there is no “true reality” behind or beneath phenomena; noumena are phenomenal things which are “too strong,” too intense or intensive, for our perceptual apparatus, attuned as it is to constituted reality.

Deleuze’s point is … that one should subtract the opposition between phenomena and things-in-themselves, between the phenomenal and the noumenal, from its Kantian context, where noumena are transcendent things that forever elude our grasp.

What Deleuze refers to as “things-in-themselves” are in a way even more phenomenal than our shared phenomenal reality: they are the impossible phenomena, the phenomena excluded from our symbolically constituted reality.

s. zizek


Nietzsche talks about the death of God

he does not have in mind the pagan living God, but … God qua Holy Spirit, the community of believers.

Although this community no longer relies on a transcendent Guarantee of a substantial big Other, the big Other (and thereby the theological dimension) is still there as the virtual frame of reference

(say, in Stalinism in the guise of the big Other of History which guarantees the meaningfulness of our acts).

S. Zizek [on how already for Nietzsche it is not enough to bury one’s belief in god, because to really bury it fully and to be not indirectly still be haunted by it would require to also bury with it the guilt one feels for having killed or abandoned God]