Date: Wed, 13 Sep 1995 09:45:09 -0500 (CDT)
From: CND7750-AT-UTARLG.UTA.EDU
Subject: re: brains and susan says


Yes i have seen Churchland's new book but i have not spent the cash
for it yet. Waithing for paperback.

It's not that brains are so important, although the are for understanding
human behavior (affectivity). D&G's discussion of the brain in _WIP?_
is, of course, very interesting. Basically the brain gives rise to the
thing we call thought, is the organ that 'thinks'. I have brought it
up because humanists and theists alike see it as the seat of free will,
intentionality, etc. Most will argue this point by arguing that that
the brain gives rise to immaterial phenomena that then magically direct
the movements of matter of determinate space/time. Even if these 
immaterial entities do exist, and in a sense 'cause' material
movement, this does not mean that anything possesses them, and can then
choose to cause certain effects. Now, as i'm sure you remember, Deleuze's
notion of incorporeal events has always bothered me, for this very
reason. All of these dualisms, corporeal/incorporeal, molecular/molar,
deterritorialize/reterritorialize, are very troublesome when thoroughly
examined. Even the virtual/actual split, when one nno longer understands
time as the form of space, when time is no longer spatialized, but
an ever present Event, as described in the series on the AION in
_The Logic of Sense_, is trublesome. Interiority and exteriority too.
Notions like absolute deterritorialization, pure exteriority are
probably not only wistfull, but serve only hinder the comprehension
of noneuclidean space. Outside and inside no longer apply; they are
eliminated.

Susan has the hots for Tim. Every thim she snaps at him she
starts cuzzing away. But she would rather masturbate than fuck
him because he's such a typical goody goo. She'll probably wind
up killing him and his little girl.

cnd

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