Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 23:51:50 -0400 To: deleuze-guattari-AT-lists.driftline.org Subject: Re: [D-G] deleuze and benjamin on violence I will have to take the time and track down this book so that I can talk about it with convincing authority. ;-) In a small way there are some symptoms addressed here, but from what I gatheres most of the writing is just thrown up on the wall. some of it slithers inside itself and makes disgusting sounds as one oozing snot ball making friends with a handkerchief. I suspect some of the members are merely empty edu.c-shell email accounts wherein any looney-bird can peck out an odd phrase or two or twenty and we all get to read it never knowing who will be behind the password tomorrow. The poetry has been missed.... the goal to aspire to the perfect form, perhaps it will someday, practice makes perverts.... As for the thread, I am happy to clarify what I have found in the logos, but I am not trying to stay here with this point. For starters, the logos is too ill defined for most hypothesis, so a definition becomes the destination and also the point of departure. the "personal logos", or better put would be the "perceived logos" (implies perceiver) is that giant spectrum of "human knowlege expressed in language."(how's that?) Now from this plateux of meaning many people begin to divide it up, ie. there is the "spoken" logos and there is the "written" logos. People like Derrida are keen on this distinction and it is true, but there is no need to be exclusatory, both are still logos in actuality (so Derrida's Truth is mostly equivocal - "equivocating the power" beware of paradigm shifts!) The ancient amarnaic Rhebus is the evolutionary fulcrum of meaning that divides the logos between written/spoken for these people, by dividing the "perceived logos" one exerts control over the "perceiver". (its an evolution that continues in the likes of Grimm, Russian cyrilic, St.Patrick, etc...) There are many historical examples showing how by dominating the logos it becomes a tool for power, and DyG have few or more paragraphs getting into the "recording surface" merging with writing techology and hypomnemata (by spartan conquest in 430bc), Philosophy orginally began completely connected to the logos... "full human knowlege" but when it was learned that the logos could be divide to gain power, monotheistic religions created a "conventional" schism. It was a long time between when the Romans had burned down the greek libraries and when university-born-bacon was able to re-claim the split (from satanic popes snarling among the thralls variants of the name include Sahrimnir, a common Anglication). But bacon did not merge them, he kept them apart and added another split (for more dominance, of course) - the method of science, a mother-[explicative]. Now what we have with science today is much more then a third of the logos and even the creationists cant hold their own semi-solid sacred ground of "deviscive politcs". LIke darwin's evolution, the rhizomes of the logos evolve on their own within the entire scope of the absolute. the reptile today has a much more sophistcated brain-neurology then the humanoid's own "reptilian" limbic system (and more...) and... for an author to make intentional comparisons between them has everything to do with underlying evolution/circuitry as in the circuitry of a few BwO(marketeers play very unfair game). These are the circuits that D and G keep looking for, they indicate important underlying rhyzome evolutionary structurs that travel up a persons butt, through their spine and out their nose. or sex-starved eyes floating around looking for an ass.... its a not-so-unpleasant divine-violence alloyed with testicles. Now if Wbenj. asked Neitsche "who's wooden iron", Neitsche would answer "What, you mean what." To me this seems like a comedy routine. At least the intent of its "force" exists outside of the "divine-knowlege" logos game for neanderthal-nerds who dont drink enough beer (re: freud's tri-partide man). A schwienhund will always beat-out a scientist... or to get a more eloquent equivocation just read some Locke, that dude could serve it on a plate. _______________________________________________ List address: deleuze-guattari-AT-driftline.org Info: http://lists.driftline.org/listinfo.cgi/deleuze-guattari-driftline.org Archives: www.driftline.org
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005