The year 1730 predates the births of both Gilles Deleuze (born 1925) and Flix Guattari (born 1930). Consequently, there is no direct historical event involving their collaboration or individual activities in that specific year. The phrase “becoming intense,” when applied to their later philosophical partnership, suggests a period of heightened intellectual activity and collaborative development of their key concepts.
The relevance lies in understanding the intellectual landscape prior to their emergence. The 18th century, including 1730, was a period of significant philosophical shifts, marked by Enlightenment thought and the rise of empirical methodologies. These intellectual currents served as a distant backdrop to the later developments in critical theory that Deleuze and Guattari would contribute to significantly.
While a specific event in 1730 concerning their future partnership is non-existent, examining the philosophical and societal conditions of that era provides a broader context for appreciating the radical departures and innovative theories that would characterize their influential work in the latter half of the 20th century. Their theoretical framework, built upon challenging established norms, could only emerge from a lineage that both embraced and reacted against the dominant intellectual paradigms of prior centuries.
1. Philosophical undercurrents simmering
The phrase “Philosophical undercurrents simmering” in the context of 1730, pre-dating Deleuze and Guattari’s mature work, signifies the gradual build-up of intellectual tension and the development of ideas that would later influence critical theory. Understanding these nascent philosophical movements provides insight into the intellectual climate that indirectly shaped their future philosophical endeavors and their “becoming intense.”
-
Rise of Empiricism and Rationalism
The 18th century saw a continued debate between empiricism, championed by figures like Locke and Hume, and rationalism, exemplified by thinkers like Leibniz and Wolff. Empiricism emphasized sensory experience as the primary source of knowledge, while rationalism prioritized reason and innate ideas. This fundamental tension between experience and reason created a fertile ground for future philosophical developments. Deleuze and Guattari, in their later work, would engage with and critique both traditions, ultimately forging their own unique path. The “simmering” of these ideas set the stage for their subsequent interventions.
-
Emergence of Proto-Critical Thought
While not yet fully formed, certain intellectual currents of the time exhibited proto-critical tendencies. Thinkers began questioning traditional authority and exploring the social and political implications of knowledge. This nascent critical spirit can be seen as a precursor to the more radical critiques that would later characterize Deleuze and Guattari’s philosophy. The “simmering” critical thought challenged existing social norms and power structures laying the foundation for radical ideas.
-
Development of Early Political Philosophy
The Enlightenment period witnessed significant developments in political philosophy, including theories of social contract, natural rights, and the separation of powers. Thinkers like Montesquieu and Rousseau were grappling with questions of governance, liberty, and the relationship between the individual and the state. These ideas, though distinct from Deleuze and Guattari’s later work on power and subjectivity, nonetheless contributed to the broader intellectual context in which they would operate. The “simmering” political ideas challenged existing ideas and helped establish new views of society.
-
Changes in Methodological Approaches
The 18th century also saw shifts in methodological approaches to knowledge acquisition. The rise of scientific methods, with their emphasis on observation, experimentation, and mathematical analysis, influenced not only the natural sciences but also philosophical inquiry. This emphasis on systematic and rigorous investigation paved the way for later developments in epistemology and philosophy of science, which Deleuze and Guattari would engage with in their own ways. The “simmering” methodical approaches resulted in new scientific discoveries.
These philosophical undercurrents, while seemingly disparate, contributed to a complex intellectual climate in 1730. This climate, though not directly impacting Deleuze and Guattari in their formative years (as they were not yet born), provides a crucial historical backdrop for understanding the context in which their later philosophical project “became intense”. The “simmering” philosophical undercurrents in 1730 set the stage for the intellectual evolutions that occurred later. Their eventual focus on concepts like desire, power, and subjectivity can be seen as both a continuation and a radical departure from these earlier trends.
2. Social structures solidifying
The phrase “Social structures solidifying” as it pertains to 1730 describes a period where societal hierarchies, norms, and institutions were becoming increasingly entrenched. This entrenchment, while seemingly distant from the later philosophical partnership of Deleuze and Guattari, provides critical context. The solidification of social structures in 1730 created a stable yet restrictive environment that, in retrospect, established the very foundations against which later critical thinkers like Deleuze and Guattari would react and develop their concepts of deterritorialization and the critique of rigid social organization.
To illustrate, consider the prevailing class structure of the time. The aristocracy maintained its dominance, with land ownership and inherited titles conferring significant power. Simultaneously, the merchant class was gaining influence, yet remained largely constrained by existing social hierarchies. This increasingly rigid structure informed the future intellectual environment. Furthermore, the colonial empires of the European powers were expanding, solidifying hierarchies of race and power that would later be subject to critical examination by post-structuralist thinkers. The perceived ‘naturalness’ of these hierarchies became a target for later deconstruction.
Understanding the solidification of social structures in 1730, therefore, is not merely a matter of historical record; it is a necessary step in comprehending the intellectual and social landscape against which subsequent philosophical movements emerged. Deleuze and Guattari’s work, with its emphasis on challenging fixed identities and disrupting established power relations, can be seen, in part, as a response to the perceived limitations and injustices inherent in such solidified structures. Recognizing the dynamics of 1730 provides a richer appreciation for the radical nature of their later intellectual project and its enduring relevance to contemporary social and political issues.
3. Scientific advancements nascent
The phrase “Scientific advancements nascent” in 1730 describes a period where scientific inquiry was undergoing significant development, though its transformative impact on society and thought was not yet fully realized. While Deleuze and Guattari were not yet born, these emerging scientific methodologies and discoveries indirectly influenced the intellectual landscape that would later shape their philosophical approaches. The burgeoning scientific spirit, with its emphasis on empirical observation and systematic analysis, contributed to a broader cultural shift away from purely metaphysical explanations towards a more materialist understanding of the world. This gradual shift provided a fertile ground for the later development of post-structuralist thought, including the theories of Deleuze and Guattari. Their engagement with concepts like systems theory and complexity, evident in their later work, suggests an indirect influence from the developing scientific paradigms of the early 18th century. For example, the early stages of taxonomy, while not directly informing their philosophy, represent a systematizing impulse congruent with some aspects of their later engagement with mapping and categorization.
Furthermore, the nascent scientific advancements fostered a sense of intellectual optimism and a belief in the power of reason to understand and control the natural world. This optimism, while ultimately tempered by later critiques of scientific reductionism, nonetheless contributed to a broader cultural environment receptive to new ideas and challenges to established norms. The early stages of Newtonian physics, while distinct from the social and philosophical realms, exemplify a drive to find underlying principles that could explain complex phenomena. This impulse toward uncovering underlying structures, although different in method and application, resonates with some of Deleuze and Guattaris later theoretical endeavors to map out the complex systems of desire and power. The growing acceptance of the scientific method in the wider culture also helped to foster a critical attitude towards tradition and authority, which played a role in shaping the intellectual climate in which Deleuze and Guattari’s philosophical project would later emerge.
In summary, while a direct causal link between scientific advancements in 1730 and the later work of Deleuze and Guattari is difficult to establish, the emerging scientific spirit, with its emphasis on empirical observation, systematic analysis, and intellectual optimism, contributed to a broader cultural and intellectual climate that indirectly influenced their philosophical approaches. The nascent scientific advancements acted as one component in the complex interplay of historical, social, and intellectual forces that shaped the context in which Deleuze and Guattari’s theories would eventually “become intense.” The early scientific method laid the groundwork for future innovation. The significance lies not in direct causation, but in understanding how these nascent developments contributed to a changing intellectual landscape that fostered novel modes of thought.
4. Economic systems evolving
The phrase “Economic systems evolving” in 1730 signifies a period of transition within European economies, characterized by the expansion of mercantile capitalism and the early stages of industrial development. While separated by centuries from the philosophical partnership of Deleuze and Guattari, this economic evolution constitutes a critical, if indirect, precursor to the intellectual climate in which their ideas would later flourish and become intense. The shifting economic landscape created new social relations, altered power dynamics, and fueled intellectual debates that subtly shaped the context for later critical thought. For example, the growth of global trade networks, driven by mercantile policies, fostered increased contact between different cultures and economic systems. This intercultural exchange, while often exploitative, introduced new perspectives and challenged established worldviews, laying a foundation for the future critique of Eurocentrism that would become central to post-structuralist thought. The increased commodification of goods and labor, a hallmark of evolving economic systems, altered social relationships and contributed to a growing sense of alienation and social fragmentation. This alienation, while not directly addressed by economic policy, later became a central theme in critical theory, including the work of Deleuze and Guattari.
Furthermore, the accumulation of capital and the rise of a wealthy merchant class led to increased investment in scientific and technological innovation. These advancements, while initially aimed at improving economic productivity, also had profound social and intellectual consequences. The development of new technologies, such as the steam engine and improved textile machinery, transformed production processes and created new forms of labor. These technological advancements, and their associated social and economic disruptions, would later become objects of critical scrutiny for thinkers examining the relationship between technology, power, and social control. The rise of financial institutions, such as banks and stock exchanges, further transformed the economic landscape and created new opportunities for wealth creation and speculation. These developments, while not without their benefits, also contributed to increased economic instability and social inequality. This instability and inequality, in turn, provided fertile ground for the development of critical theories that sought to understand and address the structural causes of social injustice.
In conclusion, the evolving economic systems of 1730, characterized by the expansion of mercantile capitalism and the early stages of industrial development, played a significant, though indirect, role in shaping the intellectual climate in which Deleuze and Guattari’s philosophical project would later emerge and achieve its intense state. The shifting economic landscape created new social relations, altered power dynamics, and fueled intellectual debates that subtly influenced the development of critical theory. Recognizing the connection between these seemingly disparate historical developments provides a richer understanding of the complex interplay of forces that shaped the intellectual landscape of the 20th century and beyond. The challenges and contradictions inherent in these evolving economic systems continue to resonate in contemporary debates about globalization, economic inequality, and the role of technology in shaping social relations, highlighting the enduring relevance of understanding their historical roots.
5. Artistic expressions emerging
The phrase “Artistic expressions emerging” concerning 1730 denotes a period of evolving aesthetic sensibilities and nascent artistic movements. While Deleuze and Guattari were not yet born, the artistic landscape of this era established a cultural foundation that indirectly informed the intellectual milieu from which their philosophies would later emerge and “become intense.” Examining specific artistic trends offers insight into the evolving values and modes of thought that subtly shaped the conditions for later critical theory.
-
The Rococo Style and its Societal Reflection
The Rococo style, characterized by its ornate designs, pastel colors, and emphasis on frivolous subjects, gained prominence in the early 18th century. This artistic movement reflected the aristocratic elite’s pursuit of pleasure and escapism. While seemingly distant from the later concerns of Deleuze and Guattari, the Rococo’s emphasis on surface aesthetics and the questioning of rigid classical forms implicitly challenged established hierarchies. This aesthetic shift, while not explicitly political, contributed to a cultural climate receptive to later critiques of traditional authority. The Rococo challenge was more about aesthetics than politics but still contributed to a culture that challenged the norm.
-
The Development of Musical Forms
The Baroque period in music was reaching its zenith, with composers like Bach and Handel exploring complex harmonic structures and elaborate instrumental arrangements. However, the seeds of the Classical era were also being sown, with a growing emphasis on clarity, balance, and emotional restraint. This transition in musical forms reflects a broader shift in cultural values, from the emotional intensity of the Baroque to a more rational and ordered aesthetic. These musical transitions subtly influenced the coming society. The later emphasis on the “rhizome” structure proposed by Deleuze and Guattari, as opposed to hierarchical structures, finds a distant echo in the move away from the rigid formal constraints of earlier musical periods.
-
Emergence of the Novel as a Literary Form
The early 18th century witnessed the rise of the novel as a significant literary form. Works like Daniel Defoe’s Robinson Crusoe and Samuel Richardson’s Pamela explored individual experiences and social issues in unprecedented detail. This shift towards realism and the focus on individual subjectivity paved the way for later literary and philosophical movements that emphasized the importance of lived experience and the critique of abstract systems. The development of the novel as a literary form opened new views of understanding and relating to others. The focus on individual experiences connects with Deleuze and Guattari’s focus on subjectivity.
-
The Growth of Portraiture and Self-Representation
Portraiture became increasingly popular, reflecting a growing interest in individual identity and social status. This trend also led to experimentation in self-representation, as artists explored different ways of depicting themselves and their subjects. This burgeoning focus on the individual and self-expression prefigured later philosophical concerns with subjectivity and the construction of identity. The rise in portraiture showed how the value of the individual was increasing within the culture of the time. The focus on self-representation leads to an interest in subjectivity.
These emerging artistic expressions in 1730, while seemingly unrelated to the later work of Deleuze and Guattari, contributed to a cultural landscape characterized by evolving aesthetic sensibilities, challenges to traditional forms, and a growing emphasis on individual experience. These trends, in turn, subtly shaped the intellectual climate in which Deleuze and Guattari’s philosophical project would eventually “become intense,” providing a foundation for their later critiques of established norms and their exploration of subjectivity, desire, and the complexities of social life. All of these transitions that occurred in 1730 influenced the development of society and set the stage for Deleuze and Guattari’s philosophical work later.
6. Political climates brewing
The phrase “Political climates brewing” refers to the evolving political landscape of 1730, a period marked by shifting alliances, growing colonial tensions, and the subtle undercurrents of nascent revolutionary sentiments. Although Gilles Deleuze and Flix Guattari were not yet born, the political dynamics of this era indirectly contributed to the intellectual atmosphere that would later inform their philosophical project. These brewing political conditions represent a background context against which their radical critiques of power, state control, and social organization would eventually emerge and “become intense”.
-
Consolidation of Absolutist States
Many European powers, including France and Prussia, were characterized by increasingly centralized, absolutist forms of governance. Monarchs sought to consolidate power, diminish the influence of the aristocracy, and exert greater control over their territories. This trend towards centralized authority created inherent tensions between the rulers and the ruled. These tensions would later be critically examined by thinkers who questioned the legitimacy and effects of concentrated power. Deleuze and Guattari’s later work challenged centralized systems. Their emphasis on rhizomatic structures can be seen as a direct challenge to the hierarchical and centralized models of power epitomized by these absolutist states.
-
Growing Colonial Rivalries
European powers were engaged in intense competition for colonial possessions and trade routes across the globe. This rivalry fueled military conflicts, economic exploitation, and the subjugation of indigenous populations. The competition for colonial territories exacerbated existing tensions between European nations and intensified the exploitation of colonized regions. The ethical implications of colonialism provided an intellectual context for later critiques of power, capitalism, and cultural imperialism, issues that would be central to the work of Deleuze and Guattari. The colonialization efforts contributed to a future environment focused on critiquing capitalism.
-
Emergence of Enlightenment Ideals
The Enlightenment, with its emphasis on reason, individual rights, and the separation of powers, was beginning to gain influence in intellectual circles. Thinkers were challenging traditional authority and advocating for greater individual liberty. Though not yet dominant, Enlightenment ideals began to challenge existing political structures. These ideals emphasized individual rights. The emphasis on individual rights and reason formed a crucial precursor to later critical theories that sought to dismantle oppressive social structures and empower marginalized groups.
-
Peasant Unrest and Social Tensions
Despite the consolidation of power by absolutist states, peasant unrest and social tensions persisted in many regions. Economic hardship, oppressive taxation, and the abuse of power by local elites fueled discontent among the lower classes. The discontent of the lower classes would later evolve into a strong foundation for philosophical advancements. The social discontent created by economic inequality and political oppression contributed to a climate of instability and a growing awareness of the need for social change. This simmering unrest formed a backdrop for later revolutionary movements and critical theories that sought to address the root causes of social injustice.
These “political climates brewing” in 1730, characterized by absolutist rule, colonial rivalries, emerging Enlightenment ideals, and social unrest, represent a complex and dynamic historical context. While these conditions did not directly cause the philosophical partnership between Deleuze and Guattari, they indirectly contributed to the intellectual atmosphere in which their theories would later “become intense”. Their emphasis on challenging established power structures, critiquing capitalism, and empowering marginalized groups can be seen as a response to the legacies of these brewing political conditions. These conditions acted as a crucial element to future ideas and revolutions.
7. Intellectual discourse fermenting
The phrase “Intellectual discourse fermenting” describes the period around 1730 as one of dynamic intellectual development. While Deleuze and Guattari were not alive at this time, the philosophical and scientific debates taking place then laid a groundwork that would indirectly contribute to the environment in which their ideas would later emerge. The “fermenting” intellectual environment of the early 18th century was characterized by vigorous discussions across a range of disciplines, challenging existing assumptions and prompting new lines of inquiry. These activities provided the subtle but crucial starting point for later intellectual movements. Consider the ongoing debates between rationalism and empiricism. Thinkers like Locke and Hume, though preceding 1730, had established empiricism as a powerful force, emphasizing sensory experience as the primary source of knowledge. Conversely, rationalists such as Leibniz argued for the importance of innate ideas and deductive reasoning. This fundamental disagreement concerning the nature of knowledge fueled continuous debate, creating an atmosphere of intellectual tension and innovation. This environment, while not directly shaping Deleuze and Guattari’s work, illustrates the kind of intense intellectual exchange that fostered critical thinking and a willingness to challenge established norms, which later manifested in their rejection of rigid philosophical systems.
Similarly, the rise of scientific societies and academies during this period promoted the dissemination of new knowledge and encouraged collaborative research. These institutions provided platforms for scholars to share their findings, critique each other’s work, and collectively advance scientific understanding. The Royal Society in London, for example, played a key role in fostering scientific innovation and promoting the application of scientific knowledge to practical problems. The emphasis on empirical observation and experimentation within these scientific communities indirectly contributed to a more materialist worldview, which would later influence critical theories questioning traditional metaphysical assumptions. The growing prominence of scientific inquiry also led to debates about the relationship between science, religion, and philosophy, creating a space for new interpretations of the world and humanity’s place within it. Thinkers began to explore the implications of scientific discoveries for ethics, politics, and social organization. The increasing focus on scientific inquiry also had implications for the role of reason. The idea that reason and the scientific method should be used to solve problems in society was taking hold. This helped set the stage for later philosophers.
In summary, the “intellectual discourse fermenting” around 1730 fostered an environment conducive to challenging existing assumptions and exploring new avenues of thought. While the specific ideas and debates of this period differ significantly from the later philosophical concerns of Deleuze and Guattari, the underlying spirit of critical inquiry and intellectual innovation paved the way for the emergence of new and radical theories. Recognizing this connection helps to contextualize the development of Deleuze and Guattari’s work within a longer history of intellectual ferment and the ongoing pursuit of knowledge. The earlier ferment provided a backdrop for the later explosion of philosophical ideas.
8. Colonial expansions accelerating
The phrase “Colonial expansions accelerating,” characterizing the global landscape around 1730, bears a significant, if indirect, relationship to the subsequent philosophical developments associated with Deleuze and Guattari. While the two thinkers were not yet born, the intensification of colonial projects by European powers established material and ideological conditions that would profoundly shape the intellectual environment of the 20th century, influencing the critical frameworks they would later develop and “become intense”. Colonial expansion in 1730 entailed not only the territorial acquisition and economic exploitation of distant lands, but also the imposition of European social, political, and cultural systems upon diverse populations. This process generated significant resistance and unrest, and sparked intellectual debates about the justification for colonial rule, the nature of cultural difference, and the ethics of empire. These debates, while initially confined to relatively narrow circles, provided a foundation for later critiques of Eurocentrism, cultural imperialism, and the inherent violence of colonial power.
The accumulation of wealth and resources through colonial exploitation fueled the development of capitalism in Europe, further exacerbating social inequalities and transforming social relations. The wealth accumulated from global expansion funded advancements in science and technology. These new advances directly supported a new level of military strength that helped European nations to expand even further. Deleuze and Guattari’s work, with its emphasis on the interconnectedness of power, desire, and capitalism, can be seen, in part, as a response to the legacies of colonial exploitation and the global expansion of capitalist modes of production. Specifically, their concept of “deterritorialization” can be interpreted as a way of understanding the disruptive effects of colonialism on traditional social structures and cultural identities. Similarly, their concept of “nomadism” can be seen as a response to the forced displacement and migration of populations resulting from colonial expansion. The colonial era, in turn, had great impacts on the cultures of countries such as India, China, and the American continents. It is critical to understand the impacts of global colonialism to understand the modern world.
Understanding the link between “colonial expansions accelerating” and the later philosophical project of Deleuze and Guattari is crucial for several reasons. It provides a richer understanding of the historical and material conditions that shaped their intellectual development. It highlights the enduring relevance of their work for addressing contemporary issues of globalization, inequality, and post-colonial identity. And, it serves as a reminder that seemingly abstract philosophical concepts are often deeply rooted in concrete historical experiences. By understanding the expansion of colonial endeavors, we can see it laid the groundwork for future theories about globalization, power dynamics, and social justice. Therefore, the context of colonial expansion is critical to a comprehensive understanding of Deleuze and Guattari’s work.
Frequently Asked Questions
This section addresses common questions regarding the phrase “what happened in 1730 Deleuze Guattari becoming intense” and its significance.
Question 1: Why is the year 1730 significant in relation to Deleuze and Guattari, given that they were born much later?
The year 1730 is significant not for any direct involvement of Deleuze and Guattari, but as a marker in the historical context that indirectly influenced their later philosophical work. Analyzing the prevailing social, political, and intellectual conditions of that era provides insight into the background against which their theories emerged.
Question 2: What does the phrase “becoming intense” signify when applied to Deleuze and Guattari’s partnership?
“Becoming intense” suggests a period of heightened intellectual activity and collaborative development of their key concepts. It implies a process of intellectual maturation and the increasing radicalization of their philosophical positions over time, rather than a single, specific event.
Question 3: How did the philosophical currents of the early 18th century influence Deleuze and Guattari’s thinking?
The philosophical debates between rationalism and empiricism, the rise of proto-critical thought, and the development of early political philosophy all contributed to the intellectual landscape that indirectly shaped their approaches. While Deleuze and Guattari ultimately moved beyond these traditions, understanding them provides context for their later interventions.
Question 4: In what ways did the social structures of 1730 contribute to the conditions for their later work?
The increasingly solidified social hierarchies, the expansion of colonial empires, and the growing economic inequalities of the time created a set of conditions that later critical thinkers, including Deleuze and Guattari, would challenge. Their emphasis on disrupting established power relations can be seen, in part, as a response to the perceived limitations and injustices inherent in such solidified structures.
Question 5: How did the scientific advancements of the early 18th century relate to their philosophical project?
While a direct causal link is difficult to establish, the emerging scientific spirit, with its emphasis on empirical observation, systematic analysis, and intellectual optimism, contributed to a broader cultural climate that indirectly influenced their philosophical approaches. Their engagement with concepts like systems theory and complexity reflects, to some extent, the scientific paradigms of the time.
Question 6: Did the economic and political conditions of 1730 have any bearing on their later theories?
Yes. The evolving economic systems, characterized by the expansion of mercantile capitalism, and the political climates, marked by absolutist rule and colonial rivalries, created social tensions and intellectual debates that subtly shaped the development of critical theory, including their work. Their emphasis on challenging established power structures and critiquing capitalism can be seen as a response to these historical legacies.
Understanding these contextual factors is crucial for grasping the full significance of Deleuze and Guattari’s work. Their theories did not emerge in a vacuum, but rather in response to a complex interplay of historical, social, and intellectual forces.
The next section will explore the lasting impact of Deleuze and Guattari’s work on contemporary thought.
Navigating the Indirect Relevance of 1730 to Deleuze and Guattari
The phrase “what happened in 1730 Deleuze Guattari becoming intense” necessitates understanding the indirect connection between a specific historical period and later philosophical developments. This section provides guidance on contextualizing the intellectual environment of 1730 to better appreciate Deleuze and Guattari’s work.
Tip 1: Focus on Intellectual Currents: Examine the dominant philosophical debates of 1730, such as rationalism versus empiricism. Understand how these debates contributed to a broader intellectual climate that indirectly influenced later critical theory. For example, appreciating the emphasis on reason in Enlightenment thought offers context for understanding Deleuze and Guattari’s subsequent critiques of rigid philosophical systems.
Tip 2: Consider Social and Political Structures: Analyze the prevailing social hierarchies, political systems, and economic arrangements of the era. Understanding the solidification of absolutist states and the expansion of colonial empires provides insight into the power dynamics that Deleuze and Guattari would later deconstruct. For example, recognizing the rigid class structures of 1730 informs an understanding of their focus on challenging fixed identities.
Tip 3: Investigate Nascent Scientific Advancements: Explore the early developments in scientific methodology and their impact on cultural thought. The rise of empirical observation and systematic analysis contributed to a shift away from purely metaphysical explanations, subtly influencing the development of materialist perspectives in later philosophy.
Tip 4: Trace the Evolution of Artistic Expressions: Analyze artistic movements like Rococo and the emergence of the novel. These developments reveal evolving aesthetic sensibilities and a growing emphasis on individual experience, which prefigure later philosophical concerns with subjectivity and the critique of traditional forms.
Tip 5: Acknowledge Colonial Expansion’s Impact: Recognize that the increasing dominance of colonial expansion by major European countries provided the resources and environment that future philosophical positions would react to. The wealth accumulation and cultural clashes due to colonial rule created the basis for cultural theories about modern power structures.
Understanding the relationship between these disparate historical developments and the later work of Deleuze and Guattari requires a nuanced approach. It involves recognizing that the intellectual climate of 1730, while not directly shaping their formative years, established a foundation for the emergence of new and radical theories.
The preceding tips serve as a guide for appreciating the historical context that indirectly informed Deleuze and Guattari’s philosophical project. The concluding section will summarize the enduring legacy of their work on contemporary thought.
Conclusion
This exploration of the phrase “what happened in 1730 Deleuze Guattari becoming intense” reveals that its significance lies not in a direct historical occurrence, but in the understanding of the period’s socio-intellectual landscape. The investigation into the prevailing philosophical currents, solidifying social structures, nascent scientific advancements, evolving economic systems, emerging artistic expressions, brewing political climates, fermenting intellectual discourse, and accelerating colonial expansions of that era, offers a crucial context for appreciating the origins and development of Deleuze and Guattari’s later philosophical project. Though not directly present in 1730, the conditions of that time established a foundation upon which their theories of power, desire, and social organization would eventually “become intense.”
The critical assessment of this temporal disconnect highlights the enduring importance of contextualizing intellectual movements within broader historical frameworks. Recognizing the indirect influences shaping philosophical thought allows for a more nuanced understanding of its complexities and its continued relevance in addressing contemporary social and political issues. Further exploration of these historical connections promises to deepen the appreciation of Deleuze and Guattari’s contributions and their lasting impact on critical thought.
