Alexis Karpouzos's Blog: Consciousness - Posts Tagged "physics"

The “deamon” of Socrates is the voice of God that works inside us, it is an echo of the voice that governs the Universe and defines the operation of everything in the world. This way, Socrates unites in a mutual substance the man, the Universe and the God! Socrates cogitates the sky, detects the stars, envisions the entire world and within him there is the profound conviction that through the “cosmic creation” and the “human fate”, a superior Intellect, which is an imprint of our own Intellect, dominates.

Democritus and Lefkipos supported that the atoms are the last molecules of matter which are not susceptible to incisions (they cannot be divided) or fluctuations, are unborn, indestructible, unchangeable and indivisible, complete and perfect, compact, united and simple, while they are numerically infinite, vastly varied in shape and move continuously in space. Namely, using contemporary terminology, Lefkipos and Democritus introduced an energy “conservation principle” of the atom.

Plato believed that every phenomenon of the world is deceptive and everything perceived by the human senses is an illusion. Through Virtue, Plato discovers the immaterial world, which he calls an Idea, and he becomes the founder of Ideocracy. The interpretation of the matter of the visible world is a fraud, for Plato. The soul has a divine origin, it is related to the Ideas, but it is the only thing in the world that is similar to the Ideas. By knowing, the soul of the divine becomes divine itself and equal to God Himself. Dialectics is the queen of the sciences and the only path to true knowledge.

The eastern and Asian philosophies and religions were led through introspection, meditation, intuition, insight and mystical experience to the understanding of the deep structure of the natural world. We could say that they do not constitute philosophies, with the west notion of the term, since they are not expressed by the rational intellect, the logical argument and the declarative language of science, but by parables, allegories, images and poetic language.

The eastern philosophy points a path to the revelation of truth, namely the living experience that humans, plants, animals, the planet, the stars, everybody and everything is One. Everything is made of the same “universal matter”. The separations are metaphysical abstractions and mental constructions. The difference between the western and the eastern and Asian thought is the way that we will reach the ultimate knowledge, the knowledge of wholeness. There is no methodology on the western sense, a system of predefined rules that aim on a purpose. There is the path of the personal search. That is why we support that the “knowledge” is not mental, namely impersonal, but it is experiential, i.e., personal. The “knowledge” is ineffable and inexpressible, for it is not expressed in words, but shown with attitude, manner and style.

When the dimension of time is added to the dimensions of space and the 4-dimensional universal space-time continuum is shaped, two spirits which are located in different spots of space-time will be able to be one, or structural elements of One Universal Spirit, which would compose an inseparable and ineffable being

Humanity is unaware of its great strength, and it is unaware of its great perils. It is these two things that have brought a New Message into the world for the protection and the advancement of humanity. World seeks to protect human civilization and to give it new life, a new purpose and a new direction, to warn you of the great adversities you face now that are greater than anything your ancestors ever had to deal with. Therefore, so much depends on human response — human responsibility, the ability to respond. So much depends upon your awareness and decisions, and your ability to recognize you are living in a time of evolution, in a time of transition into a more difficult and more hazardous world. So much depends upon human intelligence, the intelligence of individuals who can respond to a New Evolution and can share its wisdom and its guidance with others. So much depends upon the power and the presence of Knowledge within each individual, a power and a presence that is so unknown and that it is not heeded by most. You have to love humanity and have great faith in humanity to believe that humanity will make the right decisions and follow the path that will provide a new way forward. You have to love humanity and have faith in the spirit of humanity and in the promise and the talents of humanity despite its tragic and prolonged mistakes.

Do not think another race in the universe will come to save you, for those that claim to do so are only here to take advantage of your weakness and your naiveté. Do not think that if human civilization fails, something better or greater can be established as a consequence. Do not underestimate the power of the time in which you live and the great adversities that you now face that still remain unknown to so many.

Do not lose faith in the power and presence of Knowledge within you and within others to recognize and to respond to this and to see the great opportunity to forge a new union in the human family — a union built by necessity, a union built in the fire of necessity, a union built by the recognition that together you can succeed, where in the past you have failed. The warning is upon you, but the blessing is upon you as well. For life loves humanity and does not want to see you fail or lose your freedom as you emerge into a Greater Community of life in the universe.

You must have this love and this faith and this commitment to humanity as well. If you do, you will begin to experience the power and the grace of Knowledge within yourself. You will see that you too have come into the world at this time specifically to make a unique contribution to certain people in certain circumstances. And though you may not yet realize who these people are or what these circumstances are, you will feel the power and presence of Knowledge moving you, freeing you, reshaping your life, recasting your commitments, moving you in a new direction.

the future of humanity will be a time of transitionMay this blessing be yours to experience, for it is a blessing truly. May these times arouse a newer, deeper commitment and a deeper courage. May you see that your future is before you to be decided at this time of great transition. May you recognize that you as an individual must make these decisions and not simply rely upon others to make them for you. May you recognize that the power and the grace of Knowledge live within you, beneath the surface of your mind. Within your heart, you know things the mind cannot understand, and that your true identity exists beyond the realm and the reach of the intellect, in the power and the presence of Knowledge. May you hear these words with your heart with an open mind to see the great love that they demonstrate and the great respect and trust that they offer to you, who do not yet have your own self-respect and trust. May New Evolution illuminate your life and give you strength and courage to navigate the difficult times ahead, and to speak as one voice in this world, and to forge the foundation for a greater future for the human family.

The Greek philosopher and revolutionary Kostas Axelos tried in his vast philosophical production to distance himself from orthodox and Stalinist Marxism, seeing Marx as the thinker of technology and providing a metaphysical interpretation of the Trier revolutionary on the basis of the scant indications offered by Heidegger in some of his works. Over time, having put aside his youthful revolutionary fury, he arrived at a post-metaphysical thought, which set itself the objective of thinking about the becoming of being, renouncing, moreover, any attempt to provide men with points of reference of an ethical nature.

Kostas Axelos' reflection, from the beginning, stood out - as well as for its radicality - for the ambitious objective it set itself: the overcoming of Marxism and Heideggerian post-metaphysics in view of a thought to come, capable of healing the bleeding wound of nihilism and joyfully facing the challenges of planetary technology. Already in the years in which he was editor-in-chief of the magazine Arguments, founded in 1956 by Edgar Morin, the Greek philosopher and revolutionary examined the existing relationship between Marx and Heidegger, who connect, from his point of view, on the theoretical ground of concept of estrangement, understood as an essential negative of the history of metaphysics: as economic and social alienation in Marx, as constitutive uprootedness of the subject in Heidegger. But if the first explains the technical essence of modern man, the second recognizes in technology the status of a historically determined form of truth. It is therefore necessary to deduce the emancipatory perspective from Marx, from Heidegger the temporal relativity of this perspective, and the opening onto a broader project of liberation. It is on this basis that it is possible for us to grasp, in the problematic conjunction of Marxism and Heideggerism, the traces of a future thought: «Through Marx and Heidegger, and through them we can at the same time go beyond them. This reflection also introduces an anticipatory thought" (1). The critical project of Marxism allows us to take Heidegger as the one who, questioning the history of philosophy, indicated the urgency of a new way of thinking, of a liberation of thought from the representative status of classical metaphysics, and from the will to technical power of the subject. And, vice versa, the Heideggerian approach to the problem of metaphysics allows us to see in Marx the overcoming of philosophy in technology.
The starting point of the Axelosian interpretation of Marx is, therefore, represented by the Letter on "Humanism", in which Heidegger underlines the need to reach a productive dialogue with Marxism, a dialogue which neither Sartre nor Husserl have reached, since who have not recognized «the essentiality of the historical dimension in being» (2). Marx, for Heidegger, in experiencing alienation and considering the entity in its totality as work material, managed to penetrate an essential dimension of history, superior to any type of historiography. The true essence of materialism, consequently, does not lie in the affirmation that everything is matter, but rather in conceiving reality as that which man continually transforms, thus imprinting his own mark on all beings, reduced to mere background: «The essence of materialism is hidden», observes Heidegger, «in the essence of technology, about which much is written, but little is thought. In its essence, technique is a destiny, within the history of being, of the truth of being that rests in oblivion. In fact, it dates back to the techne of the Greeks not only in name, but comes in an essential historical sense from the techne understood as a way of alethèuein, that is, of making being manifest" (3). But, while techne, for the Greeks, is co-essential to nature, in the sense that natural arising and poietic producing, cosmic happening and active operating, are determined by the same thing which remains, ultimately, enigmatic, in the modern era first, and even more so in the planetary one, it opposes nature, trying to dominate it. In other words: modern thought, according to Heidegger, which, on this point, greatly influences Axelos, carries forward the work of dissolving the unity of the totality of physis, already called into question by Christianity, placing the ego of the subject as res cogitans and opposing it to the objective world of the res extensa, understood as the set of things that are in front of the man who takes possession of them and shapes them. Fundamental, then, is Descartes' thought, for which the subject, the res cogitans, must, through representation, dominate the res extensa, in order to use it rationally. Man becomes the "measure" of the entity, in the sense that he gives the entity the measure, determining what can be considered as an entity. From this it is clear that the notion of objectivity, very important in modern philosophy, always refers to that of the subject: objective reality is that which appears as such to the subject, which is why what constitutes it is the certainty that the representing subject has of it.

From that moment on, being has the fundamental and exclusive property of presence, the essence of truth is given by the certainty of representing, the entity is increasingly subjugated by man who methodically exploits it. Descartes therefore takes the first decisive step in that process which will slowly lead to the philosophical becoming of the world as the mundane becoming of philosophy: physics begins to transform into technique, and man, the human subject, who aims at control totality of the entity through the ratio, is itself posited as an object. According to this reconstruction of Western philosophy, Kantian philosophy, which fits into the path traced by Descartes, places the transcendental ego by trying to found it: «this thinking and acting ego», as Axelos observes, taking up Heideggerian arguments, «constitutes things as objects of experience, that is, as objects. The transcendental of objectivity includes transcendental subjectivity and is both founded by it. Transcendental subject and transcendental object are referred to each other and are rooted in the same" (4). The criticism of Kantian pure reason, far from being understood as a criticism of Cartesian reason, is seen as its strengthening, as a further enthronement of the subject, increasingly aimed at the conquest of beings in its entirety, at total domination and scientific about reality.
The fulfillment of metaphysics begins with the Hegelian metaphysics of absolute knowledge understood as the will of the spirit. Hegel, in fact, reviving the entire Western philosophical tradition in his thought, understands philosophy as the "awareness" of universal becoming that leads to the Absolute Spirit; Spirit which, alienated in nature, returns to itself and recognizes itself as what it actually is. The Spirit, which has the prerogative of neutralizing any force of disintegration, is, therefore, the power that stands up to time by occupying the place of the future and reuniting it with that of the beginning; it, therefore, is History, unlike nature, which has no history, «because in it universality is only an internal without actual development. There are indeed living individuals, but in them life can only express itself as an abstract universal, as the negation of any particular specificity. In other words, the meaning of organic life is death, the annihilation of everything that aspires to give itself a separate existence" (5). The life of the spirit, on the contrary, is that life that does not fear death, but, on the contrary, tolerates it and maintains itself in it: it knows how to face the negative and assimilate it. Philosophy, as a phenomenological description of the vicissitudes of the Spirit, must acquire knowledge of principles and general points of view, thus presenting itself as a science and no longer as a love of knowledge. It must be real and absolute knowledge of the Absolute Spirit, because only the spirit for Hegel is real, that is, Being. Thought presents itself, therefore, as the engine of becoming, which, in turn, is the unity of being and non-being, a process of revelation of the absolute, the will of the Spirit. Marx precisely questions this, replacing the spirit and ideas with the productive forces and their real movement, maintaining that the true reality is not that posed by thought, but is constituted by the social being understood as the result of the historical process, determined from practice. He is, therefore, seen as the one who, with the overthrow of the Hegelian metaphysics of absolute knowledge, underlined the importance of technical praxis, through which man sets out to conquer the entire planet and philosophy begins to become worldly. . But, at the same time, through the concept of alienation, Marx thematized the disorientation of modern man, who is no longer able to make sense of himself and his actions. In short, Marxian thought, like all Western metaphysics, does not have access to the truth of being, which continues to be veiled, denying itself to thought. We must not forget, in relation to this, that the history of metaphysics presents itself, for Heidegger, as the history of the oblivion of being, which occurs by withdrawing and remains, for this reason, in hiding. At no moment in history, which is the history of being, has the truth of being been thought of. Indeed, history, as the history of being, begins precisely with the oblivion of being, with a thought that thinks only the truth of beings, leaving the truth of being unthought: «thought is constantly set in motion by a single fact: that in Western history, from the beginning, it is thought to be silent with respect to its being, but without the truth of its being being thought of king, so that this is not only rejected to thought as a possible apprehension, but it is so in such a way that Western thought itself, in the form of metaphysics, hides the fact of this rejection, even if it is not aware of it" (6). The oblivion of being, therefore, does not derive from a lack of thought, or from our negligence, since it has its roots in the essence of being which tends to withdraw into itself: metaphysics, consequently, is denied the truth of being, at least until it reaches the era of its fulfillment. And that era, for Heidegger, is the era of deployed technique, in which only the truth of beings emerges and being is totally forgotten, covered by the productive/destructive fury of man, who is preparing to become the undisputed master of the world. Everything bends in the face of the inexhaustible power of technique, which presents itself in the form of Gestell, of imposition: « Gestell, imposition, indicates the meeting of that request which requires, that is, provokes, man to to reveal the real, in the way of use, as a background". (7) But, Heidegger observes, while stating that technique is imposition, it is not possible to fully understand its essence, it is not yet possible to identify the direction in which it proceeds, to pose the problem of what is intimately pushes her. Technology has invaded every aspect of man's life, from politics to art, to religion, it has transformed his interiority, but individuals are still far from correctly asking themselves the question about his true essence. It is therefore necessary to question our history, which, for Heidegger, is the history of being, of his oblivion. That is, entering into dialogue with those essential thinkers who can help us understand the desert that is growing around us; search in the work of a philosopher for what has always remained unthought, hidden. But who, in his works, has thematized the alienation of the human being increasingly distant from the land of being? Who discovered in advance the power of planetary technique by penetrating its essence, who destroyed philosophy by bringing it before the tribunal of material and transformative praxis? That thinker, for Heidegger, is Marx, who, although he did not complete metaphysics, although he did not "go beyond" it, laid the foundations for its destruction, for the worldliness of philosophy.

Starting from these assumptions, Axelos constructs his discourse in the monograph Marx, penseur de la technique: de l'aliénation de l'homme à la conquête du monde. The Greek philosopher presents, in the footsteps of Heidegger, a particular interpretation of Marxian thought, seen as a continuation of the metaphysics of subjectivity inaugurated by Descartes at the dawn of modernity and carried forward by Kant and Hegel. A metaphysics of subjectivity, the Marxian one, which has its nerve center in the question of the economic, political and ideological alienation of man and which leads us directly to the problem of nihilism and world technicization. However, the aim of the Axelosian interpretation of Marx and its constant comparison with the Heideggerian Seinsfrage is not at all to lay the foundations for the construction of a new ethical-political edifice. With the death of God and the humanization of nature, with the affirmation of a one-dimensional thought incapable of opposing the existing state of things, with the decline of the messianic utopias that offered the hope of a future redemption, it has failed, according to Axelos , the possibility of pushing towards new horizons, so much so that the very notion of horizon has become problematic, and mediocrity and ambiguity have taken over: we act without knowing why, we build cities that tend to become necropolises and we end up populating deserts. Mystical impulses crystallize in churches, revolutionary movements in bureaucratic states, research of thought in sclerotized universities, the existential adventures of individuals in autarchic and hypocritical families. Man's actions are meaningless, the time in which he finds himself living is so poor that he is unable to even recognize his own indigence, that it presents itself as a radical lack of future: the sense of total being in its becoming sinks into nothing and there is no longer any foundation, purpose, meaning or idea. Dominated by this game we are forced to realize that truth and true life have left us, without ever having existed. Our being becomes dark and we become problems to ourselves. The main question of politics and ethics, What to do?, although insistently posed again, has, for Axelos, only one answer: abandoning oneself to the becoming of being, to what the Greek thinker defines as the game of the world.

Man must learn to live without thinking that he can make humanity better, playing a game made up of acceptance and renunciation, of reclamation and reconciliation. ion, of observation and contestation, a game that allows him to play in detachment and indifference: Classical morality resided in intentions. Future ethics will reside in problematization and the executions that perform therein. It will be neither the ethics of maxims nor that of sentences. These are of little use to us in times of peace, a little more in times of war. The problematic ethics of the future will be aphoristic, because aphorisms delimit the fields of life and the fields of death. And this ethic will certainly suffer its repercussions in the banal and in chatter. The positive was given to us. The negative has been generated. How to (re)find what has not yet existed and will never fully exist: the constructive, globalizing and questioning, integrating and problematizing power? First of all, we must abandon the conflict of points of view to those who dedicate themselves to it with the tepid fury in which particular and partial points of view, political, aesthetic and ethical, crackling of different opinions caused by the crossing of wooden sabers are confronted[ …]The throne of knowledge, conscience and self-certainty on which the human being has painfully installed himself is not yet completely worm-eaten. Innovative behaviors will therefore still appear as transgressors with respect to the rules of the adaptation game. The contradictory aspects of everything have already become problematic. But everything that comes too soon for this fraction of space-time fails to make itself recognized. The clarity of notions, concepts, categories and definitions, so desired, playing within large, relatively transparent systems, is contained in a sort of opacity that no one dares call superior, because it is not. Every production scheme is certainly worn out by what it does not account for. Hence the task of deconstructing it. (8)
The ethics of planetary man problematizes his very being, introducing us to a beyond of ethics. It invites man to play the great Game, to abandon himself to it, without expecting anything in return, without asking or looking for points of reference, rules, more or less firm, to follow: «one cannot do anything other than play on and with the game of the two senses of the word game: playing like a door plays on its own axis and playing like a game. The more or less explicit systematics of the rules of the human game and its transgressions, i.e. the ethical problematic, would harmonize man's participation in the game of the world in the form of an always unstable equilibrium." (9) Immerse yourself in the infinite ocean of becoming, taking the place of the gods: this is the only possibility, at the dawn of an era in which nothing is as it seems, in which everything can, from one moment to the next , turn into its opposite. Man thus finds himself abandoned to his finiteness as a cosmic player, who cannot win or lose, who cannot set himself goals or hope for a radical change in his existence. He must have the wisdom of Ecclesiastes which proclaims the infinite emptiness of everything; he will have to quench his thirst at the source of Heraclitean wisdom, which he understands the One-All as becoming marked by the rhythm of time, as becoming of time as a royal and infantile game. In other words, he will have to experience nihilism to the fullest, putting an end to the era of subjectivity, abandoning the search for meaning, experiencing the efforts of vanity, opening up to the repeatable, to the old and the new, reaching a discordant agreement with the game of the world, renouncing every revolutionary attempt, since every revolution is always restorative: in fact the planetary man, as Axelos conceives him, has lost the Archimedean point, constituted by that "inhabitation of the future" of which Bloch speaks, which alone can constitute the support for the deployment of authentic ethical action.

Gilles Deleuze, a prominent figure in postmodern French philosophy, made significant contributions to various fields, including metaphysics, aesthetics, and literary theory. Gilles Deleuze’s philosophy invites us to embrace creativity, multiplicity, and the perpetual process of becoming. His ideas continue to inspire scholars, artists, and thinkers across disciplines, bridging Western philosophy with Eastern mysticism and inviting us to question established norms

Let’s delve into some key aspects of his philosophy:

Concept Creation: Deleuze conceived of philosophy as the creation of concepts. His writings take the form of precise deductions of these concepts. Unlike traditional philosophical systems, which often seek to establish universal truths, Deleuze’s approach is dynamic and inventive. He engages with thinkers such as the Stoics, Leibniz, Hume, Kant, Nietzsche, Spinoza, and Bergson, extracting insights and weaving them into his own unique framework.

Gilles Deleuze, a prolific philosopher, believed that philosophy is not merely about analyzing existing ideas but rather about creating new concepts. Let’s explore this fascinating aspect of Deleuze’s thought:

Philosophical Encounters:

Deleuze didn’t approach art, literature, or cinema as mere subjects of study. Instead, he engaged in philosophical encounters with them. These encounters inspired him to develop fresh concepts, emphasizing the creative aspect of philosophical thinking.

Constructivist Stance:

Deleuze considered himself a constructivist. For him, philosophers are concept creators. Each encounter with philosophy should lead to the birth of novel ideas, expanding our understanding of the world.

Leibniz and Unusual Concepts:

Leibniz, whom Deleuze admired, exemplifies this creative approach. Leibniz’s rationalist philosophy involved inventing unusual concepts. These concepts weren’t pre-existing; they emerged through Leibniz’s intellectual activity.

God as a Creator of Concepts:

Leibniz believed that God created the world through calculation. He used examples like tiling (arranging figures to fill space while minimizing emptiness) to illustrate his concept of creation.

In summary, Deleuze’s philosophy encourages us to be active creators of concepts, just as painters create lines and colors.

………………………….

Difference and Repetition: Deleuze’s magnum opus, “Difference and Repetition” (1968), explores the interplay between difference and repetition. He argues that difference is fundamental to reality, and repetition is not mere duplication but a creative force. Deleuze challenges conventional notions of identity and sameness, emphasizing the productive potential of difference.

Gilles Deleuze’s “Difference and Repetition” is a seminal work that challenges traditional Western metaphysics and offers a fresh perspective on concepts like identity, repetition, and creativity. Let’s explore some key ideas from this remarkable book:



Pure Difference: Deleuze argues that difference is fundamental to reality. Unlike classical philosophy that seeks universal truths, he emphasizes divergence and decentering. Each moment contains unique differences, and these differences shape our understanding of the world.



Complex Repetition: Repetition, for Deleuze, isn’t mere duplication. Instead, it involves displacement and disguising. While repetition contributes to generality and thought, it’s the differences within each repetition that account for change and novelty. Concepts and things derive meaning from these differences.



Shift Away from Hegel and Marx: “Difference and Repetition” played a crucial role in shifting French thought away from Hegel and Marx toward Nietzsche and Freud. Deleuze’s exploration of difference challenged established philosophical norms and paved the way for new perspectives.



The Image of Thought: Deleuze critiques the traditional “image of thought, ” which often relies on fixed identities and binary oppositions. Instead, he encourages us to embrace multiplicities, complexities, and the perpetual process of becoming.



Asymmetrical Synthesis of the Sensible: Deleuze introduces the concept of asymmetrical synthesis, emphasizing the interplay between perception and affect. Reality is a dynamic, ever-changing process, not a static being. Copies are never identical; they’re something new.



“Difference and Repetition” invites us to rethink how we perceive reality, emphasizing creativity, multiplicity, and the constant flux of existence. Deleuze’s work continues to inspire thinkers across disciplines, bridging philosophy with art, literature, and mysticism.

…………………………

Multiplicities and Becoming: Deleuze rejects fixed identities and embraces multiplicities. He sees reality as a complex web of interconnected processes, where entities are constantly becoming. His collaboration with psychoanalyst Félix Guattari resulted in the influential works “Anti-Oedipus” (1972) and “A Thousand Plateaus” (1980). These texts explore desire, capitalism, and the rhizomatic structure of thought.

Gilles Deleuze’s concept of multiplicity is a fundamental departure from traditional metaphysical notions. Let’s explore it in more detail:



Multiplicity Defined:

Deleuze draws upon ideas from mathematician Riemann and philosopher Bergson. Multiplicity, for him, isn’t a mere combination of many elements; it’s an organization intrinsic to the many itself.

Unlike the One-Many dialectic, where unity and opposition dominate, multiplicity thrives on differences within and between multiplicities.

Substance vs. Multiplicity:

Substance theory (from Aristotle to Spinoza) often reduces the world to a unity (the One) or a variety (the Many). Deleuze challenges this.

He replaces substance with multiplicity, asserting that even the One is a multiplicity. Instead of rigid oppositions, we find a rich variety of differences—difference becomes the key.

Desiring-Production and Multiplicity:

In “Anti-Oedipus, ” Deleuze links multiplicity to desiring-production. Desiring-production is pure multiplicity—an irreducible affirmation beyond unity.

Multiplicity accounts for the dynamic, ever-changing nature of reality, resisting fixed essences.

In summary, Deleuze’s multiplicity invites us to embrace difference, complexity, and the perpetual becoming of existence. It’s a departure from traditional metaphysics, opening new vistas for thought and creativity.

……………………………….



Rhizome and Non-Hierarchical Thinking: Deleuze introduces the concept of the “rhizome, ” an alternative to hierarchical structures. Rhizomes grow horizontally, connecting diverse elements without a central point. This idea challenges traditional tree-like models of knowledge and encourages a multiplicity of connections and pathways.

The concept of rhizome in Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari’s philosophy:



What Is a Rhizome?

A rhizome is a descriptive or epistemological model that contrasts with hierarchical structures. Unlike a tree-like system with a central root and branches, a rhizome has no fixed order or hierarchy. In a rhizome, any element can connect to any other, creating a network of multiplicities. It defies linear thinking and embraces complexity.



Non-Hierarchical Connections:

Rhizomes mark a horizontal conception where diverse elements link without respect for specific species. For instance, Deleuze and Guattari connected desire and machines, giving rise to the intriguing concept of “desiring machines”. Rather than following a predetermined path, a rhizome allows for nomadic growth and propagation. It resists chronology and organization, favoring a dynamic, interconnected system.



Rhizome vs. Tree:

While trees represent hierarchical models, rhizomes work with planar and trans-species connections. They emphasize multiplicity and interbeing. Just as water spreads across available spaces, a rhizome’s surface can be interrupted and moved, leaving no trace but seeking equilibrium.

In summary, the rhizome challenges traditional thinking, encouraging us to explore networks, multiplicities, and the perpetual middle ground between things.

………………………………………….



Affect and Percept: Deleuze emphasizes affect (intensity) and percept (sensory experience) over representation. He explores how affective forces shape our encounters with the world. His collaboration with Claire Parnet resulted in the captivating book “Dialogues” (1977), where he discusses these concepts in depth.

Gilles Deleuze’s concepts of affect and percept within his materialist philosophy:

Percept:

Percepts go beyond mere perceptions. They are independent of the state of those who experience them. Unlike perceptions, percepts exist in themselves, with their validity transcending individual lived experiences. They are self-sufficient entities.

Affect:

Affects exceed ordinary feelings or affections. They possess a force that surpasses the strength of those who undergo them. Deleuze’s notion of affect emphasizes intensity, vitality, and the transformative power of forces that shape our existence1.

In summary, percepts and affects are essential components of Deleuze’s philosophy, emphasizing the immanence of forces and the dynamic interplay between sensation, intensity, and lived reality

…………………………………….

Virtuality and Actualization: Deleuze distinguishes between the virtual and the actual. The virtual contains potentialities, while the actual represents realized states. His work on cinema, particularly the concepts of the “movement-image” and the “time-image, ” exemplifies this exploration of virtual and actual dimensions.

Let’s delve into the fascinating concept of virtuality and actualization in Gilles Deleuze’s philosophy.



Deleuze’s exploration of virtuality is deeply rooted in the work of French philosopher Henri Bergson. Rather than framing it solely as a realm of mere possibilities waiting to be actualized, Deleuze considers the virtual as a dynamic and productive field. Here are some key points:



Virtual vs. Actual:

Deleuze distinguishes between the virtual and the actual. These are not opposing realms but interconnected aspects of reality. The virtual refers to an ideal yet real dimension. It is not merely potential; it possesses full qualities of the real. The actual, on the other hand, unfolds from the virtual through processes of actualization or differentiation.



Bergson’s Influence:

Deleuze credits Henri Bergson for developing the notion of the virtual to its highest degree. Bergson’s concept of “duration” aligns with the virtual. Duration is inseparable from the movement of its actualization.

Example: Reflection in a Mirror: Consider a reflection in a mirror. It exists fully, regardless of whether we perceive it. The mirror image is already there, waiting for no further actualization. Yet our perception of it remains real.

Political Implications:

Brian Massumi highlights the political implications of virtuality.

The virtual is inaccessible to the senses but can be felt through its effects. Massumi uses topological figures to illustrate virtuality, emphasizing its imaginative presence. In summary, Deleuze’s virtuality is not a passive waiting room for actualization; it’s a vibrant force shaping our experience.



……………………………….

The Topology of Deleuze: A Virtual Continuum

Deleuze’s ontological categories include a virtual continuum—a dynamic interplay between pure extension and thought. This continuum, akin to Spinoza’s substance, embodies two powers: the power of being and the power of thinking1. Throughout his writings, Deleuze employs various terms to describe this continuum: “intensive spatium, ” “ideal or metaphysical surface, ” “plane of consistency, ” and “plane of immanence.” These diverse labels emphasize different aspects of the same underlying concept.



Pre-Extensive Milieu: Deleuze characterizes this continuum as a pre-extensive, non-qualified “milieu” or “space-stratum.” It envelops complexes of differential relations, pure intensities, and singularities. Unlike empirical fields, it doesn’t correlate with consciousness and its objects, nor does it dissolve into undifferentiated chaos.

Topological Model: Deleuze consistently employs a “topological model” to describe the properties of this transcendental field. He draws inspiration from Michel Serres and Merleau-Ponty, emphasizing topological categories like position, junction, and connection. In this framework, places matter more than what fills them, defining a non-extensive, pure spatium1.

Surface and Co-Existence: Deleuze’s transcendental field constitutes a surface—a topological surface. It connects internal and external spaces without regard to distance. This property echoes Simondon’s argument that all organization presupposes an absolute outside and inside, leading to relative intermediary exteriorities and interiorities.

In summary, Deleuze’s topology transcends traditional notions of space. It’s a dynamic, pre-individual field where intensities and relations coexist, shaping our experience beyond empirical confines.

Darkness, both metaphorical and literal, has a profound impact on our inner selves. Let’s explore how it transforms us:

Self-Reflection and Growth:

Like the night sky, darkness invites introspection. It’s in the quietude of our own thoughts that we confront our fears, desires, and vulnerabilities. In moments of darkness—whether through grief, loss, or personal struggles—we learn resilience. We adapt, evolve, and find hidden strengths.

Breaking Illusions:

Darkness strips away illusions. It reveals our true nature, unfiltered by societal masks or pretenses. When faced with adversity, we shed superficial layers, exposing raw authenticity. We discover what truly matters.

Creativity and Inspiration:

Creativity often blooms in the shadows. Artists, writers, and thinkers draw inspiration from the mysterious, the unknown. The canvas of our minds becomes fertile ground for new ideas, fueled by the obscurity of night.

Empathy and Compassion:

Our own struggles make us more empathetic toward others. We recognize shared pain and connect through vulnerability. Darkness teaches us compassion—how to hold space for someone else’s suffering.

Spiritual Awakening:

The “Dark Night of the Soul, ” as described by mystics, signifies a spiritual crisis. It’s a transformative journey toward enlightenment.In these depths, we seek divine connection, surrendering ego and finding inner illumination.

Resilience and Endurance:

Just as stars shine brightest against a dark sky, our resilience emerges during life’s darkest hours. We endure, finding hope even when the world seems bleak.

I know that our efforts all come to nothing. Analyze life, tear its trappings off, lay it bare with thought, with logic, with philosophy, and its emptiness is revealed as a bottomless pit; its nothingness frankly confesses to nothingness, and Despair comes to perch in the soulI know the end of us all is nothing, I know that at the end of Time, the reward of our toil will be nothing — and again nothing. I know that all our handiwork and all our ideas will be destroyed. I know that not even ash will be left from the fires that consume us. I know that our ideals, even those we achieve, will vanish in the eternal darkness of oblivion and final non-being. There is no hope, none, in my heart. I know, No promise, none, can I make to myself and to others. No recompense can I expect for my labors. No fruit will be born of my thoughts. I know the time — eternal seducer of all men, eternal cause of all effects — offers me nothing but the blank prospect of annihilation. So, my dignity is broken and weak, in recognition of my impending defeat.

The man who is alone, who stands on his own feet, who is stripped bare, who asks for nothing and wants nothing, who has reached the apex of disinterested­ness not through blind renunciation but through ex­cess of clear vision, turns to the world which stretches out before him as a burned prairie, as a devastated city — a world in which no churches, asylums, refuges, ideals, are left — and says: «Though you promise me nothing I am still with you, I am still an atom of your energies, my work is part of your work; I am your companion and your mirror as you march on your merciless way. But I owe nothing to any one. I would be responsible to freedom alone.