This dream, therefore, is itself action, reality, and an effective menace to all established order; it renders possible what it dreams about.

The technocrat is the natural friend of the dictator — computers and dictatorship; but the revolutionary lives in the gap which separates technical progress from social totality, and inscribes there his dream of permanent revolution.

and the error of totalitarianism, which aspires to constitute a totalization of the signifiable and the known, according to the rhythm of the social totality existing at a given moment.

There are therefore two errors which in truth are one and the same: the error of reformism or technocracy, which aspires to promote or impose partial arrangements of social relations according to the rhythm of technical achievements;

Are you all right? It’s very simple, isn’t it? I mean, it’s like mathematics. What can only be spoken from the perspective of the superior exercise is what cannot be spoken.

Since what can only be spoken can only be spoken, but the empirical use of speech is to speak about what can also be seen. What can only be spoken is what is hidden from any empirical use of the word. So what can only be spoken is what cannot be spoken from the point of view of empirical use.

unless it helps us, it’s, as well, something that can’t be spoken, which is implied, what can only be spoken is something that can’t be spoken from the point of view of empirical use.

there are even many things that can only be spoken. Probably death can only be spoken for Blanchot, but why? What is it, what can only be spoken, and which would define the superior exercise of speech? Notice: it’s not going to help us,

The alternative is imposed with no way out: either to say nothing, or to incorporate what one says — that is, to eat one's words.

And in Leibniz, I’d like for you to be open both to the extent to which he enters into the entire stream of traditional philosophy, so-called traditional, and how at the same time he brings about such innovations, such innovations that the future of philosophy flows through him.

To have no opinion, it’s not at all to be like the guy in the public opinion polls who responds, “I have no opinion,” eh? That one there has an opinion.

Concepts don’t exist ready-made, they are not located in the sky, they are not stars that one gazes at in the sky. You have to create, fabricate concepts.

the entire exotic geography which characterizes a mode of thought as well as a style of life.

It is like sense which, on one of its sides, is attributed to states of life and, on the other, inheres in propositions of thought. There are dimensions here, times and places, glacial or torrid zones never moderated,

Nietzsche has at his disposal a method of his own invention. We should not be satisfied with either biography or bibliography; we must reach a secret point where the anecdote of life and the aphorism of thought amount to one and the same thing.

In this manner, Nietzsche reopened the whole problem of the orientation of thought: is it not rather in line with other dimensions that the act of thinking is engendered in thought and the thinker engendered in life?

So… The air of superiority that one acquires by dint of being stupid…. All that is unfortunate. But you’ve got to have a relation, at the extreme, only with what you love.

That’s a funny thing; it makes you bitter, you know, this kind of intellectual bitterness that takes things out against others for your not having been able to find what you loved.