thought to a simple dualism, for, as we shall seen affirmation is itself essentially multiple and pluralist, whereas negation is always one, or heavily monist.
Yet history presents us with a most peculiar phenomenon: the reactive forces triumph; negation wins the will to power! This is the case not only in the history of man, but in the history of life and the earth. at least on the face it inhabited by man. Everywhere we see the victory of No over Yes, of reaction over action. Life becomes adaptive and regulative, reduced to its secondary forms; we no longer understand what it means to act. Even the forces of the earth become exhausted on this desolate face. Nietzsche calls this joint victory of reactive forces an the will to negate “nihilism” – or the triumph of the slaves.

– Gilles Deleuze, Pure immanence, chapter 3 Nietzsche, p 74/75 –

Waalid Raad

Raad is niet alleen een erg goede beeldend kunstenaar, hij is ook een geweldige comedian. In één stroom vloeien de verhalen er uit. Met eigen logica en samenhang, deels gebaseerd op feiten, deels op associaties met hun eigen logica.
Zenuwgas – geesten – dood – gratis onderwijs – onroerend goed speculatie – beurs speculatie – musea – verzamelaars – transplanterende beelden – louvre abu dabi – heel veel namen
En dan blijkt het tempo nog hoger te kunnen. Terwijl het goed verstaanbaar en te volgen blijft.
Waalid Raad’s performance is van het zelfde hoge niveau als zijn beeldend werkt. Goed.

stedelijk, 3-10-2019