From: "Dominic Le Fave" <dominic.lefave-AT-the-spa.com> Date: Wed, 17 Jul 1996 16:04:11 +0000 Subject: theologic machine Amen, Brother! One will not find deleuzian theology in the abstract machines. But a deleuzian God is not so distant and leibnizian as you suggest. the abstract machines are not created; they are not aggregates or assemblages of their parts, nor do they carry the code for such aggregation. God does not have a moment of monadic origin that seeks temporal reification. Rather, the theologic machine, the concept of difference Herself, marks the becoming of the entire (total as actual/infinate as virtual) plane of immanence and all of its heterological inscriptions (Adam & Eve). the inscriptions and reinscriptions mark and caress an immense becoming that is both incarnate and known as a causal result--not as history, but as manifestation: heirophany. Thus, multiplicity constantly undoes itself(s) not "in spite of God" but because of God. A Deleuzian theology is always a theology of immanence. THIS IS WHY SPINOZA IS THE CHRIST ---dominic Phil Goodchild wrote: > God may choose paradise as the best of all possible worlds, but once his > creations, Adam and Eve, encounter each other, then desire emerges, along > with the world of Cain and Abel that is incompossible with paradise - > heterogeneity, multiplicity. A pullulation of twins or individuals > absolutely identical in their concept (D & R 12-13), indistinguishable with > respect to their genetic codes, but affecting each other's developments as > fertilized embryos (or bodies without organs) - experiencing mimetic rivalry > due to a difference in matter, the pure form of the sensible, that cannot be > included in conceptual calculation. If this difference were not there, the > world would be a thought in the mind of God, not a creation. But it is > sufficient that one admits the minimum of difference between ideas and the > synthesis of difference on the one hand, and the asymmetric synthesis of the > sensible on the other, to allow the world to emerge as a strange > dramatization, driven by desire, in spite of God - the world progresses by > deterritorializations and reterritorializations that not even God could > foresee. This is why any abstract machine has a date, an occurrence where > it is actualized: a moment later, and its operation will be interrupted by > strange rhizomatic encounters. Emergence. Multiplicity. Mechanosphere. > > One will not find a Deleuzean theology by studying abstract machines. > > Look instead towards proximity, encounter, chance - perhaps here appearances > are deceptive. --dominic.lefave
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005