Tag CloudAchilles Affect Affects affectuum imitatio Antigone a thousand plateaus Augustine Autopoiesis Badiou Being Campanella capitalism Causation Cause Christiaan Huygens Davidson Death Deleuze Descartes Epistemology Ethics Freud Graham Harman Guattari Harman Hegel Heidegger Huygens Idea Imagination Immanence Information Johannes Hudde Kant Lacan Language Game Larval Subjects lathe Latour Lenses lens grinding Letter 39 Letter 40 Levi Bryant Massumi Metaphor Metaphysics microscope Negation Nietzsche object Object-Oriented Philosophy Ontology OOP Optics panpsychism Parables of the Virtual Philosophical Investigations Philosophy Plato Plotinus Poetry power Rorty Sophocles Spinoza Subject Substance Telescope Triangulation Truth Van Leeuwenhoek Vico Wim Klever Wittgenstein
2001: a space odyssey Achilles Alan Gabbey Antigone Antonio Negri Arne Naess Art Criticism Augustine Avatar Badiou biosemiotics Bousquet Brian Massumi Caliban Campanella Chalmers Christiaan Huygens Colerus Conjoined Semiosis Critical Theory cybernetics Dante David Graeber David Skrbina Davidson Deleuze Della Rocca Derrida Descartes Duns Scotus Epistemology Ethics Euripedes Exowelt Felix Guattari Foucault Graham Harman Greek Tragedy Guattari Heidegger Helvetica Hevelius Hockney-Falco Thesis Hume Huygens Information John Donne Kepler Kubrick L'occhiale all'occhio Latour Leibniz Letter 39 Letter to Peter Balling Literary Theory Martha Nussbaum Marx Metaphor Micrographia Milton Morality Nicola Masciandaro Nietzsche Optica Promota Ovid Painting panpsychism Parables of the Virtual Patricia Collins Philosophy Philosophy of Mind Photosynth Plato Plotinus Politics Rhetoric Rilke Robert Hooke Rorty Sappho Simulated Annealing Skepticism Slavoj Zizek Sloterdijk Specilla circularia Spinoza Spinoza's Foci St. Paul The Buttle Principle Three Varieties of Knowledge Tommaso Campanella Uncategorized Van Leeuwenhoek Vico Walter Benjamin William of Auvergne Wittgenstein Zizek zombies Zuggtmoy
|Day One of Bullshit!… on Cookery, Cuisine and the Truth…|
|Dana on Conjoined Semiosis: A “N…|
|Kevin von Duuglas-It… on Conjoined Semiosis: A “N…|
|Dana on Conjoined Semiosis: A “N…|
|Prof. Brian J Ford on The 1661 Technique of “G…|
|Charles M. Saunders on As Lensmaker: A Quick Ove…|
|Kevin von Duuglas-It… on Spinoza Doubt? The Sephardim,…|
|George W. Singleton… on Spinoza Doubt? The Sephardim,…|
|Dean on The Objective truth of Ro…|
|Billy McMurtrie on A Book that Explodes All Books…|
- Mitochondrial Vertigo: The New Blog
- Going Dark
- The Becoming-woman of Machine in Avatar
- The Difference Between a Description and an Explanation: Deficits in Latour
- Peking Opera and the Aesthetic Freedoms of Avatar
- Transcendence or Immanence: Cake-and-eat-it-too-ism
- From Affect to Mutuality, Openness to Rational Co-expression: Massumi to Spinoza
- Is the Medium the Message? Avatar’s Avatar
- Massumi’s Cognitive Doubling, Spinoza’s Numerical Affectivity
- Two Vectors of Avatar’s Cinematic Achievement: Affect and Space Interface
- Accursed Share
- An und für sich
- Anodyne Lite
- Click Opera
- Critical Animal
- Dead Voles
- Ecology Without Nature
- Eliminative Culinarism
- Fido the Yak
- In the Middle
- Loxogonospherical Moods
- Lumpen Orientalism
- Metastable Equilibrium
- Methods of Projection
- Naught Thought
- Necessarily Eternal
- Perverse Egalitarianism
- Pinocchio Theory
- Pirates and Revolutionaries
- Quiet Sun
- Shaviro's Workblog
- Slawkenbergius’s Tales
- Speculative Heresy
- spinoza research network
- Splintering Bone Ashes
- The Whim
- Utopian Realism
- Varieties of Unreligious Experience
- Velvet Howler
- Violent Signs
- Working Notes
Spinoza Primary Sources
- Ethics, Emendation, Tractatus and Letters, in Latin
- F. van den Enden website
- Hyperlinked Ethics, Emmendation, Tractatus and Letters
- Nicholas De Cusa’s “De Visione Dei”, English Translation
- Selected Letters, Elwes Translation
- Spinoza’s Complete Works, Shirley Translation
- Spinoza’s Works in Latin
- The Life of Spinoza, by Johannes Colerus (1705)
- April 2010 (1)
- January 2010 (2)
- December 2009 (26)
- November 2009 (21)
- October 2009 (21)
- September 2009 (15)
- August 2009 (8)
- July 2009 (18)
- June 2009 (23)
- May 2009 (21)
- April 2009 (20)
- March 2009 (26)
- February 2009 (24)
- January 2009 (28)
- December 2008 (16)
- November 2008 (17)
- October 2008 (12)
- September 2008 (23)
- August 2008 (26)
- July 2008 (40)
- June 2008 (40)
- May 2008 (54)
Ode to Man
Tho’ many are the terrors, not one more terrible than man goes. This one beyond the grizzled sea in winter storming to the south He crosses, all-engulfed, cutting through, up from under swells. & of the gods She the Eldest, Earth un-withering, un-toiling, is worn down, As the Twisting Plough’s year into Twisting Plough’s year, Through the breeding of horse, he turns. & the lighthearted race of birds all-snaring he drives them & savage beasts, their clan, & of the sea, marine in kind With tightly-wound meshes spun from all-seeing is Man. Yet too, he masters by means of pastoral beast, mountain-trodding, The unruly-maned horse holding fast, ‘round the neck yoked, & the mountain’s ceaseless bull. & the voice & wind-fast thought & the passion for civic ways He has taught, so from crag’s poor court from under the ether’s hard-tossed arrows To flee, this all-crossing one. Blocked, he comes upon nothing so fated. From Hades alone escape he’ll not bring. Tho’ from sickness impossible Flight he has pondered. A skilled one, devising of arts beyond hope, Holding at times an evil, But then to the noble he crawls, honoring the laws of the Earth, & Of gods the oath so just, high-citied. Citiless is the one who with the un-beautiful dwells, boldly in grace. Never for me a hearth-mate may he have been, never equal in mind He who offers this.
Ode to Man
A BwO is made in such a way that it can be occupied, populated only by intensities. Only intensities pass and circulate. Still, the BwO is not a scene, a place, or even a support upon which something comes to pass. It has nothing to do with phantasy, there is nothing to interpret. The BwO causes intensities to pass; it produces and distributes them in a spatium that is itself intensive, lacking extension. It is not space, nor is it in space; it is matter that occupies space to a given degree—to the degree corresponding to the intensities produced. It is nonstratified, unformed, intense matter, the matrix of intensity, intensity = 0; but there is nothing negative about that zero, there are no negative or opposite intensities. Matter equals energy. Production of the real as an intensive magnitude starting at zero. That is why we treat the BwO as the full egg before the extension of the organism and the organization of the organs, before the formation of the strata; as the intense egg defined by axes and vectors, gradients and thresholds, by dynamic tendencies involving energy transformation and kinematic movements involving group displacement, by migrations: all independent of accessory forms because the organs appear and function here only as pure intensities. The organ changes when it crosses a threshold, when it changes gradient. "No organ is constant as regards either function or position, . . . sex organs sprout anywhere,... rectums open, defecate and close, . . . the entire organism changes color and consistency in split-second adjustments." The tantric egg. After all, is not Spinoza's Ethics the great book of the BwO?
Ode to Man
But human power is extremely limited, and is infinitely surpassed by the power of external causes; we have not, therefore, an absolute power of shaping to our use those things which are without us. Nevertheless, we shall bear with an equal mind all that happens to us in contravention to the claims of our own advantage, so long as we are conscious, that we have done our duty, and that the power which we possess is not sufficient to enable us to protect ourselves completely; remembering that we are a part of universal nature, and that we follow her order. If we have a clear and distinct understanding of this, that part of our nature which is defined by intelligence, in other words the better part of ourselves, will assuredly acquiesce in what befalls us, and in such acquiescence will endeavour to persist. For, in so far as we are intelligent beings, we cannot desire anything save that which is necessary, nor yield absolute acquiescence to anything, save to that which is true: wherefore, in so far as we have a right understanding of these things, the endeavour of the better part of ourselves is in harmony with the order of nature as a whole.
Kvond “…in Spinoza the Indifference (if we can borrow the term) falls to Substance itself which contains all things as a Unity come out of its unbound nature, a pure affirmation without lack; thus for him the differentiation of essences expressed in an infinite number of Attributes flows from its sheerly immanent, determined and infinite nature.” I always appreciate that message about affirmation.
Looking forward to The Cold of the Body Without Organs.
Me too. I am really hoping that I can get “cold” enough to drive it out of me.
Schelling’s concept of indifference has always intrigued me (in an indifferent sort of way 😉 and it’s fascinating to learn that it’s related to magnetism..
On the other hand, while I now see what you meant by “Absolute Zero”, and of course I’ve heard of zero degrees Kelvin, I would not have connected that with anything philosophical, since it’s such a nearly non-existent state and matter must be tortured in order to reach it. If it’s something like a metaphor for a cloud world where there are no distinct objects, I’m not sure I can follow you over that cliff.
I’ve had some psychedelic experiences of going beyond ‘cell boundaries’, but these have always appeared to me as something ‘warm and fuzzy’, more like being fried and dissolved into a hot soup, than anything cold and/or frozen. I’ve read Deleuze’s COLDNESS AND CRUELTY: but, like Nina said of dysphoria, “I guess I’m just not wired that way”..
Coldness and the Bose condensate just reminded me of something: I was trying to read one of Graham’s favorite philosophers again, yesterday. I’m referring to Leibniz’s MONADOLOGY (Rescher’s edition for students with all the nice references for each cryptic ‘axiom’) and I just can’t get past square one because the concept of a “simple substance” is no more meaningful to me than a Bose-Einstein condensate that can only exist under some tortured, illogical conditions. I can’t see anything that is partless, as Leibniz wants to claim, and I don’t, uh, see the point of turning objects into metaphysical points – unless all you’re interested in is constructing some abstract string theory..
Anyway, what (re)occurred to me that’s possibly relevant to your Coldness theme, was Leibniz’s example of a frozen pond that is not a simple substance because, locked within the ice, there are various frozen fish and, adding my own elaboration now, in the mud beneath the ice there are turtles hibernating, waiting for the thaw. Now, if The Cold of the Body Without Organs, as Amarilla puts it, is something like hibernation, I can relate to that, whereas Absolute Zero still seems like an abstract ideal..
Mark I am certainly glad that at the very least the juxtaposition of ideas has gotten your wheels turning, and equally glad you share your associations here. Hopefully my next post – this was something more of a prologue to the idea, its genesis in me – will show more of the kernel of thought. It is a very strong intuition, and I am struggling with how to present it.
But it comes with these vectors or directions:
1. Absolute Zero is related to the principles discussed in the Stonier piece on Idea as Information. I am less inspired by the overlap of wave functions, the hyperglobuale Einstein-Bose, than I am with the thought that 0 K is a state of 0 Entropy, and rather than being a great glob is a highly structured, completely information dense state. This has strong correspondence to Spinoza’s sub specie aeterintatis.
2. There may be correspondence to Deleuze’s Coldness and Cruelty and a rhetorical appeal to the other meaning of “indifference” (which Schelling did not mean), but I have not thought that threw. In a certain sense the machinic nature of pure production or pure potentia is highly impersonal, but I have not gotten that far.
3. How one goes about constructing a BwO for D and G is of great importance here. I read Absolute Zero conceptually to be related to the BwO of a Thousand Plateaus (a much neglected and little theorized concept of theirs).
4. What is key for me is that Spinoza offers two prescriptions for health and radical change. The first is internal and starts with ANY idea that one has. In a sense he seeks to cool that idea down to zero, to find the point of indifference between it and its object, to seek its coincident or indiffence point. This is not globular, but rather, because it is linked to an infinite series of distinct determinations it “opens-out” any mental state. The second prescription is that Spinoza advises (or rather, implies) that there are Zero Points for any external states as we relate to them. These too he cools down, seeking an Indifference, inducing an intuition that is also quite radical to any theoretical picture we have of whatever state we think we are participating in (and we are materially and ideally participating in all of them). So Absolute Zero is sought intra- and inter- Being, in a sense.
5. This is definitely connected to psychological or political “cold”, most important though is, pace Schelling and all that followed, cold is not a negation, not defined as the absence of something, a hole in the world. This is why Spinoza’s Indifference is at great divergence from Schelling’s. Perhaps though it does come about by “torturing matter” as you suggest. Or at least dissecting the joining points that see most natural to us, I’ll have to play that out and see. At the very least, Spinoza see this Zero as one that is not a middle point of a numbers line that goes into negative and positive numbers, but rather as a beginning point for a wholly positive and full affirmation and series.
6. I suspect or am hopeful as well that an aesthetic process can be solidly linked to this, a way in which to aesthetically approach objects that are taken as objects of representation. Because Cold Point thinking is non-represenational, representational endeavors would be radically rethought, much as perhaps Deleuze and Guattari rethought the representations of the orchid and the wasp, but even more so.
Anyways, thanks for your thoughts. Hopefully this will provoke me to getting my ideas out in the next few days.
A few questions… In what text do G & D speak of orchids and wasps? Who is this Bruno you speak of in the post?
For some reason I’m glad the phrase “tortured matter” has shown up, in my experience it takes a lot of torture to find the 0 point of renunciation of attraction and aversion, both of which states seem to require an excess of energy and the warping twists of self-deception to sustain themselves. I’m wondering if the tortured matter brings us back to the territory of what you’ve called, I think, the chaocomplex.
Amarilla, the wasp/orchid phenomena is found in A Thousand Plateaus. In the past I have written on it in the analysis of transgender, here: https://kvond.wordpress.com/2008/05/15/23/ .
I think I follow your thoughts on tortured matter and self. The way that I read it is that seeking the Cold Point, the absolute neutrality of idea and object, sets the path straight, opens up the possibilities of what has been previously recorded through illusionary habituations. From there, the chaoplex arises, partly out of our determinations, partly out of the borders of our ignorances…
Oh, I see which Bruno now. I came across a motto of his, “In tristitia hilaris, in hilaritate tristis” (In sadness happy, in happiness sad.) Perhaps his way of saying there is not negative.
Hey, the Bruno loosely referenced is likely Bruno from the Renaissance, but it specifically is a character is a Schelling dialogue which was meant show Schelling’s problems with Fichte’s thinking. Cool Bruno quote. The “real” Bruno is wonderful. His burning at the stake in I think 1600 is thought by some to mark the beginning of modernity.
The quote’s a lot better in Latin, no? Tristitia and hilaritate lift off, but happiness and sadness, not so much. Or maybe it’s just the novelty effect.
I don’t know if this similar to your concept of absolute zero in ideas, but I’ve found in time spent remembering things in my past, eventually you develop this cooling, cold, empty and clear relationship w/r/t a memory, even if it is a sad or painful one. Admittedly, I like the way it feels once you can get there. It’s like this space that isn’t one, almost bordering the junkie’s cold within you, like the early morning hours when the city is still asleep and the streetlights are shimmering on the pavement and perhaps intervals within the gleam of sparse traffic. And an autumn’s gentle rain drizzling and almost inaudible and damp, and the high or sedation, or whichever of your chosen pill/substance, has set in inside of you, slowly dissolving, indifferent and vacuous. I definitely do not think it is dysphoric, though. And for me lately, unlike the junkies absolute cold, it doesn’t feel edge-laced frenetic or anything…there’s no real panic to quickly figure out a way to get the numb back in you before you ‘return’ to whatever state/degree you were trying to escape to/from, if that’s what you desired. It just feels like a gradual melting enclosing you and slowly moving along you, and the world feels a bit dulled or subdued and muted, and yet is familiar, but not nostalgic or sentimental. And you feel a calming surge and you are still and unspoken, and you are present and stark real.
Anyway, I’ve really enjoyed your work on this wordpress. I am especially having a particularly good time wrapping my brain through the “Information, Spinoza’s Idea and The Structure of The Universe” and cyberneticists/chaocomplexicists related posts. Looking forward to the “Cold of the BwO”.