[D-G] Universe of Reference in Sciences

Johnatan Petterson internet.petterson at gmail.com
Thu Jul 23 07:15:14 PDT 2020

in Cartographies Schizoanalytic (1989 ), Félix Guattari spoke about those
Universes of Reference
which are like the Clef de voûte  (cornerstone) to the Quadchromatic Matrix
(Universe of Reference (virtual/possible), Territories Existencial
(virtual/real), , Phylum Machinic (actual/possible), and Flows
(actual/real) )

how does this concept relate to the Plane of Reference as discussed
together with Deleuze in What is Philosophy? (1991)

it seems the Plane of Reference could not be grasped by a subjectivity by
excluding its qualification as sensibiliae by Partial Observers.

but it seems there is only 1 plane of Reference for Science, stitched from
many fragmentary experiences of Scientists. (the Plane of Reference implies
Paradigmatic massive changes, whereas the Plane of Philosophy is folded and
multiple and idiosyncratic to each Conceptual Persona). (a humbler
Philosopher can adopt the Conceptual Personna of another more glorious, or
get absorbed in her Idiosyncrasy)
Yet across many Paradigms, the way of connection via coordinates and
variables is weaving a unique Plane of Reference, because scientists have
the need to insert a new theory/praxis into the mass of other theories to
stitch them with , so that there is some consistency, not only a spectral
or vague endo or exo Reference. Referentiality is just about this connexion
of data/variables.

Guattari in Schizoanalytic Cartography compares the movements or art
schools with the paradigms of Science and he talks about "Constellations of
Universe of Reference" to that effect.

A Universe of Reference is in Guattari's idea working as the essence of
mode for Deleuze in the latter description of it in Spinoza Problem of
Expression 1968. Indeed from possibility it passes into existence (becomes
effectuated and  real) The synapse in disposition is the effector of this
realization.  (in Logic of Sense, 1969, Deleuze views counter-effectuation
as a valid Ethic in harsh situations )

So, I wonder what is the Universe of Reference of the Plane of Reference of
Science in a specific Paradigm?

The Scientist alone should be able to tell.  The Partial Observer is more
concerned with aesthetically and existentially grasping: it belongs to the
Territory factor, itself in "prise" , or plugged to the Phylum ( social
machines  ) and the Flows of data (particles) of Science.

But i think, contrarily to what Deleuze and Guattari say in WIP? the
cornerstone and the unification of Science is as much as important, and at
stakes, for the practitioner of Science. The relation to the possible
Universe of Reference of Science is a changing one, and it can enter in
relation with Universes of Reference previously unrelated to Science.

For instance, the prevalence to Chaos digging, preferring "knowing one bit
of Chaos" (WIP?) over "marble science"
constitutes perhaps for Deleuze and Guattari a potent political attempt to
tweak the synaptic disposition of previous ways in their times of "doing

Even when in WIP? Deleuze and Guattari espouse a strong critique of
Badiou's work by characterizing it as a restoration of Philosophy as a
superior discipline on top of Love, Politics, Science and Aesthetics, it
seems by securing "variation" as leitmotiv  for Philosophy and variable for
Science, ( and varieties for Arts ) the effect of Gilles Deleuze and Félix
Guattari on their contemporaries and readers would have been a
revalorisation of their level of Philosophy over previous works of other
disciplines like Science and Arts (whose artists they professed to admire
lost most of their attractiveness due to the DG readers empathy with DG
conceptual consistency)

Clifford Duffy's (and other's)  insiststance to Guattari being as important
as Deleuze is symptomatic of writers and thinkers wanting to preserve
themselves and their audience from such an empathy , because Guattari's
work is more loose than Deleuze's tight and coordinated writing, and it
"blocks less" even if in the case of Duffy there is still a strong
attachment to Deleuze " as a matrix " for performance of effects of
signifiers in the Orphic writings synopsism.

Best regards,




More information about the Deleuze-Guattari mailing list