[...]s='lgc'>: all objective entities are products of a ="trms">historical process, that is, their identity is synthesized or produced as part of ="trms">cosmological, geological, biological, or ="trms">social ="trms">history. This need for a concept of “synthesis” or of “production” is what attracted ="ppl">Marx to ="ppl">Hegelian dialectics since it provided him with a model of synthesis='lgc'>: a conflict of op="trms">posites or the negation of the negation. ="ppl">Deleuze and ="ppl">Guattari, on the other hand, replace that model of synthesis with what they call a “double ="trms">articulation”='lgc'>: first, the raw ="trms">materials that will make up a new entity must be selected and pre-processed; second, they must be consolidated into a whole with properties of its own. A rock like limestone or sandstone, for example, is first ="trms">articulated though a process of sedimentation (the slow gathering and ="trms">sorting of the pebbles that are the component parts of the rock). Then it is ="trms">articulated a second time as the accumulated sediment is glued together by a process of cementation. They use Hjemslev's terms “content” and “expression” as the names for the two ="trms">articulations, but this is not meant to sug="trms">gest that the ="trms">articulations are in any way ="trms">linguistic in o="trms"nttrm="righ,rigo,riga,rigi,trig,rign">rigin. On the contrary='lgc'>: the sounds, words, and grammatical patterns of a ="trms">language are ="trms">materials that accumulate or sediment ="trms">historically, then they are consolidated by another process, like the standardization of a dialect by a Royal Academy and its official ="trms">dictionaries, grammars, and rules of pronunciation.

(synthetic ='lgc'>=/=='qstn'>? analytic; ='lgc'>[a problematic distinction!='lgc'>] the logical particle “un-” in “no unmarried man is married”) (analytic ='lgc'>=/=='qstn'>? ="trms">contingent)
(="ppl">Kantian='qstn'>?!) ‘a ="trms">priori and synthetic’ ='lgc'>=='lgc'>=> ‘a posteriori analytic’

='lgc'>[singular entities:='lgc'>]

The ="trms">question of the “individuation of ="trms">trajectories” is about mathematical models (which to me are the secret of the success of ="trms">science) but you are correct that it goes beyond that. All entities synthesized ="trms">historically are individual entities='lgc'>: individual plants and ="trms">animals; individual ="trms">species and eco="trms">systems; individual mountains, planets, solar ="trms">systems, et cetera. Here “individual” means simply “singular or unique,” that is, not a particular ="trms">member of a general ="trms">category, but a unique entity that may ="trms">compose larger individual entities through a ="trms">relation of part-to-whole, like individual pebbles ="trms">composing a larger individual rock. A ="trms">materia="trms"nttrm="listen,alist,ilist,llist,olist,ylist,ulist">list ="trms">ontology of individual entities is implicit in ="ppl">Deleuze and ="ppl">Guattari and Braudel, so we must give them credit for that, then move on and invent the rest.

="large lg2" stl="font-size:111%">
..rethinking of the disciplinary boundaries (without using labels such as ="trms">interdisciplinarity, etc.)



we must take in mind that ="trms">materialism is good to be enriched, but, ="trms">materialism is not an ‘a ="trms">priori’!

in ='mywrk'>my research in ="nms">apass on ="nms">ajayeb عجایب‌, can be theoretical yet anti-="trms">methodological='qstn'>?



...="ppl">Marx is his ="trms">interest in the oppressed, that is, his anti-="ppl">Aristotlianism that allows us to conceptualize the self-organizing power of “="trms">matter” without the “meaning” that should over="trms">code it.

="ppl">Delanda='lgc'>: The political economy of ="ppl">Marx is entirely a ="trms">priori.
='lgc'>[='lgc'>--="ppl">Laclau='lgc'>='lgc'>--> essentia="trms"nttrm="listen,alist,ilist,llist,olist,ylist,ulist">list conception of both ="trms">society and ="trms">social ="trms">agency in ="ppl">Marxism ='lgc'><='lgc'>== ho="trms"nttrm="listen,alist,ilist,llist,olist,ylist,ulist">listic approache ='lgc'>: a “founding totality” (expressed at the surface of ="trms">social life) which ="trms">presents itself as an intelligible object of ‘knowl="trms"nttrm="knowledge,Knowledge">edge’ (in ="ppl">Marxism notion of ‘ideology’) ='lgc'>=/= ='lgc'>{="trms">relational character of any (="trms">social) identity ='lgc'>+ in="trms">finite play of ="trms">differences='lgc'>}= discourse ='lgc'>='lgc'>--> ‘the ="trms">social’ always exceeds the limits of the attempts to constitute ‘="trms">society’;
& (in advanced capita="trms"nttrm="listen,alist,ilist,llist,olist,ylist,ulist">list ="trms">societies='lgc'>:) identity='lgc'> = the unstable ="trms">articulation of constantly changing ="trms">positionalities, ‘="trms">social ="trms">agent='lgc'> = decentered subject’ ='lgc'>='lgc'>--> how can we, then, say the subjects misrecognize themselves in this kaleidoscopic movement of ="trms">differences='qstn'>? ='lgc'>=/= (="ppl">Marxism's notion of) ‘false consciousness’; can we do without (the concept of) ‘misrecognition’='qstn'>?
='lgc'>='lgc'>--> (="ppl">Laclau sug="trms">gests) the ideological='strcls'>* (='lgc'>='lgc'>~=='qstn'>? will to totality)='lgc'>:
="lsts lst1">•misrecognition of a ="trms">positive essence='lgc'> = ultimate suture (بخيه bakhie)
="lsts lst1">•nonrecognition of any ="trms">positivity ='lgc'>=/= ultimate suture
(="trms">society institutes itself ='lgc'><='lgc'>==) closure='lgc'>: nonrecognition of the in="trms">finite play of ="trms">differences ='lgc'>}='lgc'>='lgc'>--> ‘ideological ='lgc'>=='lgc'>=> ="trms">social’ ='lgc'>~(the ="trms">social is impossible without some fixation of meaning) ='lgc'>: “utopia is the essence of any ="trms">communication and ="trms">social practice” ='lgc'>--!,='lgc'>]
='lgc'>[='lgc'>--="ppl">Delanda='lgc'>='lgc'>--> (the mode of ‘downward thinking’ when we think in terms of) ideology (='lgc'>~ the established ="trms">relations of a particular ="trms">society constitutes people's identities) ='lgc'>='lgc'>~= intrinsic='lgc'>: the identity is created by ="trms">relations ='lgc'>{the fantasy of ‘seamless totality'='lgc'>} ='lgc'>=/= (="ppl">Deleuzian) extrinsic='lgc'>: the ="trms">relations are real but don't determine identities='lgc'>]

what are artists (particular ='lgc'><-='lgc'>=> general) pro="trms">positions (Angebot)='qstn'>?
="lsts lst1">•pro="trms">position='lgc'>: a declarative that can be ="trms"nttrm="righ,rigo,riga,rigi,trig,rign">right or wrong ='lgc'>=/= a sentence, grammatical entities
="lsts lst1">•ex="trms">position='lgc'>: a ="trms">systematic ="trms">interpretation/explanation of a ="trms">specific topic
="lsts lst1">•dis="trms">position='lgc'>: an ="trms">affective orientation, knowl="trms"nttrm="knowledge,Knowledge">edge attitude
='lgc'>[="ppl">Marx's ruthlessness='lgc'>: criticism must not be afraid of its own con="trms">="trms"nttrm="cluster,club">clusions='lgc'>]


what are the sources of “value” in ="nms">ajayeb='qstn'>?
(sun, photosynthetic, micro-organisms, etc.)
fermentation, photosynthesis, respiration

="nms">ajayeb is the (shared, individual, or experienced) “="trms">memory” of which organizational layer or process of which ="trms">communities of practice='qstn'>?


rethinking “invisible hand”
(dynamic between supply and ="trms">demand. “planning ="trms">system”='qstn'>?)

... against ... the dualisms that have been transmitted to us in the ="trms">history of philosophy (="trms">matter vs. meaning, micro vs. macro, inorganic vs. organic vs. ="trms">social, realism vs. ="trms">social constructivism, etcetera.) and argue in favor of a new ="trms">ontology ="trms">according to which “mechanisms are largely ="trms">causal, but they do not necessarily involve linear ="trms">causality”



Neo-="trms">Materialism ='lgc'>=/= Creationism='lgc'>: ="trms">matter is an inert receptacle for forms that come from the outside imposed by an exterior psychic ="trms">agency='lgc'>: “Let there be light!”

='lgc'>='lgc'>--> ="trms">matter has ="trms">morphogenetic capacities of its own and does not need to be commanded into generating form.

one of the idealisms that have been generated by post="trms">modernism='lgc'>: that we know al="trms"nttrm="already,spread">ready how all ="trms">past discourses have been generated, that we have the secret of all ="trms">past conceptual ="trms">systems, and that we can therefore engage in ="trms"nttrm="metaph,metamorph,metabol,metal">meta-theorizing based on that knowl="trms"nttrm="knowledge,Knowledge">edge



="ppl">Delanda='lgc'>: I am not convinced that avoiding dualities is the key to a new way of thinking (particularly if one simply adds new ones='lgc'>: ="trms">modernism-post="trms">modernism, rhizome-tree, power-resistance).

reified generalities that do not really exist='lgc'>: The ="trms">Market, The State, and The People.

The duality emerges when one ignores the zone of overlap and reifies the averages.

="large lg1" stl="font-size:136%"> ="display:block;white-space:nowrap;margin-bottom:-1em;overflow:hidden;">...................................

='lgc'>[in ="nms">="nms">ajayebnameh عجایب نامه...='lgc'>] to map the ="trms">morphogenetic changes of the real



... be="trms">wildering heterogeneity of registers in ="nms">="nms">ajayebnameh عجایب نامه

... treating entities trafficking in the futures

active capacities of description

this is not a project of repopulating the ="trms">social ="trms">sciences with nonhuman beings

the ="trms">symbolic function of ="trms">language is about detecting salient features of the ="trms">world that can be organized in contrastive sets
(can we think not in contrasts='qstn'>?)

this is not about trying to think like X, that would be trans="trms">position of a ="trms">relational experience at another scale

(non-="trms">religious ="trms">semiotic model)
bodily dis="trms">position ='lgc'>==(produces)='lgc'>=='lgc'>=> perspective ='lgc'>==(produces)='lgc'>=='lgc'>=> self

the beings in ="nms">ajayeb (عجایب‌) are ‘alive’ because of their ability to ‘do things’ in the ways they come to re="trms">present and ="trms">interpret through me

="trms">recruiting scores of new actants so as to render the theater of ="trms">worldly ="trms">interactions more complex and ="trms">interesting


what is the ="trms">sociocultural ="trms">world we construct='qstn'>?


="large lg3" stl="font-size:111%"> dream images, vivid mythical s="trms">cenes,


form ="trms">travels/passes through us

="display:block;white-space:nowrap;margin-bottom:-1em;overflow:hidden;">...................................
="large lg4" stl="font-size:112%">
='lgc'>[="ppl">="ppl">Latour modes of existence='lgc'>]

(to distinguish types of)
incompatible truths

“truth"='lgc'>--is the expression of an encounter with forms of existence

to understand the others in the absence of a description of ourselves
(what is rea="trms"nttrm="listen,alist,ilist,llist,olist,ylist,ulist">listic='qstn'>?)

="large lg5" stl="font-size:120%"> to direct attention towards the beings about which humans are ="trms">interrogating themselves



عجایب‌ ="nms">ajayeb is a ‘="trms">network’ more than anything else, in it “God” has no[...]