Was Spinoza a Deleuzian? Rethinking the Politics of Emotions and Affects

A salient tradition in contemporary affect theory heavily relies on distinguishing between emotions and affects. The former refers to structured categories of socially coded affective states, while the latter denotes the pre-social libidinal flow underlying emotions. This distinction is commonly attributed to Spinoza and is thought to have been further developed by Deleuze. In this article, I argue that this overall historical picture is misleading and inaccurate. Deleuze radically transforms Spinoza’s theory of affect for the ends of his own ethical-political philosophy. Moreover, I argue that Deleuzian and similar conceptualizations of affect fail to fulfill their political and ethical promises due to two critical problems. In the last section, I show that a unified notion of emotion inspired by Spinoza, which does not create a sharp rift between emotions and affect, can perform the same explanatory function intended by the emotion-affect distinction while allowing us to circumvent these problems.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Theory Culture & Society
Published
2025-01-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/02632764241301334
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Posthumanist Ethics and Activism
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
32.98
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Was Spinoza a Deleuzian? Rethinking the Politics of Emotions and Affects

Ahmet Aktaş
2 citations
Theory Culture & Society
Posthumanist Ethics and Activism
32.98
article

Was Spinoza a Deleuzian? Rethinking the Politics of Emotions and Affects

Ahmet Aktaş
article en
2 citations

Abstract

A salient tradition in contemporary affect theory heavily relies on distinguishing between emotions and affects. The former refers to structured categories of socially coded affective states, while the latter denotes the pre-social libidinal flow underlying emotions. This distinction is commonly attributed to Spinoza and is thought to have been further developed by Deleuze. In this article, I argue that this overall historical picture is misleading and inaccurate. Deleuze radically transforms Spinoza’s theory of affect for the ends of his own ethical-political philosophy. Moreover, I argue that Deleuzian and similar conceptualizations of affect fail to fulfill their political and ethical promises due to two critical problems. In the last section, I show that a unified notion of emotion inspired by Spinoza, which does not create a sharp rift between emotions and affect, can perform the same explanatory function intended by the emotion-affect distinction while allowing us to circumvent these problems.

Theory Culture & SocietyVol. 42(3)
Purdue University West Lafayette (US)
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 1%
Posthumanist Ethics and Activism
32.98
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Was Spinoza a Deleuzian? Rethinking the Politics of Emotions and Affects — Ahmet Aktaş · Theory Culture & Society (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS