Talk:Minority (philosophy)

Philosophy: Social and political Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Social and political philosophy

The Minor is not Minorities

I've added a paragraph to offset the highly mislead gross inaccuracies of the first paragraph which seems to suggest that Deleuze and Guattari are somehow advocating a form of identity politics. Clearly this cannot be the case given their commitment to difference, multiplicities, and their critique of the molar and Oedipal identity (minority identities being yet another example of such Oedipalization). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.231.40.130 (talk) 16:46, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

patriarchy

The use of the word "patriarchy" in this context is at odds with Deleuze and Guattari's concept of minority, although the example used fits perfectly with the concept. Patriarchy is often used as a concept to produce the type of standard that becomes major under Deleuze and Guattari's definition, as noted in Claire Colebrook's introduction to Deleuze.

94.196.199.232 (talk) 10:40, 23 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Needs definition

Currently, the article is pretty much incomprehensible because it obliquely describes what the concept isn't, but doesn't actually define what "minority" means as Deleuze and Guattari use it. The opening sentence should be rewritten to state the meaning precisely. 73.223.72.200 (talk) 16:56, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]