What is the Body Without Organs? | Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari | Keyword

[@pjeffries301]

The BWO's plane of resistance provides the "energy" for Brownian Motion, therefore the necessary condition without which the organs could not establish or exist - the "seeds" could not germinate. This perpetual motion machine inherent in the BWO motivates or allows all the rest. The Brownian Motion aspect of the BWO is often passed past by thinkers (as here) without recognizing its cornerstone presence making possible every organ which arises. Love this piece, thanks.

[@TheoryPhilosophy]

Interesting! I'll pin this to let others know

[@pjeffries301]

@@TheoryPhilosophy Cool. Began reading ATP 11 years ago, still generally lost. I consider it one of the finest, most entertaining books ever. Your thoughts are valuable to me - keep them coming.

[@gwennygwen9768]

@@pjeffries301 offer some resistance

[@gwennygwen9768]

I would fight for some of Delueze

[@vishalchidambaram1064]

@@gwennygwen9768 what do you mean?

[@xuvetynpygmalion3955]

When I'm thinking of the Body without Organs I always imagine it in analogy with the decellularized pigs heart (the "Ghost heart"); an organ stripped away from all identity and function, only a framework for its possible becoming. You can inject it with stem cells (metaphorical desiring machines) and re-appropriate the organ, make it work in a way which suits the desired needs.

[@TheoryPhilosophy]

Yes very cool!

[@freddytackos]

definitely starts making sense after about 5 viewings spread out over 5 days. thanks!

[@TheoryPhilosophy]

Lol

[@Philmebatty]

Remarkable similarities to Zen Buddhism and the view of Emptiness and interconnectedness and temporariness of everything. Thanks 👍 x

[@literallyanythingelse]

disagree. i feel like emptiness and other buddhist concepts are prior to deleuzean concepts of the way things (monads, i guess) become. more aligned with heraclitus. deleuze gets stuck in the metaphysical game he thinks he has escaped.

[@heartache5742]

@@literallyanythingelse but his metaphysics is pretty good

[@scriabinismydog2439]

@@literallyanythingelse but he never wanted to escape metaphysics in the first place; he just wanted to develop something that would've gone "beyond" dialectics by producing a philosophical system that would've propelled novelty and creation. He surely gets stuck in contradictions which ultimately stem from his fidelity to empiricism (Brassier's criticism of the deleuzoguattarian account of Capital in Cap&Schiz and the bergsonian vitalism in Difference and Repetition are brilliant in this), but Deleuze was quite aware of what he was doing. It's easy to equate non-dualism/"monism" (which is typical of the post-structuralist "school") with whatever Buddhist/Advaita Vedanta/Hinduist platitude (I do not say this to demean these practices ofc, it just seems to be a tiresome redundant analogy imo).

[@Maya-th8dk]

You are my best buddy for reading. ❤️

[@TheoryPhilosophy]

Lol happy to hear it :)

[@Stars4Hearts]

I was getting confused as to why philosophers causally bring up “schizophrenia”- then I read that Deleuze sort of coined the term. So I came directly here 😊

[@unusualpond]

Hey man. I think you did a really great job here. One more thing to note, is that this whole concept of the body without organs is lifted from Artaud. Also a lot of the general anti- psychiatry stuff of Guattari and RD Lang is heavily influenced by the writings of Artaud. You probably acknowledge this in your other videos, but this is the first of yours that I’ve seen. Maybe check out some of Artaud‘s plays and poetry to understand what he was on about. In a nutshell, he was a very radical thinker, who wanted to shock western society with revolutionary theatre, but unfortunately also a severe drug addict and spent much of his life institutionalised. Hence the search for freedom from western societal norms in his theatre work, his drug use, and his railings against the psychiatric institutions to which he was confined. I could go on, but I won’t LOL

[@lexparsimoniae2107]

Finally here is someone with the intellect and the eloquence to explicate this complex notion! Thank you sir!

[@reeceadair2226]

This explained BWO brilliantly, I am a somewhat non-academic reader and struggled to understand its full meaning, however it inspired many thoughts that I had addressed in my current dissertation that begged me to use it. Thanks for the insight.

[@TheoryPhilosophy]

Thanks for checking it out :)

[@SIVSO-w3u]

I have anecdotally heard comparisons between Quantum Mechanics and both Deleuzean and Baudrillardian notions of BWO and Savage Phenomenology, respectively. I’m new to Baudrillard and am coming at him as an anthropologist. Thanks for helping me through Baudrillard. Can’t wait for “Seduction “ keyword

[@TheoryPhilosophy]

You are the first person to use the term "savage phenomenology" on here. The reason I'm pointing it out is because--and I'm not sure if you got this from the same source--that term confuses the hell out of me lol. I remember it from either The Illusion of the End or Impossible Exchange where Baudrillard is describing photography as a and I have read some translations as "savage phenomenology" and another as 'rough and ready (I think) phenomenology'. My concern is that such a translation suggests Baudrillard to be traversing some new philosophical "savage" or "wild" territory whereas I take the original to mean more like an originary phenomenology--a kind of pure phenomenology (if such a thing can be said to exist). Anyways sorry about the rant. I am curious about what you think though.

[@nightheron5892]

@@TheoryPhilosophy Sorry this is me from my other account my kids dont use. So, I suspect his use of raw phenomenology in relation to analogue photography acts as a specific case of the broader use of seduction, reversability, and fatal strategies. In this case, the camera is like a quasi-phenomenological apparatus of capture in one of two ways. It functionally disappears, objectifies, and decontextualizes in the making of photos, in a way that embodies the excess/magic of the object as it only necessarily clumsily extends from/spills into the "being" as photographer thus a raw phenomenology. I know, I have no clue, but I want to figure it out. I love your work !

[@ChickenParmVodka]

I’m also thinking about the relationship between Deleuze and quantum mechanics. The BwO seems to have relations of reciprocal determination, which have variables without identities prior to their coming into relation with one another. In the differential relation, a change in the value of X corresponds to a change in the value of Y and vise versa where X and Y each have no value in themselves until they acquire it in entering into the dY/dX formula. But I’ve found that this sounds a lot like the quantum mechanical phenomenon of entanglement, at least from my limited and colloquial conception of it, when they say that “when something happens to one particle, something happens to the other.” Moreover, the elements of an entanglement are not meaningful without a view of their relations to other elements. The relations take primary status. I’ve only said something about reciprocal determination, but there is also the aspect of complete determination in the differential relation. This concept I’m less clear on. Complete determination may just be what I’ve already described where X and Y acquire values. But I am unsure.

[@muanliantonsing9461]

Sir this is quite an explicit explanation... Thank you so much

[@TheoryPhilosophy]

Could I have done it any other way??? No probz

[@salemronkartz6866]

Thank you so much for making this. Im not a student, i was just extremely interested in the topic and this reached right to the root. It really helped me get this idea and im very interested!

[@jkam2524]

Thank you for this. Even though my grasp on these ideas is limited, I'd suggest that the 2008 market crash did end up trigger events in America like the Tea Party (right) and Occupy (left), and the Tea Party did morph into Trumpism and the nationalism he used to gain power, so the theory feels consistent.

[@vishmonster]

I would add Antonin Artaud's "To Have Been Done With the Judgement of God."

[@drageben145]

Thank you. I started reading anti-oedipus two months ago (though i haven't gotten far due to my bad reading habits) and i never truly understood the BWO that much, but i think this video helped me alot and i may understand the book a bit better now :D

[@fumoblitzkrie]

At the start of AO they say that the BWO is death drive and unmoved mover. I think this is important for an energetic analysis. Basically they are saying that all things desire to be without organs, to move towards a state of rest, of unproductivity, but the organs keep torturing, keep working, just like conservation impulses keep engaging with the repression of the pleasure principle (of the death drive) in Freud's "beyond the pleasure principle". Does this work for you?

[@fumoblitzkrie]

Note that "beyond the pleasure principle" is the LEAST Oedipal work of Freud, so that might be the reason why they appreciate it and utilize the concept of "death drive"

[@davidlariviere2864]

Thank you for this analysis. A thought occurred concerning your question at 22:13, wondering why we didn't see the authoritarian or fascist (re)territorializations that should have followed the 2008 financial collapse. Others have addressed this question, but I would like to take this response in a slightly different direction and suggest that we did see a particular rise of authoritarian or fascist behaviour that radically reterritorialized capital flows in unprecedented ways (following the 2008 financial crisis). Here I am assuming the neoliberal inversion of pecking order whereby the state apparatus operates at the pleasure of multinational conglomerates and in the interest of market financialization. As an example, one may point to the highly publicized bailout package that followed 2008 whereby taxpayers (in various countries, without say) extended relief to investment banks with low-interest loans. However, in the US these actions were eventually dwarfed by 16 Trillion dollars in bailouts that remained, for the most part, unreported. ( See: www.forbes.com/sites/traceygreenstein/2011/09/20/the-feds-16-trillion-bailouts-under-reported/?sh=6959e1ad26b0) Perhaps the fascist reterritorialization did occur, but its centre of power was obscured. The oppression and control involved are manifest by the lack of democratic participation or voice in this process on the part of any citizenry, rather than the traditional, visible, cultural signs of book-burning, etc.

[@jphili]

Wow handsome and extremely smart! What a combination you are.

[@TheoryPhilosophy]

Lol thanks 😌

[@nickdoyle5308]

what a weird thing to comment...

[@mohammedpatel7163]

@@nickdoyle5308yeah, but we were all thinking it

[@AlelovesJapan]

Thank you for the meticulous explanation. I highly needed a video of this sort to help me understand the text better.

[@felipeandrade2470]

Very nice explanation, the corn field and capital examples are very good. Although I think any economic system could be used as an example as well, any economic system imposes its desiring machines on the neutral capital

[@dionisossolon2335]

The degree of subjectivity related with the BwO and the schizo position is not at all confusing or unclear. It could be if you still understand schizophrenia from the medical and psychiatric institutions, then, and only then, it will be confusing and not clear. To understand the schizoanalysis you need to understand their opposition on how it works inside the clinical perspective (wich can be seen in Guattari's book with Suely Rolnik called "micropolitics"), then you could see that the psychotic position has been polarized into two ways that they change. One nosological term which is the paranoid (in direct link with morality and fascist states) and the schizo (directly into the nomadic states of war machinery). Actually your explanation on war machine could find a way to bring a scenario to how schizophrenia resembles to imagination and new creations (through art, music, etc) rather than the classis dyagnostic term of "psychiatric schizophrenia" (associated with individuals that can't live in a schematized state world).

[@seancalvey8768]

You are a true legend of the game thank you

[@misscraycray777]

Very comprehensive! Other explanations, though equally good, don't really help that much because citings from Dolce & Gabbana texts are v difficult to read

[@clarkedavis488]

Thanks. I listened to it twice.

[@ngdsmedia8189]

You are doing great work, keep it up!

[@doctorinternet8695]

The BwO seems to me to be refering to the ultimate substrate of reality. The shapeless base that allows for physics to exist and allow reality to assume shapes at all. A substance that is self referential, as in what shape appears on its face is that most capable of appearing on its face. It could also be interpreted in an idealiat way, with the BwO being then the field of consciousness, on which all qualia appear. Sometimes the BwO seems to be refering to the latent space of possible shapes that a system can assume starting from its current shape. BoW seems to kinda refer to 2 different concepts, the substrate, and the possibility space. The possibility space is only possible due to the neutrality and maleability of the substrate, and this fact kinda allows us to talk about the possibility space as the "will" of the substrate trying to escape any particular organization. The BwO of a system seems then to be just a virtual thing, an abstraction, a way of thinking. Like when we think about an electron's spin or whatever. It's not really spinning, but it's "as if" it was. The electron itself is not a defined object, it's something that behaves "as if" it was, in certain situations It's all so comfusing...

[@noyaljose5186]

Wow really great video. Cleared my doubts and really made me interested in Deleuze. Thanks

[@wj4505]

This and some of these comments were really useful, tysm

[@mahdiesmaeili1512]

Thank you for the detailed explanation of the term. It wasn't boring at all; I actually enjoyed listening to it. Well done!

[@keanuclark4833]

I love your content. Your Time-Image and Movement Image podcasts have been great. Thanks.

[@JS62515]

When the world discovers “The Wonders” and what Rene Gaudette is teaching, all this will change and be simplified drastically.

[@artnarchist1392]

dude you're such a cool cat. thanks so much for doing these vids. Cheers from India!

[@moonmoonpaik171]

This has been an extremely helpful and informative lecture. Thank you so much!

[@pramatheshnandan3380]

Good content. You remind me of Edward Norton. You could play him in the biopic.

[@kriskras5]

Thank you for sharing the video, I still am left with more questions than answers but your examples are clearing some things up.

[@little_flitter]

Currently using bodies without organs as an underpinning philosophy in my research of circus and disability!! Thankyou for this!!

[@TheoryPhilosophy]

Would be super interested in hearing more about that topic if you'd be willing to share on here (or on social if you DM me through insta or patreon)!

[@little_flitter]

@@TheoryPhilosophy oh I'd love to!!

[@anupamapadmanabhan743]

Thank you for explaining BwO!! Love your presentation.

[@TheoryPhilosophy]

Happy to help!

[@martin_quarto]

Maybe what doesn’t seem like a crisis is the crisis of sea change - made more marked by the seeming okayness - mixed with a feeling of uncanny non-okayness - economically speaking - world-change mixed with sea change

[@phucle475]

Permutation, rotation and duality paradox

[@inbfu1513]

Would you please make a video on the essay 'The Autonomy of Affect' by Brian Massumi? Thanks!

[@aeri3684]

To answer the last question - I think fascistic effects of the 2008 recession could possibly be more gradual. In the context of the US, many children and young teenagers, teenagers, adults, ect saw their families ripped apart and other emotionally and mentally damaging and traumatic experiences. The exit-way for many of this younger generation was the Internet - where new digital culture was growing. Considering the prominence of the Alt-Right pipelines of the 2010's and the ability for young individuals to radicalize extremely quickly into new ideologies online, a ground work could have been laid that would harden the decade after. Possibly, it laid the seeds for new resentments throughout hidden fourms and all that. However, this is pure speculation and its a complex topic that this lil hypothesis isnt covering.

[@adyasa-qt4kp]

Do you have any introductory video on Structuralism ?

[@earlephiladelphia4743]

Wow blown away by the presentation. A little intimidating, as I am now applying to Phd programs in philo. Do I have the right stuff?

[@parsa8624]

Thank you this was helpful

[@jeremygold933]

Thanks king

[@adjokisser2926]

Thank you so much. Happy I found you!

[@TDHenriksen]

Very inspirational - thank you very much.

[@raphaelradespiel9970]

Finally! Lol, thanks for this guide, I'll go back to reading with these words in mind.

[@TheoryPhilosophy]

Happy to hear you got something from it. I personally found my presentation lacking but oh well

[@raphaelradespiel9970]

Man, your videos are great. Sadly it's a small niche, but they always help me a whole bunch, incredibly always being in my specific interests of philosophy. Explaining the BwO must really be hard, but this really gave me some good insights. Cheers from a future philosophy teacher from Brasil

[@SepiaOfficinalis-up5rl]

Great video. I will not be able to put this coherently as i do have a schizophrenia specturm disorder. But the schizo part of the book and the way its discussed is so interesting and yet confusing because it does seem to veer into fetishism at times . It feels really weird to read a philosophy book and then basically have yourself described as some kind of messiah figure. Idk I think in broad strokes theyre right but It desperately needs some actual engagement with disability politics to clarify what they mean and what they want. Theres also jsut the kinda iffy aspect of like, putting some people who are lucky to even just live a decent life given the dreadful circumstance , putting them on the cross. I do i think try and engage with these ideas and exercise them in my life and especially in my art , and i think there are other schizos who similarly engage with the book productively but i think some significant amount of the readership understand the schizo to be some ubermensch figure that they somehow have a connection to or even could be. It reminds me of white people calling themsekves shamans in a way .idk.

[@aesop1451]

Don't take it literally. The schizophrenia is an image to communicate a higher meaning.

[@thea7035]

thank you for this video!!! helped me a lot

[@kommanderson]

Thanks, man! You're saving my ass with these concise explanations.

[@jakecarlo9950]

Regarding the crisis of 2008 vs. The right wing populism’s of more recent years, economic thinkers like David Harvey or Yanis Varoufakis have said that the economic order signalized at that time has remained in place and operating, such that the economy & populism can be seen as correlated on the kind of time scales at which large political and economic events unfold. Put another way, 2008 and 2016 can be viewed as adjacent at socioeconomic timescales.

[@jessl1934]

22:23 I'll take the engagement bait! I think that the question that you pose is critically flawed. If we take Germany as the example here, there are two distinct periods: pre and post Treaty of Versailles. The fascism that arose in Germany in the post-Versailles historical moment did so largely due to the economic crisis that represented a rupture in the economic system that underpinned Germany, which posed a sort of existential threat on a bunch of different levels (this also plays out, on a cultural level, in a similar way to the Volkisch revolt against modernity and the wave of industrialization that it rode in upon.) What we see in the US and, at least to some extent, other developed countries is a complete inversion of this situation and hence it does not pose an existential threat nor is there a cultural threat that accompanies it/runs parallel to it. This inversion is as such: the economic crises are normalized and "managed" by a neoliberal process of spreading the losses on a social level, and especially across time by (to put it in glib terms) printing money and letting the future generations deal with incumbent inflation (and also to expand the reliance upon the US dollar internationally but I'm gonna shirk the massive Lenin tangent in a [vain] attempt to reclaim some semblance of brevity here.) These economic crises are also incorporated into the economic system itself to the point where they are fundamental to the ongoing existence _to_ capitalism in the US; instead of being a rupture, as was the case in post-Versailles Germany, it has become the _continuity_ of the prevailing (neoliberal) economic mode. My case for this is in how the economic crises in recent times are never resolved - there is no bankruptcy, no abandonment of currency, no structural changes to the fundamental economic policy or function of the economy itself. All of the crises are bought off and forestalled (in variety of ways)-the US kicks the can down the road, so to speak-but this is also the prevailing method that neoliberal process is itself advanced, and hence it drives the economy forward. Let's take Nazi Germany as an analogy here: the Nazi occupation of France was disastrous and an existential threat to the French. (Much like the rupturous nature of the Versailles-era economic crisis was to Germany.) Why then was the occupation of France not disastrous to Nazi Germany? Without being too blunt about it, the answer is pretty obvious: the invasion and occupation of external territories was an _expression_ of, and a continuity of, Nazi Germany and this imperial expansion was fundamental to how Germany functioned at that time. Not only was it _not_ a threat but war and expansionism was foundational to the very way Germany reproduced itself; the existential threat to Germany did not in reside war but instead it resided in the inability to continue prosecuting war and expanding its territory. Likewise, the so-called economic "crises" in the US represent the economic frontiers of a deepening neoliberalization of society. The "war" does not pose a threat because the economic system inherently relies upon the battlefront to expand its territory. The only real threat is when the economic system cannot expand its territory or maintain its fronts (e.g. if the necessary bailout from the next economic crisis was so immense that it would cause a crisis of confidence in the US dollar as reserve currency globally which would trigger a domino effect of de-dollarization as countries dropped the US dollar in favor of other, more stable, currencies for use in international trade and reserves etc.) That's my take, that's my turgid prose peppered with overextended metaphor.

[@stupideunuchs6513]

The body without organs is CGCG.

[@frombeyond5]

Thank you for this lucid video 🙏

[@ReadingSouthAsia]

Very helpful! Thank you!

[@Rhizzome]

KZbin algorithm done good! Great vid & subscribed 👍

[@karenbanks8542]

Thank you!

[@lizthor-larsen7618]

Much more importantly, comrades, what is a mind without a body? This is an older and more sticky question.

[@rotroom]

Love ur explanation

[@lizthor-larsen7618]

You are not "appeasing" your body. Your body is part of you. You "occupy" your body, brother. You are not restricted by your organs. What restricts one is the greater body politic in which we live.

[@Xanaduum]

You could say you are part of your body. Why would part of the body have ownership? 'You' is a concept, ownership is a concept.

[@ImagoCanis]

could value be considered a BWO in that we use it to create commodities and currency?

[@mwmingram]

Thank you.

[@aureliable8712]

Thank you for the thorough elaboration, it was immensely helpful! Also, excuse my ignorance in advance, I'm familiar with philosophy only on a high-school textbook level, but does the "grand death" of all burdensome constraints imposed by codes and structures have any common points with the death of meta-narratives Lyotard spoke of?

[@thomasrivet5494]

Hey David. Your Patreon link seems to be incomplete. An elipsis eats up the last few letters of your link. Cheers!

[@TheoryPhilosophy]

What a hero! Thanks Tom

[@thomasrivet5494]

@@TheoryPhilosophy You're welcome. Wishing you well!

[@gwennygwen9768]

So what you are saying is...that which is yet to be created...attracts to that which is open to creation?

[@chimz1310]

Wig! Thanks for this King

[@earlephiladelphia4743]

May I ask if we are to see organes themselves as desire machines, thanks in advance?

[@CarlitosMiddleWay]

10:30-12:30

[@kvass679]

i love you so much. Thatks, alot. These vids r amazing

[@hyacinthoides]

thank you for the explanation handsome!!! ❤️

[@varisleek3360]

great channel

[@abcrane]

regarding the 2008 crash and alleged lack of fascism (as its reaction)...fascism comes in many forms, is administered by many parties, the reason why Americans equate one party of the other as fascist is most often based on the effects of such parties policies and agendas on their own lives, they will not see (or care) that both main parties enact fascism on other territories (nations). Americans for the most part look at surfaces and are very me-oriented. Also, the political correctness will prevent them from admitting this or that about someone in power that may be a minority...but bombing foreign countries and exploiting foreign labor bases have been the favorite pastime of all parties left and right. Fascism has been a constant in the US for decades, it's just that Americans are truly that oblivious and unconcerned with anything that does not directly affect them. after the Nam protest years Americans traded in on old liberal ideal of unity and solidarity for a watered down, over bureaucratic, image focused, narcissistic "self-righteousness" identity politic (the perfect candidate, actually, for fascistic takeover, not to mention its administration.) but rest assured, this is and has always been fascism, it's just that most Americans are clueless about life beyond its fortress walls. beyond its complacent mediocrity.

[@LucBoeren]

Thanks a lot!

[@Paolablanton]

"site of possibility" = chaos?

[@wren3164]

amazing thanks

[@kimfreeborn]

To study physiology with a clear conscience, one must insist on the fact that the sense-organs are not phenomena in the sense of the idealistic philosophy; as such they certainly could not be causes! Sensualism, therefore, at least as regulative hypothesis, if not as heuristic principle. What? And others say even that the external world is the work of our organs? But then our body, as a part of this external world, would be the work of our organs! But then our organs themselves would be the work of our organs! It seems to me that this is a complete REDUCTIO AD ABSURDUM, if the conception CAUSA SUI is something fundamentally absurd. Consequently, the external world is NOT the work of our organs-? Nietzsche

[@FrostRare]

Template/ stratum/ opportunity Do you think there are parallels between the body without organs and the feminine?

[@TheoryPhilosophy]

I have no idea what the feminine is

[@FrostRare]

Theory & Philosophy lol

[@shakespearaamina9117]

Brilliant

[@felipeandrade2470]

there's the assumption that the body without organs would prefer to be left alone on its own without desiring machines imposing their will, but i don't see how Deleuze/Guattari come to this assumption, could D/G be projecting their personalities onto the body without organs as they'd prefer that no outside influence changes them at will? is this question arborescent? maybe. Am I the one projecting? maybe. You say in the video that it opposes to desiring machines because it is anti productive, but It doesn't seem very convincing

[@mariorossi7225]

god is a lobster

[@ViolaVoltairine]

So we're they just kinda jiving on an idea of moksha? BwO is just the state of enlightenment - or rather the absolute and unmanifest basis of existence and consciousness - pure potentiality - worded in a different way? And capitalism co-opts that in a way that "botches" it.

[@markfoster9304]

But can you explain what Zizek is on with a Organs without a Body?

[@jessl1934]

Not even Zizek can explain that

[@aesop1451]

Zizek is a Hegelian. Hegel believes in the end of history therefore he believes in linear time instead of cyclical time. Deleuze believes in cyclical time.

[@JAMAICADOCK]

We've had the crisis since 2008, it was Trump. Brexit etc. Or rather simulated crisis, fascism-lite as it were; which probably speaks to Baudrillard's simulation theories; wherein past hot events play out as weak facsimiles However, the crisis has led to hot events in the developing world - the Arab Spring, ISIS, famine in Yemen - not to mention the rise of de facto fascism in Burma, the Philippines, Thailand etc. It's probably the case that highly developed societies are no longer in history, but rather in the simulation of history. Fascism, like communist revolution, or even a counter revolutionary return to classical capitalism - now permanently negated. The real crisis of capital, having been outsourced to the Third World decades ago

[@MajorChoices]

i must admit and say this seems alot like the machines in the matrix , however I may be taking it out of context tho.

[@gwennygwen9768]

Like a magnet?

[@kelvinkj7074]

Body without organs = automaton / mindless bodies

[@21stcenturyoptimist]

Cause the economy never recovered from 08.

[@Adrrian11]

So this is what Shia Labeouf is up to.

[@spritualelitist665]

Very interesting it makes a lot of sense now to me. But what if in essence capitalism assimilates. It was first the religious state, then the nation state, now the global secular state. If anything capitalism can assimilate anything even Marxism/Socialism itself. This idea of Fascism and capitalism is kind of weak having read loads of Fascists manifestos, it sounds like liberal drivel, if anything the nationalistic drives of Europe and Eastern Europe is nations trying to protect themselves from global capitol and what happened in 2008, as I think many on the right have cottoned on how capitol can be a destructive force. Whereas its in the centre and the liberal left that seem to be assimilating into the capitalist structure without even noticing as such, but also stopping it breaking out with MTT, they have somewhat become the new conservatives of the status quo when it comes to economics. Capitalism is still got a way to go, even a pandemic can't stop it. Even decentralisation can be assimilated by capitalism as it can thrive on its own destruction, and now with the emergence of the blockchain and crypto currency, the flows have and could change. If anything the state is stagnation, we should be going away from centralisation and towards decentralisation. I think Nick Land makes the best assumptions of Deleuze's theory and takes it further, Capitol is A.I. The final goal is a form of intelligence explosion, not so much the pre convinced notions of communism or a human utopia, I think it will be post human if anything. Just like the conception of ''0'' in Europe brought about radical change and liberated mathematics creating different economic systems and the idea of capitol itself , capitol will go towards a singularity. You can't really escape capitol and it knows how to smash boundaries. It's always seems 10 steps ahead as well. It's quite remarkable really the constant evolution of it. So I take a nomadic approach with it all. Capitalism will most likely smash globalisation but also survive without it in a decentralised form away from the state and bureaucracy, a nomadic techno capitol. It's why I keep an eye of Africa and its slow system of blockchains creating new flows without the need of corporate entities/state intervention or a third party (the west).

[@jessl1934]

"Capitalism will likely smash globalisation" Bruh. What?? Capitalism in its fully realized form was _always_ globalized and it quite literally tears down the forces and structures that seek to hem it in, as you have said (but which Marx said much better in Grundrisse imo.) You could no more "smash globalisation" than you could "smash cultural exchange" or "smash development". Here's a fun game I like to play with techbro prognostications: replace any terms like crypto/blockchain with "the age of Aquarius" and AI with "enlightened consciousness" or "spirit of Gaia" and see if it's indistinguishable from the ramblings of a hippie wannabe guru who has more opinions than knowledge. Seriously bro, you need to lay off the Nick Land. Not even Nick Land reads Nick Land.

[@7556wjq]

Obscurantism

[@lizthor-larsen7618]

Or, is this a discussion about the "body" politic? This is not particularly deep.

[@anpswagg]

iam calling my boyfriend BWO

[@genathing903]

What do you mean “after 2008 we didn’t see fascism”. This is the post 2008 fascism. It takes time for roots to sprout, for connections to be made. And this fascist movement is definitely rhizomatic.

[@arturzathas499]

what a bunch of gibberish. sophisticated arguments are the result of a simple mind. th more complex the mind, the more elegant the argument. both these dudes, were being as french as they could be - over the top.

[@duffdingelmeyer7101]

Why do they insist on using this weird terminology

[@Xanaduum]

I think it's because it sounds more esoteric\poetic. To me it comes across as trying too hard. Reminds me of Lacan intentionally writing in a way that makes you have to really work to understand what he's trying to say. Frankly I think it's pretentious.

[@zubermesfin1679]

Can you please tell me what even is the purpose of inventing this artificial term? What is the question they were answering in coming up with this term? What real life problem was made clear through this term? Are you sure you are not wasting your time with meaningless concepts.

[@zack49]

Let's not pretend wasting time is that terrible while commenting on youtube lol. Go away from philosophical spaces, if these ideas are too abstract, this is not the place for you.

[@blackeddeath]

you came back and edited this comment lol

[@aesop1451]

Deleuze was a process philosopher. He picks up Heraclitus (the Lao-Tzu of the West) and puts him in the 20th century. Like Nietzsche, Deleuze believes Plato ruined Western metaphysics by creating a substance-based ontology. Instead of reality being constant flux, Plato says reality is created by Eternal Forms. Taoism is not just a philosophy. It also has a practical component to it. Lao-Tzu says to follow the Dao or wu-wei. Nietzsche framed it in terms of beyond good and evil (duality). Now you see the theme of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil in the Garden of Eden. The Taoist path is neidan (inner alchemy). In alchemy, you have to produce the philosopher's stone. In Christian terms, you need to find a fruit from the Tree of Life. Wu-wei is transcendence through immanence. Jesus tells Nicodemus he needs to be born again. In process philosophy, reality is described as panentheistic. God is in the world and the world is in God. THE BODY WITHOUT ORGANS. This solves scientific problems like "How did consciousness arise from matter?" If you want to see Deleuzian metaphysics through the world religions, read Evola's Yoga of Power, Ride the Tiger, and Eros and the Mysteries of Love. Deleuze is a modern day magus.

[@Anabsurdsuggestion]

Brexit and Trump were less than ten years after the 2008 crash. The Nuremberg rally of ‘33 was 15 years after the end of WW1. It’s happening alright.

[@Yocole5]

Pseudoscience that don’t make a damn bit of sense

[@davidsheriff9274]

You are absolutely correct. This is a perfect example of post modernist incoherent babble. It means absolutely nothing. I think some post modernists have important things to say about society and literally criticizm but my God, they should stay away from science. There is a great book called " Fashionable nonsense" writer by Alan Sokol. It talks all about this. He is standing up proudly and screaming"the emperor has no clothes".

[@jessl1934]

@@davidsheriff9274 My favorite work by Alan "Sokol" is the one where he unintentionally proved the postmodernists right and attempted to build a name for himself based on this.

[@zubermesfin1679]

Glad there is at least one other sane person in this comment section. Anything that further obscures simple concepts is trash, and so is anything that needs to be described in such a convoluted way. All you need to do to determine the value of these obscure terms is this: summarize it clearly and ask yourself, was that really profound? In this case, the answer is a resounding no.

[@jessl1934]

@@zubermesfin1679 How's the anti-intellectualism treating you today?

[@Xanaduum]

​@@jessl1934 there's intellectualism and over-intellectualism. Reminds me of Lacan intentionally writing in a way that makes you have to really work to understand what he's trying to put across. It also makes it sound esoteric in way that comes across as trying too hard. Like those artists that write about their own work using the biggest words they learned at university.

[@davidmiller4078]

Dead ? Why pretend its rocket science ? you dont sound like a cynical French psuedo intelectual ?