Not for these ones, assuming you've read Spinoza. Merleau-Ponty's comfy as shit too.

>>7374169
This is beautiful. I'm saving it. Thank you.

>>7374178
I've read the Ethics and some of On The Improvement of the Understanding. Is that sufficient for Spinoza?

I really just want to find a way to reconcile Wittgenstein and Spinoza, and immanence seems like the best way to do it.

I'm excited for Ponty as well, because phenomenology is cool.

>>7374205
You sound like a retard

>>7374233
Thanks :)

>>7374205
Ethics is one of the main texts he discusses, but keep in mind that it's Deleuze's opinion. I mean, it's good opinion but you don't need to go ranting that Spinoza was secretly just quoting farmers to be fair that happens more when people trying to reconcile him with Heidegger read him It's better to read Spinoza before him because otherwise you might take everything he says as gospel when some is opinion and some is just basic explanation. It's probably one of his more accessible ones because it assume you might need to be introduced to the subject, but keep in mind the pitfalls of that.

Merleau-Ponty's PoP is definitely one of the most fun reads in philosophy. It's like that highly enthusiastic teacher who believes in you and is willing to draw you diagrams.

>>7374137
ask /pol/

>>7374261
Thanks for your help!

:)

>>7374137
English translations of Deleuze are trash.

>>7374137
Abide friend. Absorb Spinozas mind. Let it seep deep into your skin. Sit by the fire and drink every paragraph deeply. This is the pinnacle of your life.