Again later: in compressed form: un seriously, -not the reversal, as not coincidental, is deleuze pushing the envelope? To correlate two different processes: a psychological and a social/political?
Psychoanalysis, is an attempt to see forces lurking behind events, so we get the psychoanalysis of the singular personality like Stalin, who is for saying : it’s easier to kill millions of people then one. To reduce social forces to the level of singular yet unconscious ones, then because this type of determinism failed, to ideology, there is a turn around: there are traits shown rather than types, resemblance because of common traits, in families;;;;;such that is 2 members have similar traits, they belong to the same family, ; rather than 2 member belong to the same type (let’s say ideal) therefore they are identical (logically)::::what is the significance of this turn around? The logical type is a reduction of the approximate trait.
Merleau ponty says that the difference between “acts of thought” and. “Intentional objects of thought” do not constitute an irreducible ground" implying the ground is reducible. (From the intentional object to their acts.) In other words, --the thought (as thinking) and what is being thought about, is analogous to the thought and it’s content (as what is being thought about qua a physical content—and actual representation of what is thought about).
This is a higher level process which does not deal with the type of collapse that Ayer and Russell dealt with. Here, thought of a representation, is analogous to a representation.
In a psychological regression, a similar analogy can be made to a Phenomenological reduction, both seem to “bracket” phenomenologically the “situation” of the given, without judging it, and this is the interesting idea of looking at the “ontological” turnaround of --disassociation-.
Logical association seems to be one of necessity, one pointing toward ideal models.(As categorical identity)
Process,use, and identity show a focus of trends in an approximation of identity as a function of it’s utility. Meaning: continental rationalism has been trumped by a utilitarian, non modeled sense of presentation ourselves.
Why? If nietzche was still around, would he approve of a political/map like in Ayer? Is it just a sleigh of hand matter or is ontology dismissed because of expediency?
Terrible and weighty questions, and the only credible solution is yes, it’s both.
Both: political/epistemological and psychological/ontological.
We see in kierkegaard a way to see the split adhered over by an aesthetic band aid, where life imitates art, including God.
The divided man, somehow sees this, and the utilitarian objection, that existentialism tries to do this from both ends is, though valid, and politically incorrect, but the evaluation is not fixed, but a based on a map in flux, where both types , as complementary processes, with shifting topical values,changing boundaries constantly, are keener to appreciate these changes, and are able to incorporate them by the “bracketed” situations, as if they were pigeonholed and static, but yet, they are fluid and dynamic processes always like a film sliced into frames seeking exact definitions.