hwenk at web.de
Fri Jun 29 09:58:24 PDT 2007
Hello Dr, cb.,
As far as I remember the example of Adam eating
the fruit at Spuinoza was,
that God only pointed as
"natural consequences" of the eating of the fruit,
as they are produced by the fruit and its digesting
by Adams (human)
body. Something like to say to a child
"get away from that electric circuit, otherwise you will get a electric
The second part, which played a great role in Spinozas discussion
with theologians is, that Adan ate the fruit,
armed with full functioning human reason, in spite of
that warning and his relation to god - which should have been either one of
trust or obedience
or a mixture of both.
I myself got another interpretation, that
the story of the eating is a mytholgical story about the experience
of mankind from the stoneage to be forced to try foreign food, learning
that some are poisionous, others are medicin in the right dosis, others
are tasting well others giving a lot of energy by eating them.
That is a hard lesson in "Lack" and "being good".
We have to eat.
In my eyes, these experiences, eating foreign food as
an experiement which could be very soon very deadly or at lest very painful
combined with pains coming from within by illnesses without any
explanation - leading to the believe on daemons,
is a deep source of conserativsm and neophobie.
There are so much circumstances you have to manage,
and "new" often means to rearrange a lot of them - with a lot of dangers
because of lack of trust because of lack of relation and information.
The other tencency, the neocortex is growing and by that the easiest way to
manage with it is connecting to new experiences making a
new "desire machine" as habit to learn "new things" is also very plausible
compared to everday expierence.
Both tendencies result often in "New without real changes and consequences
is very pleasant - like
This has driven to despair a lot of people with insights, after being
fashion things are sometimes as
if there has been no discussion on that insights.
A little bit this is also the case with Deleuze and Guattaris "Anti-Oedipe"
Both were fashion in intellectual circles in the seventies, but the real
effects are compared to the
insights, the look at the neurological driven part of desire
the almost free connection to the comnntents of thinking, very very
Also the very fine complex structure thinking without totalisation.
"The task of destroying Oedipus was to big for us" (Foreword Mille
In my eyes, it smore a structual effect like that "fashion - new without
See also the fate of the Marxian economic discours, which was
a kind of intellectual hegemonial for an decade.
And today, looking at the economical discussions??
It is interesting that you make the step from "don't to eat" to "eat" by
some kind of logical combinatorics,
not on the nature of the neurotransmitters spread out ot the circuits
functioning. It seems to follow from some kind of network considerations -
dynamical ingrediants. Seems it play no role if there are some inhibitory or
exhibitory connections or transmitters already -
by nature in the brain and new openend or already functioning.
Also I do not understand the word "chonos"??
HAMAS AND AL FATAH
A civil war among palestines, as it took place between Hamas and Al Fatah,
like "the worst" which could happen in this question.
I don't konw, if I really understand what you are trying to
express with your 1, 2, 3 and the fruit of Spinoza.
But in general, the tendeny to value low what one has actaul and searching
for new because
of being not happy - due more to inner neurology of himself than is known
by the unhappy one in general,
meets my own thinking in that question.
That was also the backgroud of the "iron wood"
- a good functioning neurolgy of the brain and desires (machines of them)
by good habits of thinking and acting,
including social relationships.
It was Nietzsche who valued the opinions of some people very high.
Now, a high valuable opinion - machine - in the head and in the body is
what I have in mind.
The shibboleth is the happiness.
This is done, as "the more the body is able to, the more the mind is able
by the - already practiced in the stone age (Leroi Gourhan "Word and
Hand") - Yoga
and differentianting, sober, complex thinking, like philosphy, mathematics
and science in general.
greetings Harald Wenk
From: deleuze-guattari-bounces at lists.driftline.org
[mailto:deleuze-guattari-bounces at lists.driftline.org]On Behalf Of
Sent: Freitag, 29. Juni 2007 17:33
To: deleuze-guattari at lists.driftline.org
Subject: Re: [D-G] its
I am still working on my speed knowlege project, audio content is
ready but the interface is not yet. By the end of this season it
should be there.
"Choosing the worst" is not hard to do especially if the worst is
provided as a negative choice. This is partially about pov, like god's
pov as in Spinoza's example: "Dont... Eat... theFruit...", 1... 2...
3.... This is not about chonos, but about sets. Once a set of 3
creates a machine, the factors also create oedipal sub-machines of
peels 1&2, or 1&3, or 2&3 etc since these neurons are so close and
create their own hydraulic crosstalk. The set 2&3 are interesting
since they create a machine which says "Eat.. theFruit...", and from
god's pov this is precisely the inverse of his decree. But from adam's
pov this inverse is only virtual because set 1 (Don't) is really an
additive construct of "lack". This is the lesson of forbidden
knowledge and how it is that "evil" is tied to it rather then "good".
Good is part of chonos that sits on a plane, but evil itself is a
plane w/o chonos yet.
Beyond all that there is more to consider, namely the human "need" to
experience new things, hearing new music, finding new categories,
meeting new lovers,etc. It does not stop until you are dead. Often the
negative posture one assumes regarding what is "old" comes from this
overriding momentum to find the new, and stay alive. It makes the old
become a threat to life itself, for no good reason really, but of
course the outer cortex can invent any number of "reasonable" reasons
why this new thing is better then the old, b/c the higher functions
always lag behind and must make up excuses, even if there really is no
good reason to. Part of this has to do with the social function of
"reason" and rhetoric for communicating/controlling social bodies.
When youre alone the excuses are rather pointless and dissolve away
because there is no longer any reason.
I am no real authority on human brains, my work is exclusively on
snails, mice, & poodles (as in tony blair). I am very interested in
the separation of bodies that some poodles are trying to make happen
in palestine. It is very dramatic and horrible. I can see spinoza's
"combining bodies" model used for this in a negative way, like with
these negative virtual states that only an inbred poodle-god can
List address: deleuze-guattari at driftline.org
More information about the Deleuze-Guattari