Difference and Repetition

Différence et répétition
by Gilles Deleuze
1962–1967French

Difference and Repetition is Gilles Deleuze’s major early systematic work, in which he undertakes a radical rethinking of metaphysics by making difference, rather than identity, the primary ontological category and reconceiving repetition as a generative, productive process rather than mere recurrence of the same. Through an intensive and often technical engagement with Plato, Aristotle, Leibniz, Kant, Hegel, Nietzsche, Bergson, and others, Deleuze develops a philosophy of “difference in itself,” an account of individuation grounded in differential relations and “intensive” magnitudes, and a theory of thought that emphasizes learning, problems, and creativity over representation and recognition. The book fuses ontology, epistemology, and philosophy of time with a distinctive style that anticipates Deleuze’s later collaborative work with Félix Guattari, and it has become a cornerstone text for post-structuralist, continental, and contemporary critical theory.

At a Glance

Quick Facts
Author
Gilles Deleuze
Composed
1962–1967
Language
French
Status
original survives
Key Arguments
  • Difference must be thought in itself, independently of identity, opposition, analogy, and resemblance: classical metaphysics subordinates difference to identity via conceptual tools like representation and negation, but Deleuze argues for a positive, productive difference that precedes and grounds identities instead of being derived from them.
  • Repetition is not simple recurrence of identical elements in time but a creative, differential process that generates novelty: Deleuze distinguishes between bare, mechanical repetition and a deeper, ontological repetition that operates through variation, disguise, and transformation, producing new individuations and events rather than reproducing the same.
  • Individuation arises from differential relations and intensive quantities rather than from pre-given essences or forms: drawing on Simondon and Bergson, Deleuze claims that individuals emerge from pre-individual fields of singularities, differences of intensity, and problematic structures, with “extensive” properties only secondarily expressing more fundamental intensive processes.
  • Representation—structured by identity, opposition, analogy, and resemblance—cannot capture the genesis of thought or being: Deleuze criticizes representational philosophy (exemplified in certain readings of Kant and Hegel) for presupposing stable identities and subjects, advocating instead a “transcendental empiricism” that begins from singular events, experiences, and problems and allows thought to be forced by what exceeds representation.
  • Time has a complex, multi-layered structure that grounds subjectivity and repetition: elaborating a theory of three syntheses of time, Deleuze links habit (passive synthesis of the living present), memory (active synthesis of the past), and a pure, empty form of time that fractures the subject, arguing that the subject is an effect of temporal syntheses rather than their source.
Historical Significance

Difference and Repetition is widely regarded as Deleuze’s first major systematic statement and one of the foundational texts of post-structuralism and contemporary continental philosophy. It decisively influenced later debates on ontology, metaphysics, and the philosophy of difference, contributing to the emergence of ‘philosophy of difference’ as an alternative to phenomenology, analytic metaphysics, and Hegelian dialectics. Its concepts—difference in itself, repetition, the three syntheses of time, transcendental empiricism, virtual multiplicities, and intensive individuation—have been taken up across literary theory, political philosophy, psychoanalytic theory, art and film studies, and science studies. The work also provides much of the conceptual groundwork for Deleuze’s later collaborations with Félix Guattari and has been central to the development of “Deleuzian” approaches in Anglophone philosophy and critical theory since the 1980s.

Famous Passages
The Fourfold Root of Representation (identity, opposition, analogy, resemblance)(Chapter 1, “Difference in Itself,” mid-chapter discussion of the critique of representation (French ed. pp. ~52–60; English trans. pp. ~28–36).)
The Three Syntheses of Time (habit, memory, empty form of time)(Chapter 2, “Repetition for Itself,” especially the sections on the first, second, and third syntheses (French ed. pp. ~94–154; English trans. pp. ~70–122).)
The Dice-Throw and the Eternal Return as Repetition of Difference(Chapter 2, “Repetition for Itself,” discussion of Nietzsche’s eternal return and chance (French ed. pp. ~146–154; English trans. pp. ~116–122).)
The Philosophy of Problems and the Critique of the Image of Thought(Chapter 3, “The Image of Thought,” central sections on the eight postulates of the image of thought and problematics (French ed. pp. ~169–223; English trans. pp. ~164–221).)
Intensity, Individuation, and the Egg (the embryological metaphor)(Chapter 5, “Asymmetrical Synthesis of the Sensible,” discussion of intensity, embryology, and the ‘larval subject’ (French ed. pp. ~306–340; English trans. pp. ~244–281).)
Key Terms
Difference in itself (différence en soi): Deleuze’s notion of a positive, productive difference that precedes and grounds identity, rather than being derived from negation or comparison between already constituted terms.
Repetition for itself (répétition pour elle-même): A deeper, ontological form of repetition that generates novelty and difference, distinct from empirical recurrence of the same events or states in space and time.
[Transcendental](/terms/transcendental/) [empiricism](/terms/empiricism/) (empirisme transcendantal): Deleuze’s methodological proposal to investigate the conditions of real experience as singular, differential, and productive, rather than as formal conditions of possible experience in the Kantian sense.
Virtual multiplicity (multiplicité virtuelle): A structured field of differential relations and singularities that is real but non-actual, from which actual individuals and states of affairs are generated through processes of individuation and actualization.
Three syntheses of time: Deleuze’s account of time as composed of a passive synthesis of habit (living present), an active synthesis of memory (pure past), and a third, empty form of time that fractures the subject and grounds radical novelty.

1. Introduction

Difference and Repetition is widely regarded as Gilles Deleuze’s first fully systematic philosophical treatise and a central text in twentieth‑century “philosophies of difference.” Published in 1968, it advances the claim that difference and repetition are not secondary features of already constituted identities but fundamental dimensions of reality and thought. Instead of beginning from stable subjects, concepts, or essences, the book asks how individuated beings and recognizable identities emerge from fields of differential relations and repetitive processes.

The work is both constructive and critical. On one side, it articulates a positive ontology of difference in itself, a theory of virtual multiplicities and intensive individuation, and a reconfiguration of time through three “syntheses.” On the other, it offers a sustained critique of what Deleuze calls the image of thought—the set of often unspoken assumptions that link thought to recognition, common sense, and representation.

Commentators often note that Difference and Repetition occupies a transitional place in Deleuze’s oeuvre: it consolidates his earlier monographs on individual philosophers while prefiguring later collaborative work with Félix Guattari. Within an encyclopedic treatment, the book is typically approached as a complex but coherent attempt to reformulate metaphysics, epistemology, and the theory of subjectivity around the primacy of differential processes rather than identity-based representation.

2. Historical and Intellectual Context

Difference and Repetition emerges from the dense philosophical landscape of postwar France, where phenomenology, structuralism, and renewed engagements with German Idealism shaped debates about subjectivity, language, and science. Deleuze’s project is often situated at the intersection of—and partly in opposition to—these currents.

Postwar French Philosophy and Structuralism

In the 1950s–60s, phenomenology (Husserl, Heidegger, Merleau‑Ponty) and structuralism (Saussure, Lévi‑Strauss, Lacan) provided dominant frameworks. Structuralists stressed systems of relations over individual subjects, while phenomenologists emphasized lived experience and intentionality. Deleuze draws selectively on both: from phenomenology, a concern with experience and temporality; from structuralism, attention to relational structures. Yet he distances himself from structuralism’s supposed formal rigidity by insisting on genesis, becoming, and process.

Engagement with the History of Philosophy

Deleuze’s earlier books on Hume, Nietzsche, Bergson, and others inform the historical backdrop. In Difference and Repetition, he reinterprets Plato, Aristotle, Leibniz, Kant, Hegel, Nietzsche, and Bergson as resources for a non‑dialectical philosophy of difference. Scholars often emphasize:

InfluenceAspect taken up in Difference and Repetition
NietzscheEternal return, critique of identity and negation
BergsonDuration, intuition, and creative evolution
SimondonIndividuation and pre‑individual fields
KantTranscendental critique, Ideas, schematism

1960s French Theoretical Milieu

The book appears alongside works by Foucault, Derrida, Althusser, and others, contributing to what is later called “post‑structuralism.” Some interpreters read it as a response to contemporaneous concerns with psychoanalysis, Marxism, and the events leading up to May 1968, while others emphasize its relative independence from immediate political debates in favor of a long‑range reconfiguration of metaphysics.

3. Author and Composition

Deleuze’s Intellectual Trajectory

By the time he composed Difference and Repetition, Gilles Deleuze (1925–1995) had established himself in France as a distinctive historian of philosophy. His monographs on Hume, Nietzsche, Proust, Bergson, and others developed an idiosyncratic style of reading that sought conceptual “powers” rather than doctrinal fidelity. Commentators often regard these works as preparatory for the systematic construction attempted in Difference and Repetition.

Doctoral Context and Writing Process

The book was written between roughly 1962 and 1967 as Deleuze’s thèse principale for the French doctorat d’État, defended at the University of Paris. It was paired with a secondary thesis on Spinoza. Scholars have noted that the demands of the doctoral genre help explain the work’s density, extensive apparatus of references, and systematic ambitions.

Available testimonies and archival research suggest a protracted composition process in which chapters circulated among colleagues such as Jean Wahl and Ferdinand Alquié. Some accounts propose that the project crystallized when Deleuze brought together themes from his earlier books—especially on Nietzsche and Bergson—under the heading of difference and repetition as transcendental problems.

AspectDetail
Degree frameworkDoctorat d’État (thèse principale)
InstitutionUniversity of Paris (Sorbonne)
Composition periodc. 1962–1967
First publicationPUF, “Épiméthée” series, 1968

Relation to Deleuze’s Later Work

Commentators typically see Difference and Repetition as a turning point: it consolidates Deleuze’s solitary period and provides many of the conceptual resources later reworked with Félix Guattari in Anti‑Oedipus and A Thousand Plateaus. Some interpreters therefore treat it as the key to Deleuze’s overall metaphysical commitments, while others caution that its style and priorities differ markedly from his collaborative writings.

4. Structure and Organization of the Work

Difference and Repetition follows a relatively traditional chapter layout but pursues a non‑linear conceptual development. The standard French edition and Paul Patton’s English translation share the same basic structure.

PartTitle (English)Primary focus (very schematically)
PrefacePreface and methodological remarksPositioning of the work, statement of method
Ch. 1Difference in ItselfOntology of difference, critique of representation
Ch. 2Repetition for ItselfRepetition, time, and the three syntheses
Ch. 3The Image of ThoughtCritique of presuppositions of thinking
Ch. 4Ideas and the Synthesis of DifferenceIdeas as differential, problematic structures
Ch. 5Asymmetrical Synthesis of the SensibleIntensity, individuation, and embodiment
ConclusionConclusion and prospectsProgrammatic indications and brief recapitulation

Internal Progression

Commentators usually distinguish two broad movements:

  1. A primarily critical and ontological phase (Preface, Chapters 1–3) that dismantles representational models of thought and being.
  2. A more constructive and genetic phase (Chapters 4–5 and Conclusion) that elaborates virtual multiplicities, individuation, and the role of intensity and sensibility.

Within chapters, Deleuze often alternates between systematic exposition and detailed engagements with historical figures. Readers frequently note that arguments recur in spiral fashion: earlier motifs (e.g., differential relations, syntheses of time) are reintroduced under new aspects in later chapters.

Because of this spiral organization, some scholars recommend reading non‑sequentially (for instance, pairing Chapters 1 and 4, or 2 and 5), while others emphasize the cumulative effect of a linear reading that mirrors the book’s stated concern with repetition and difference in the order of presentation itself.

5. Central Arguments and Key Concepts

Difference in Itself and Critique of Representation

A central thesis is that difference should not be derived from identity, negation, or resemblance but conceived as primary. Deleuze critiques what he calls the fourfold root of representation—identity, opposition, analogy, and resemblance—as traditional modes through which difference is subordinated. Proponents of Deleuze’s reading argue that he thereby offers a non‑dialectical alternative to Hegelian negation; critics suggest that this reconstruction oversimplifies classical metaphysics.

Repetition and the Three Syntheses of Time

The notion of repetition for itself redefines repetition as productive, not merely repetitive of the same. Deleuze articulates three syntheses of time:

SynthesisDescription (brief)
First (habit)Passive synthesis of the lived present through contraction of repetitions
Second (memory)Active synthesis of the past as a pure past coexisting with the present
Third (empty time)A “fracturing” synthesis introducing a future that disrupts identity

This model links temporal structure to the emergence and dissolution of subjects.

Transcendental Empiricism and Ideas

Under the heading transcendental empiricism, Deleuze proposes to seek the conditions of real, singular experience rather than merely possible experience. Ideas are reconceived as virtual multiplicities—problematic, differential structures that organize fields of singularities. Solutions are seen as actualizations of these problems rather than independent givens.

Individuation, Intensity, and the Sensible

Drawing partly on Simondon and embryology, Deleuze differentiates intensive from extensive quantities. Intensive differences (of temperature, tension, potential) are presented as driving individuation, while extensive properties result from their resolution. Concepts such as the larval subject and the individuating egg name stages in which subjectivity is emergent rather than pre‑given.

The Image of Thought

Deleuze’s critique of the image of thought targets tacit postulates—such as the presumption of good will in thinking, the model of recognition, and the moralization of error. He proposes an alternative view in which thought is “forced” by encounters with what cannot be readily recognized, emphasizing problems, learning, and encounter. Commentators have debated how far this amounts to a new epistemology versus a reorientation of metaphysics.

6. Legacy and Historical Significance

Since its publication, Difference and Repetition has acquired a reputation as a challenging but foundational work in contemporary continental philosophy. Its long‑term significance is typically described along several axes.

Influence on Later Philosophy and Theory

The book has been central to the development of “philosophy of difference” and to what is retrospectively called post‑structuralism. It informs subsequent work by Deleuze and Guattari and has influenced thinkers in political theory, feminist philosophy, queer theory, aesthetics, and science studies. Concepts such as virtual multiplicity, intensive difference, and the image of thought have been widely adopted and adapted.

Reception and Debates

Early reception in France was largely confined to specialized circles, with commentators divided between admiration for its conceptual innovation and reservations about its opacity. In the Anglophone world, the 1994 translation by Paul Patton substantially broadened discussion. Debates have focused on:

Area of debateTypical questions raised
MetaphysicsAre virtual multiplicities coherent and necessary concepts, or speculative constructs?
MethodologyDoes “transcendental empiricism” offer a viable alternative to Kantian and phenomenological approaches?
Politics and ethicsHow can a decentered subject support normative or political agency?
History of philosophyAre Deleuze’s readings of past philosophers fruitful reinterpretations or distortive?

Position in Deleuze’s Oeuvre

Many scholars regard Difference and Repetition as the most comprehensive statement of Deleuze’s metaphysical commitments, providing a framework for interpreting his later collaborations and shorter texts. Others stress discontinuities, arguing that the style and concerns of the Guattari co‑authored works complicate any straightforward reading of Difference and Repetition as definitive. Despite such disagreements, the book is widely treated as indispensable for understanding both Deleuze’s thought and broader twentieth‑century debates about difference, subjectivity, and time.

How to Cite This Entry

Use these citation formats to reference this work entry in your academic work. Click the copy button to copy the citation to your clipboard.

APA Style (7th Edition)

Philopedia. (2025). difference-and-repetition. Philopedia. https://philopedia.com/works/difference-and-repetition/

MLA Style (9th Edition)

"difference-and-repetition." Philopedia, 2025, https://philopedia.com/works/difference-and-repetition/.

Chicago Style (17th Edition)

Philopedia. "difference-and-repetition." Philopedia. Accessed December 11, 2025. https://philopedia.com/works/difference-and-repetition/.

BibTeX
@online{philopedia_difference_and_repetition,
  title = {difference-and-repetition},
  author = {Philopedia},
  year = {2025},
  url = {https://philopedia.com/works/difference-and-repetition/},
  urldate = {December 11, 2025}
}