Date: Tue, 5 Sep 1995 19:23:12 +1000
From: P.Bains-AT-uws.edu.au (Paul Bains)
Subject: Re: The desert is growing(no?)


>
>Douglas Edric Stanley writes:
>Now, all that said, what would be this modified Platonism? Quite
>interesting I have to admit from the outside although not the Plato part. I
>honestly have grudged through Plato without much joy even though I've read
>some wonderful readings (Deleuzian or otherwise) of him. However "...non
>dimensionality or transpatiality of visual and conceptual experience" is
>nice, and it would help me in my work if you could give me the page
>reference (we all have reading restraints you know!). As well it reminds me
>of smooth space described in Mille Plateaux.

        Thank you Douglas for your thought 'provoking' response. I can't do
justice to it in one go, but at least I can try to begin.
A few introductory remarks. I have not studied the hist. of phil. and could
tell you virtually nothing about Plato, Kant, Heidegger.....I've been on the
net for about a month and lurked on this list for even less time. I posted a
query about Raymond Ruyer about 3wks ago and got no response. Maybe my
netiquette was out of line-maybe nobody gave a shit-maybe nobody has had the
time or interest to follow up D/G's references in 'What is Philosophy'. I
only have the French edition so page numbers aren't that useful but here
goes. In the translators intro. specific reference is made to Ruyer's notion
of 'survol' and the problem of translating this term. You can see for
yourself how they describe it. In chapter 1, 'What is a Concept' (within the
first few pages)  D/G describe a concept as being in a state of survol in
relation to its components. It is co-present without any distance from its
components or variations. They use the term absolute overview in italics and
in a footnote, (2), refer the reader to Ruyer's work 'Neo-Finalisme'. This
notion of absolute overview or survey (as the translators preferred,
although in 'The Fold, Leibniz and the Baroque' it's rendered as overview)
is then used many times throughout the book. See for example the Conclusion,
near to note 11: "What are the characteristics of this brain...IT'S NOT A
BRAIN BEHIND THE bRAIN, BUT PRIMARILY A STATE OF 'SURVOL' WITHOUT DISTANCE,
AT GROUND LEVEL, AUTO-SURVOL...IT'S A PRIMARY TRUE FORM AS RUYER DEFINED
IT." D/G then recommend in note 11 that we consult Ruyer's Neo-Finalisme
chpters V11-X! This where Plato comes in....
        There is one copy of Neo-Finalisme in the Australian library
system-no doubt you would have more luck in Paris. I have looked at it and
would particularly recommend chpter 1X, '"SURFACES ABSOLUES" ET DOMAINES
ABSOLUES DE SURVOL'.
        Without going into detail in this mail Ruyer nicely demonstrates,
with cute drawings, the difference between perception as a
physico-physiological event and visual sensation as a state of
consciousness. The camera or an eye need to be in a supplementary dimension
to the observed object but the "I" that sees is not in a dimension
perpendicular to its experience. It's in a state of auto-overview without
any distance. "Between the 'I-unity' and the visual field, there is only a
purely symbolic 'distance'".(Ruyer, Neo-Finalisme, P.U.F. 1952).
        So in other chapters he talks about 'La Région du Trans-spatial' and
don't miss chpter X1V, 'LES ETRES DU MONDE PHYSIQUE ET LA STRUCTURE FIBREUSE
DE L'UNIVERS'.
        Anyway, I'll leave it at that for the moment. I'm trying to do some
work on 'perception' (as a very 'mature' post.grad - almost seems
old-fashioned) and found this stuff truly incredible, although Douglas
Harding says much the same things in 'On Having No Head, Zen and the
Re-discovery of the Obvious' (Arkana, 1986).-published in French as 'Vivre
Sans T=EAte, une contribution au zen en occident'(le courrier du livre, 1978).
        I suppose being into film you've seen Bill Viola's 'I do not know
what it is that I am', and yes those references to 1000 plateaus and
close-vision seem 'relevant'.
ps. Does anybody talk about Guattari's 'Chaosmose' in your loose affiliation?
Copulator, pb.
       
       
       
         
       


     ------------------