N a double play of substances and forms of extensities and ualities one at the level of molecular populations and another at the level of molar aggregates Delanda 2002 206DG ualities one at the level of molecular populations and another at the level of molar aggregates Delanda 2002 206DG The first articulation chooses or deducts from unstable particle flows metastable molecular or uasi molecular units substances upon which it imposes a statistical order of connections and successions forms The second articulation establishes functional compact stable structures forms and constructs the molar compounds in which structures are simultaneously actualised substances Deleuze and Guattari 1980 40 1Content is formed matter consisting of 1 substance as chosen matter and 2 form as matter chosen in
A Certain Order A Substance certain order a substance and b form of content of matter Expression is about how structures function as 1 organization of their own specific form and 2 substances as they form compounds 1 form as organization and 2 content of expression of compounds Deleuze and Guattari 1980 43There is an alloplastic grouping of strata rather than autoplastic that only makes changes within which make modifications in the external world through a new distribution of content and expression Alloplastic layers work with linguistic rather than genetic forms of expression including symbols that are comprehensible transmittable and modifiable from outside This is the layer of a new distribution of properties the human technology and language tool and symbol gesture and speech Deleuze and Guattari 1980 60The organization of content and expression consists of both technological content and semiotic symbolic expression Content and expression both contain existing aspects of handtools and facelanguage as well as preexistant formations Content is not simply hand and tools but a technical social process preexisting them as states of force or formations of power Deleuze and Guattari 1980 63 Language Expression is not merely a face or a language but a semiotic collective process that preexsts them and constitutes regimes of signs Deleuze and Guattari 1980 63 Therefore a formation of power is much greater than a tool and a regime of signs is much than a language they are determining and selective agents as much in the constitution of languages and tools as in their usages or diffusionsUnfortunately Delanda could not stay philosophically consistent with his own observation The Deluzian ontology is a universe of becoming without being where individual beings do exist but only as the outcome of becomings Delanda 2002 99 Double articulation is therefore not merely an integrationindividuation of the virtual and the actual but also of substance and form expression and content Usually I don t pen reviews but since this book which I consider to be important in the field of Deleuze studies hasn t received any actual criticism but has had been discussed as an important artefact in the uestion of whether or not Deleuze and Guattari ought to be exonerated of the most heinous crime of employing a vocabulary that draws on a wide range of sources among them how dare they also STEM I will say a few words about the book itself in order to facilitate lecture of this book for those who et wishhave to read itThe book consists out of four parts save the short introduction four chapters and an appendix The four parts are as follows1 An explanation of Deuleuze s usage of mathematics chapter 1 2 Deleuze s ontology chapter 2 to 3 3 Deleuze s epistemology chapter 4 4 A general clarification of Deleuzian thought and three of his major works authored with Guattari Capitalism and Schizophrenia I and II and What is PhilosophyAs many people know these days DeLanda considers Deleuze to be a realist DeLanda takes a paramount interest in ontology and relegates epistemology to just one chapter which reflects DeLanda s Deleuzian outlook Other than engaging in this in my mind facile discussion of realism vs idealism DeLanda discusses the concept of multiplicity at length This is done primarily in the first chapter where DeLanda shows how decidedly mathematical Deleuze s conception of subjectivity is This is both worthwile and demanding I d highly recommend it A multiplicity the author says is a nested set of vector fields related to each other by symmetry breaking bifurcations together with the distributions of attractors which define each of its embedded levels DeLanda 2013 23pIn the second chapter DeLanda continues his elaboration of Deleuze s ontology Here DeLanda fleshes out his infamous flat ontology which is made exclusively of uniue singular individuals differeing in spatio temporal scale but not in ontological status DeLanda 2013 51 Such an ontology leaves no room for reified totalities eg society DeLanda 2013 147 Rather an ontology of the actual virtual and intensity constitute the explicity non essentialist nature of beingIn the appendix DeLanda wraps things up and produces an ontological list which names ten decisive aspects of Deleuze s ontologyWould I recommend this book Yes I would if one is interested in Deleuze and wishes to go beyond the usual prattling about how diversity is really important and how difference is everything and how one ought to be rhizomatic etc I am still unsure about the idea of a flat ontology and its implications Latour does flat ontology rather well and so does Garcia but looking at Harman I am not entirely convinced this is the right way Markus Gabriel a new Elend der Philosophie povery of philosophy is a good example of what might happen if one pursues this line an insensuate resurrection of old categories such as sensemeaning Sinn in the original German and a very simple ontology which allows everything to be that somehow is evoked linguistically performatively medially etc. Ience explaining how Deleuze's system of thought is fundamental to a proper understanding of contemporary science from self organisation to non linear dynamics to complexity theor. Nsations and in his cogito for which he must find the necessary conditions for particular sensations or concepts which is the basis for his third synthesis of time where the I dissolves in the virtual failure of the third synthesisDelanda identifies his fundamental divide with Deleuze The term intensive which in my presentation was used in relation to individuation processes not the virtual continuum p 199 This philosophical divide for Delanda reuires a reconstruction in order to eliminate the confusion between the intensive virtual and his falsely individuated actual which thereby flattens his ontology in comparison to Deleuze Therefore all references to the individual are flattened by this exclusion of the virtual of intensities and lacks a robust philosophy of multiplicityAs we have seen above
DELANDA DOES WELL TO IDENTIFY THE does well to identify the of the anthropocentric concept of time However he goes on to say Unlike my reconstruction where the term individual refers to the final product organisms species etc in Deleuze s work it refers to the larval subject themselves It often has the meaning of a Leibnizian monad Delanda 2002 202 Delanda refers to Deleuze s robust larval selves as a Leibnizian monad which Delanda calls an intensive individual in contrast to the Delanda cogito of the individual Delanda defines the individual as without ualification to refer to the extended and ualified actual entities which form my flat ontology of individuals Delanda 2002 203 Then under a section entitled Extensities and ualities Delanda says These are the two characteristics which define the realm of the actual the fully constituted world of extended and ualified individuals Contradicting this focus on the actual he says In ATP these two characteristics are referred to as substances and forms respectively Given that no actual substance is every purely extensional these two characteristics are not really distinct They are the abstract components of every articulation Delanda 2002 203 Deleuze 1980 502 Conseuently Delanda opens the final chapter as stated above with his strong claim of a flat ontology of individuals where he has no room for reified totalities but only for concrete social individuals with the same ontological status as human individuals simply operating at larger spatio temporal scales products of concrete historical processes and operating as parts to a whole sic Where there are cases of homogeneity to suggest the existence of a single culture or society one must not postulate such totalities but must be given a concrete historical explanation Delanda 2002 147Delanda thus becomes reductionistic of not only individuals and society but also of science by cutting off the second articulation of expression of the virtual and of philosophy itself In his attempt to avoid false totalization he states that science is a scientific field like any other individual which will depend on contingent historical facts such as its degree of internal homogeneity and its degree of isolation from other fields Delanda 2002 148 Delanda thus additionally reifies history while conflating under the category of individual the alloplastic of human individuals social individuals and culture It was precisely Deleuze s project to provide a comprehensive integration of the physical organic and social in ATP and to bridge this gap of Delanda s flatened ontology Delanda goes on to state The ontology I have developed in this book is fully historical Each of the individuals which populates this other world is a product of a definite historical process of individuation and to the extent that an individual s identity is defined by its emergent properties and that these properties depend on the continuing causal interactions among an individual s parts each individual is itself a historical causal process Delanda 2002 183 4 Delanda gets very Cartesian in his use of the historical bifurcating the actual from the virtualMoreover in the introduction Delanda 2002 xv Delanda tells us that in Chapter Four he is actually trying to eliminate the erroneous assumption of a closed world and devalue the very idea of truth But then he again confabulates his problematic epistemology by capturing an objective distribution of the important and the unimportant or mathematically of the singular and the ordinary an objectivity of physical knowledge an objectivity now captured by distributions of the singular and the ordinary Delanda 2002 xv Delanda grants that there is much to Deleuze s books than just an ontology of processes and an epistemology of problem and that there is a certain violence which Deleuze s texts must endure in order to be reconstructed for an audience they were not intended for A different kind of violence is involved in wrenching his ideas from his collaboration with Felix Guattari stating that he intentionally goes back to Deleuze s early texts such as DR for his ontology Delanda also completely eliminates Deleuze s use of content and expression which combined with form and substance to define the full ontology of double articulation in ATP rather than Delanda s articulation which he also flatly carries into A Thousand Years of Nonlinear History Deleuzes s ontology in ATP is that each movement of a strata of reality consists of the first articulation movement of both physical conjunction and symbolization coding of both substance and form both parts segmentarity and multiplicity the first uantal intensity and merely ordered the second rigid atomic and organised Unfortunately Delanda comes nowhere near this capacity for the philosophy although he does for science as multiplicity what he refused to do for philosophyDelanda says Every stratum needs a double articulatio. Reted Here Manuel DeLanda makes sense of Deleuze for both analytic and continental thought for both science and philosophy DeLanda focuses on the intersection of philosophy and sc.
review Õ eBook, ePUB or Kindle PDF ☆ Manuel DeLandaShines and fades in proportion
to De Landa s ability to make comprehensible the many scientific and mathematical theories thatDe Landa s ability to make comprehensible the many scientific and mathematical theories that purports to be Deleuze s influences The first chapter of this book is mandatory reading for understanding the mathematical concepts Deleuze uses It s good and smart and whatever but I still think a realist reading of deleuze is the most buzzkilly thing ever More thesis avoidance this is actually a useful book about vectors and why math is interesting just to think aboutSubtitle Songs of Mathematical Innocence and Inexperience I absolutely loved this book which helped me understand the uite difficult philosophy of Deleuze Guattari Delanda draws from a variety of scientific and mathematical fields in the process of explaining their work Rather than
GOING BACK TO WORSHIP AT THE TEMPLE OF DELEUZE to worship at the temple of Deleuze polymathic interdisciplinary approach pushes well beyond the comfort zones of orthodox Deleuzianism although I recognize the oxymoron of orthodox and Deleuze I am a simple man and I prefer my philosophy straightforward and Anglo Saxon With its bewildering array of terminology this exhibits the worst excesses of Continental philosophy intended to obfuscate than to elucidate The basic programme of the book to provide a replacement for essentialism seems to be solving a problem which isn t and the proposed solution is neither clear nor convincingI found de Landa s habit of cherry picking examples from other disciplines to be particularly annoying disingenuous at best misleading at worst I wonder if an embryologist or a physicist or a mathematician would feel that de Landa had accurately represented the work in their discipline or whether he is just throwing out examples in an attempt to add some credibility to his specious argumentationIf metaphysics is nonsense then this is as nonsensical as it gets 141217 this is a great reading of deleuze uniue literate scientific all in explication of concepts and specific terminology intensive science is reading of new ways to generate lines of flight to create concepts on the plane of immanence if ou understand that maybe the book says nothing new but such is the potential of using the virtual de landa here suggests deleuze is offering new metaphysics specifically for modern science including disciplines not previously approached by continental philosophyd deleuze tracks the development of na Delanda explicates Deleuze s philosophy of multiplicity well in the first three chapters as it relates to science except for Chapter 2 where he says These would be in a nutshell the three ontological dimensions which constitute the Deluzian world the virtual the intensive and the actual p 55 As no Deleuzian would ever make such a claim we can clearly see here Delanda s imposed metaphysics And he clearly rejects Deleuze s philosophy as applied to the socio linguistic domain in Chapter 4Deleuze Lite Chapter 4 Virtuality and the Laws of PhysicsDelanda reconstructs Deleuze for a scientific audience but then bifurcates virtual science from virtual philosophy according to his proclaimed flat ontology of individuals well defined as non hierachical by Delanda but which ontologically flattens a fully Deleuzian intensive philosophy of multiplicity which includes socio linguistic aspects of reality After taking us through three masterful chapters of Deleuzian philosophy applied to science Delanda declares at the beginning of Chapter Four There is no room for reified totalities no room for entities like society or culture Delanda 2002 147 In so doing he decapitates Deleuze and Guattari s DG sociological critiue of the historically reified totalities of both Freudian psychoanalysis and Marxian economics He also denies the alloplastic richness of Anti Oedipus AO and A Thousand Plateaus ATPHow does Delanda s cogent expositon of Deleuze s multiplicity in the scientific world so completely reject the multiplicity of Deluze s philosophical project We have a clue where Delanda states 1 Unlike spatio temporal dynamisms the terms passive self and larval subject received very little elaboration in my reconstruction mostly because I wanted to keep the description of Deleuze s ontology free from anthropocentrism as possible p 202 Delanda here is reacting to the potentially anthropocentic philosophy in Difference and Repetition DR and completely rejects the comprehensive philosophy of multiplicity of ATPDelanda is understandably concerned about the anthropological emphasis in Deleuze s three syntheses of time in Difference and Repetition which also has a parallel in the three syntheses of space The Deleuzian cogito reuires that the I that thinks be placed in time as the passive I Deleuze rejects the Kantian cogito which grounds determinability not only in time but in thinking which is secondary and illusory Time signifies a fault or a fracture in the I and a passivity in the self and the correlation between the passive self and the fractured I constitutes the discovery of the transcendental or the element of the true Copernican revolution Deleuze 1980 86 Deleluze exposes the I that is fractured based on the passive receptivity of the self rather than covering it up as does Kant with the synthetic apriori activity of the transcendental unity of apperception TUA Deleuze now searches for the condition of this wider existence what makes the undetermined ground the fractured I the passive self of a well determined given time determinable There is a dialectic interplay between the condition of a passive self with sensations and concepts and the given objects in time which Kant tries to cut off by appeal to the pure apriori given which are thereby separated from concepts and sensations Deleuze includes se. At the start of the 21st Century Gilles Deleuze is now regarded as the most radical and influential of contemporary philosophers Yet his work is widely misunderstood and misinterp.