The religious liberal brain @ToAmused and @Nicole_Barlow1 have removed the key from the door to Iran and replaced it with RED TAPE, but by our red light device, made of psychedelic industry, a spontaneous and SOLID diagonal red stripe over the little empty keyhole signalling NO ACCESS, which removes the red tape they required for peaceful dialogue embarked on by the president Trump, however. Then @Nicole_Barlow flip flops and says, terrorists can only be defeated. THE question is therefore, as to what drives these people to take on war as the political solution, after Palestine, Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, and now Iran have all bowed to peace, and not war, as Saddam Hussein and Afghanistan all voted for peace with America, not war, but now have to contend with civil War, as Lybia, A never ending war, going on, which Trump has ended and THEY, now say he should never have? We cannot talk PEACE, with these people, the world can never, which means we cannot do revolution and get ultimately DONE with it. St. Paul

Yes, meneer @RobertHersov , its is true that the American Dream is for the most part DEAD, by now. You want a stock example? The home improvement market, for one. Hence, the South Africa home improvement market is dead. Could it, and other markets recover beyond their wildest dreams? Yes, they could, but it is no CAPITALIST'S "ideas" and, they would have to pay.

Even a million-dollar range house lounge floor can be ripped up, and dug up, and replaced with a surplus values' floor to beat a mosaic floor. You just need the good designer stuff, as Michelangelo would say. Or what about the duvet? It is not pornography which turns on the senses as of do this, do that!

Your singular essence is an intensive degree of God's power. It doesn't "pass to someone else" like a soul migrating, but it continues to express itself immanently in the infinite play of modes. Deleuze sometimes frames this as your life/power flowing back... The problem I have with this is in the formulation, "your singular essence, life/power flowing back into or composing with the whole." To what extent is this MY singular essence EXPRESSING for instance adequately EXPRESSIVE IDEAS as opposed to inadequate ideas immanently in the infinite play of modes? GROK” In Spinoza (and Deleuze's reading), your singular essence does NOT continue to "express adequately expressive ideas" in the sense of ongoing personal cognition or active joy after the body's decomposition. The "mine-ness" tied to duration, consciousness, memory, and the flux of inadequate ideas largely dissolves with death. What persists is impersonal and eternal, but limited in a specific way. Core Distinction: Adequate vs. Inadequate in Eternity •Inadequate ideas (imagination, passions, confused representations from external encounters) are tied to the body's duration—its finite existence in time, its capacity to be affected by other bodies, and the partial, mutilated knowledge this produces. These depend on the composite body's characteristic relation (the ratio of motion/rest that defines you as this individual). When that relation decomposes (death as an external bad encounter), these cease. There's no personal "afterlife" of memories, fears, desires, or self-awareness in the usual sense. • •Adequate ideas (common notions, reason, and especially intuitive knowledge of the third kind—sub specie aeternitatis) are eternal because they express necessary truths/causal connections as they are in God/Nature/Substance. They don't rely on your body's ongoing affections. The eternal part of the mind (Ethics V, P23 and scholium) is precisely the adequate idea of the essence of your body as it exists necessarily in God—not as a durational, changing thing, but as a singular degree of power/intensity. • Your singular essence is a fixed degree of power (intensive quantity) in Substance. It is eternal and doesn't "change" or "grow" post-death in the way a living mode does through encounters. Deleuze stresses this: essences are like thresholds or intensities that express God's power in a unique way, but they aren't dynamic in duration after the finite mode ends. What "Expresses" After Death? The eternal part is your essence viewed adequately—as part of the infinite intellect of God. It "expresses" immanently in the play of modes, but: •Not as you, with personal continuity or agency. •Not through new inadequate ideas or durational affects. •It contributes to the infinite expression of Nature: your power/essence remains as a singular "haecceity" or intensive difference, eternally real, without loss or gain in the absolute sense. Deleuze frames this (e.g., in Spinoza: Practical Philosophy and lectures) as the essence persisting impersonally. "A life" (impersonal) flows or composes with the whole, but the adequate expression is the clear, distinct idea in God's intellect—not a continuing subjective experience. The more adequate ideas you form in life, the "larger" or more real this eternal part feels now (blessedness, intellectual love of God), and the less death matters. But post-death, there's no further "expressing adequately" in a personal mode. The Problem of "Mine-ness" and Deleuze's NuanceThis is where your unease hits the core tension in Spinozism (and Deleuze's interpretation). Critics note that Deleuze sometimes emphasizes essences as static degrees of power (eternal, unchanging), which can feel conservative or Platonic—detaching ethics from real becoming. Yet Spinoza/Deleuze insist the ethical task is maximizing adequate ideas in duration: increasing your power through joyful encounters, common notions, and intuition while alive. Eternity isn't a reward later; it's accessed intensively in the present. Grok” Death doesn't "take away" your essence's reality—it's already fully expressed eternally. But the personal, conscious expression (the "I" of inadequate adequate mixed in life) ends. What flows back into the infinite play is the adequate kernel, not the full durational self.If this still feels unsatisfying (loss of personal continuity in adequate expression), that's a common reaction—it's why some read Spinoza as offering a kind of impersonal immortality rather than personal survival. Deleuze leans into the joy of this immanence: death changes nothing essential, so live to affirm the maximum power/adequacy now.