[...]ut 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.
..rethinking of the disciplinary boundaries (without using labels such as ="trms">interdisciplinarity, etc.)
="large lg2" stl="font-size:111%">
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
="large lg1" stl="font-size:127%">
="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.
="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'>?
dream images, vivid mythical s="trms">cenes,
form ="trms">travels/passes through us
="display:block;white-space:nowrap;margin-bottom:-1em;overflow:hidden;">...................................
='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'>?)
to direct attention towards the beings about which humans are ="trms">interrogating themselves
="large lg3" stl="font-size:112%">
عجایب ="nms">ajayeb is a ‘="trms">network’ more than anything else, in it “God” has no special privilege, is not located in addition to or beyond other beings
we are seeking to redefine the paths of beings that are unique to ="nms">ajayeb without giving them substance and without jumping immediately into transcendence. (using ="ppl">="ppl">Latour words) ='lgc'>[transcendence is never gradual, in the places i come from, it is always a shock, happening, a truth-event='lgc'>]
="prgrph">-each word (God, Angle, Jinn جن, fog, etc.) brought into its own ="trms">network,
="prgrph">-what are contrasts and of ="trms">category mistakes particular to each
="prgrph">-and their crossings='lgc'>='lgc'>--='lgc'>--and what is the ="trms">vocabulary ="trms">specific to each crossing
="large lg4" stl="font-size:112%">
the ="trms">network of as="trms">sociations necessary for the exercise of ="trms">religion without bracketing off its ="trms">ontological requirements.
explanatory rage (tavahoshe roshangari توحش روشنگری) ='lgc'>--='not'>✕='lgc'>='lgc'>--> ="trms">networks necessary for ="trms">religious meaning
(the aim is) deploying the ="trms">network (of ="nms">ajayeb)
it is about grasping ="nms">ajayeb's beings not as substances but as ='strcls'>*="trms">trajectories='strcls'>*='lgc'>--and give them a more precise ='strcls'>*direction.='strcls'>*
what is important in working these modes what kinds of possibilities are “afforded” to the investigator, myself. what kind of actor am i='qstn'>?
(="trms">specifications of the type of beings that the mode leaves in its wake)
="large lg5" stl="font-size:132%">
='strcls'>**other beings necessary for its existence='strcls'>**
(my personal/public ="trms">question, what other beings are necessary for my existence='qstn'>? and therefore for your existence as well.) ='lgc'>='lgc'>='lgc'>--='lgc'>--> the heterogeneity of the actors needed for the pursuit of any course of action
='strcls'>*="trms"nttrm="metaph,metamorph,metabol,metal">meta="trms">morphosis (a mode of existence first detected in psychogenesis='qstn'>?) what we encounter whenever we address the manner in which existents are transformed or transform in order to subsist (zist زیست)
="prgrph">-de[...]