[D-G] a close words to Nz and Jussi

NZ pretzelworld at gmail.com
Wed Jun 14 19:05:47 PDT 2006

she is pneumatic and nomadic... she speeks the bastardized english
that was formed at the base of a racketball court, banged and balled
at the edge of europe for centuries. she speaks a little german,
french, latin, greek and spanish but her favorite words in german are
today eisenstein's "grund problem" (the problem of expression of
sensation through art) and also "ubergrief" (that basic motivational
force that brings one out of depression and into dialectic
response)... "das carnikel" (it is also Häschen) which is a special
kind of bunny that will not run away or live freely yet is living
happily (like w.blake babies.)


I dont mean to get all mystical with these numbers (they are not so
important), i was asked to explain a bit. it is best most of all to
understand the general totemistic movements that operate by code, that
is when the totem is taking us up, yes like socrates in fact puts
things into a vertical plane too. up... north.... like northrup frye,
have you read his writting about critical theory? his is a christian
minister and it is very revealing to me when I read it because I like
to substitute the nouns he uses with my own nouns and I am able to
understand him better.
I am personally not so very much fond these kinds of mystic
concideration of numbers, it is silly, something for 40 year old
hasids to occupy their time when they are unable to use electricity or
kiss a fresh cut goyem. but there is a point that I'm trying to make
and I hope that it doesn't make too many of the philosophy professors
grumble... that point is basically the power of logos, personal logos
as in hypomnemata.

when the christian god is taught to be inside of us, it is a christian
logos that is inside of us. the teaching is good (in that it says to
look inside) but it is really totemistic and external, bringing us to
3, away from the 2 which is where the personal logos sits. the
christian is asked to loose this aspect, they even use self
descriptions like mono-theism suggesting a slower movement from 2 to
1, sheesh!

the problem being at 3 is that it is not 2, it nullifies the logos as
such and "rebirths" us like a conversion of anamnesis. the good thing
about being at the lower 2 is that it allows for 3 to exist as a
potential dialectic aim which gives the 2 its power of information.
informing action but keep us at 2 after the praxis takes place. being
at 3 asks us to go to 4, but the poetry of 4 is just some "other" 2 -
you can see now that we are still at 2, but another's 2 and their
personal logos that comes with it. it is a surplus value game like a
capitalist circuit where our own linguistic labor is divided and used
to support another's language. the power comes from the language of
the 2s, ultimately because it allows for the communication of a
potential 3. there is a conventional term used by people like putnam
called "semantic externalism"(see wiki) which makes this same point
but putnam doesn't get into the 1-2-3 mystical shit complex. but that
shit complex isn't important really unless you have already been
anally "rebirthed" (and-i) and feel particularly attached to the logos
which you have come to associate yourself with.
there is a certain amount of dopey self-consciouness required to feel
this way about language and it is hard to maintain a (nor-i) attitude
towards external semantics especially when you have people like rorty
and derrida trying their hardest to deny the conscious connotative
truthiness of personal logos. in fact most of the post-modern project
is couched in the effort to go from 3 to 4, and in most of the writing
that I have encountered in these philosophies completely deny the 2's
personal-logos. even chomsky (whose models of "communicative
distortion" comes from habermas) has a difficult time maintaining a
consistent presence at 2 b/c so much of the language and vocabulary
for actual intelligent discussion exists only in the 3 and to use such
language will deny the 2 anyways.
(this is also why people like singer daniel jonston suffer from wrong

the benifit of staying at 2 does is not a personal benefit, but a
feedback community benefit like a easily readable jewish lifestyle.
two 2s dialog towards the 3 the results can be compared to
one 2 broadcasting at the 3s towards the 4... the need for
broadcasting techniques is very important for the 3s because dialog is
not so possible anymore. but I think it is also possible for the 2s to
be broadcasting too... towards the 2... 1... 0....

the pnematic android druid is
generating an infinite-god from his minimal prime identity: 2
(sequence A005384 in OEIS)
Sophie Germain primes(2,3,5...) have a practical application in the
generation of random numbers. The decimal expansion of reciprocal 1/q
will produce a stream of pseudo random numbers of length q - 1[....]
The result is a stream of length q-1 digits (including leading zeros).
So, for example, using q = 23 generates the random digits

More information about the Deleuze-Guattari mailing list