[D-G] Concepts seen as functions (malgosia askanas)

[jcu]

Hello,

If concepts are specific to philosophy (as percepts are to art,  
functions to science),
and the making of them define the practice of philosophy, they are  
singularities (not
universalities) that always attach themselves to other concepts on a  
plane of immanence.
Somehow, concepts can jump from one plane (of immanence) to another,  
attach themselves
to other concepts and by doing so, become-Other.

Plane of Immanence means existing within (not without, not  
Transcendent), but since Deleuze
denies Transcendence (a divine or metaphysical outside),  he claims  
the plane of immanence
to be pure, unqualified, smooth space without division (no inside- 
outside), and hence his quote,

" It is only when immanence is no longer immanence to anything other  
than itself that we can
speak of a plane of immanence."

Kind of like my neighbours who smoke around the clock and spill their  
class A carcinogens
into my breathing space such that even when I step outside, I am  
breathing their air. NO inside-outside.
The smooth space of cancer, formless, self-organizing, no longer self- 
contained field of air but the
collapsed or flattened plane of your air = my air, or to rephrase, a  
plane (cloud?) of carcinogenic consistency
that has no universal or transcendent notion of "clean". Instead, only  
movements of air and relations of
movements (they smoke at 5 am, 7am, 9 am) and speeds or slownesses  
(the wind delivers it faster or slower
to my lungs and through cracks in electrical outlets, air vents, door  
frames). Leaving me with only
haecceities, affects, collective assemblages of their toxic air  
becoming my air; this plane knows
only longitudes and latitudes (the geography of second hand smoke),  
speeds and haeceities,
this plane of consistency (knowing they will addictively smoke again  
to fill my space).

However, much as I try not to think about it, this plane is a   
wordless cloud without
cessation. NO letter 'a' t/here.

joan




On 29-Jul-11, at 8:04 PM, Super Dragon wrote:

> hello, as i undersyand it language is not prior to the concept of  
> the concept, language is merely the topslice of the unconcious and  
> the non symbolizable is simultaneous with this in wip dg talk about  
> concepts as laying out a plane over the nonconceptual in thinking in  
> a way whic passes through its own components. i struggled with this  
> for a long time until i was able to think of it a bit like swimming  
> or treading water in so far as the actualisation is about movements  
> which sustain a space of thought that suspends the thought of  
> drowning (temporarily)
>
> hope that makes sense
> ruth
> nb maybe the letter a is better thought of as (a) indefinite article?
> Sloughing one's skin.-The snake that cannot slough its skin  
> perishes. Likewise spirits which are prevented from changing their  
> opinions; they cease to be spirits (Nietzsche: Daybreak:V:573)
>
>
> --- CainJ at sacredheart.edu wrote:
>
> From: "Cain, Prof. Jeffrey P." <CainJ at sacredheart.edu>
> To: "deleuze-guattari at lists.driftline.org" <deleuze-guattari at lists.driftline.org 
> >
> Subject: Re: [D-G] Concepts seen as functions (malgosia askanas)
> Date: Tue, 3 May 2011 01:40:26 +0000
>
> Depending on how one defines "virtual," one could say it is a  
> question of whether language is prior to Deleuze and Deleuze and  
> Guattari's concept of the concept. A concept, as I understand it, is  
> expressed in language that has already been thought, but this would  
> still leave a whole virtual field of as-yet unthought concepts in as- 
> yet unthought language. Think, for example, of the notion of  
> linguistic competence. Clearly language is prior to understanding in  
> some sense. Could unthought language be said to be part of any  
> concept whatever?
>
> Kindest Regards,
>
> Jeff Cain
>
>
> From: deleuze-guattari-bounces at lists.driftline.org [deleuze-guattari-bounces at lists.driftline.org 
> ] on behalf of malgosia askanas [ma at panix.com]
> Sent: Monday, May 02, 2011 8:44 PM
> To: deleuze-guattari at lists.driftline.org
> Subject: Re: [D-G] Concepts seen as functions (malgosia askanas)
>
> But Rutger, if the virtual form of the letter A is, as you are
> proposing, its encoding as a series of 0s and 1s, and its
> actualization is its specific appearance on the computer screen, this
> does not happen without: (1) a standard of digital encoding of the
> Latin alphabet having been proposed, discussed, adopted and anounced;
> (2) somebody writing and compiling the particular program running in
> your computer; (3) electricity being supplied to your computer; (4)
> your computer executing code; (5) your screen holding together as a
> material object; etc., etc., etc. - all of which are energetic
> processes!   No?
>
> -m
>
>
>
> At 1:40 AM +0200 5/3/11, Rutger H. Cornets de Groot wrote:
>> Hi, Malgosia,
>>
>> It's been a long time!
>> I cannot possibly answer these questions but I have some thoughts on
>> your first example of the virtual and actual. My idea is that there
>> is no need for energy functions or for a creative effort in order to
>> go from one to the other. The way I like to think about the virtual
>> and actual is that they are two states of one and the same. The
>> example that comes to mind is words, or even letters. We all know an
>> A when we see one, but when we do, it is always actual, which means
>> that it is attached to a medium. This may be a piece of paper, a
>> stone tablet, the bark of a tree or sand on the beach but it's
>> always material. The closest we get to its virtual form is when it
>> appears on a computer screen (or phone display, etc). We see it
>> compiled from digital code (one's and zero's), and its appearance
>> will depend on certain settings. Whichever way you look at it,
>> however, I don't think there is energy or creative effort involved
>> in these appearances or actualizations. I would simply say that the
>> virtual state of the letter A is indeed a concept, and not a
>> function.
>> What do you think?
>>
>> Kindly,
>> Rutger
>>
>> Rutger H. Cornets de Groot
>> Joan Maetsuyckerstraat 80A
>> 2593 ZM Den Haag
>> 070-3356483
>> 06-21980350
>> RHCdG <http://www.cornetsdegroot.com/rhcdg>
> _______________________________________________
> List address: deleuze-guattari at driftline.org
> Info: http://lists.driftline.org/listinfo.cgi/deleuze-guattari-driftline.org
> Archives: www.driftline.org
> _______________________________________________
> List address: deleuze-guattari at driftline.org
> Info: http://lists.driftline.org/listinfo.cgi/deleuze-guattari-driftline.org
> Archives: www.driftline.org
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> List address: deleuze-guattari at driftline.org
> Info: http://lists.driftline.org/listinfo.cgi/deleuze-guattari-driftline.org
> Archives: www.driftline.org