Introduction: Logos or Abstract Machines?

We have the unconscious we deserve! (9)

[3] dilemma: genealogical finality and rising entropy -- We can bypass these
dilemmas by refusing any sort of causalist or finalist extrapolation and by
strictly limiting the object of research to structural relations or systematic
balances. -- time as nonlinear but endlessly proliferating

[4**] machinic interactions: abstract deterritorialized interactions: **abstract

machines**; they "traverse various levels of reality and establish and demolish
stratifications (11)" -- operate where? **place of consistency** (transtemporal and
transpatial, refer to [3]); **relative coeffecients of existence** are affected by
the plane of consistency through abstract machines -- manner of appearance:
noncentralized (that is, not in one piece), "it is **negotiated** on the basis of
**quanta of possibles** -- **coordinates of existence** are established on the
basis of **assemblages** "which are in constant interaction and incessantly engaged
in processes of deterritorialization and singularization causing them to be
decentralized in comparison to one another, while assigning them "territories of
replacement"" in spaces of coding (11)" -- territories and lands vs machinic
territorialities -- assemblages recognize **relative identities and trajectories**
-- nothing is a foregone conclusion, therefore (in ref. to [3]) thinking time
against the grain is more than a possibility

[abstract machines are not objects, but relations that coordinate the consistency
of existence vis-a-vis the obtaining assemblages (collections of objects that make
up a recognizable social sphere) -- as informed by historical processes, and as
grounded on the immanence that stems from the plane of consistency. that it is
negotiated on the basis of **quanta of possibles** points to its opposition to
systems that require signs and subjects to operate only via compulsary universal
forms and general algorithms. via abstract machines, chance is pit against
contingency, and the structure is pit against the network.]

[5] "smoothing of time" in the direction of both the past and future (11-12)" as
**logos**? -- logos can affect the past and the future as long as to adheres to a
principle of continuity and cohesion -- dubious: because of its inclination to
distance its analyses from the physico-biological world in order to rejoin the
mathematical universe of its origin (12); "What particularly worries me is that
they can only be factored in, as Rene Thom explains, so that the most abstract are
arranged with the most elementary and the most concrete with the most complex. This
simple fact seems to condemn them to definitively fail to maintain their **hold on
reality**. (12)" [later in the same paragraph, Guattari speaks of logoi arranging
its objects of analyses according to "a universe of forms and general formulas"] --
diff between logoi and abstract machines: the former merely carries abstractions,
the latter, in addition to abstracting assemblages, also "convey **singularity
points** 'extracted' from the cosmos and history (12)" -- machinic extracts [is to
extract to deterritorialize?] -- **abstract machines vs abstract universals** --
"Abstraction can only result from machines and assemblages of concrete
enunciations. (12)"

[6] **the ideal of order**: "the systematic formalization of every mode of

expression, the control over semiological flows, and the repression of the lines of
flight and lines of dissidence (13)" -- it can never be attained because (a) it is
the stake of political and micropolitical power struggles (movements of power
shift) and (b) languages drift in all parts (13) -- to maintain the semblance of an
ideal of order, modes of research revolve around the following methodologies:
exhaustive dichotic analysis, binarist reduction, and radical "digitalization" of
every semiotic practice (13) --> "A few **universal principles** hang over
**contingencies and singularities**, precisely with respect to probabilizing events
on a diachronic axis [an object viewed across its development in history (as
predetermined)] and structuralizing them on a synchronic axis [an object viewed in
its present state] (13) -- "Chance and structure are the two greatest enemies of
freedom." (13-14) -- "It is always the same juggling act: through the promotion of
a transcendent order founded upon the allegedly universal nature of the signifying
articulations of certain enunciations--the Cogito, mathematical and scientific
laws, etc...-- one endeavors to guarantee certain types of formations of power,
simultaneously consolidating the social status and the imaginary security of its
pundits and scribes in the fields of ideology and science." (14)

[7] 2 politics re form: (a) a transcendentalist/universalist formalist position

[refer to [5]] embodied in **semiological substances** (b) a socio-machinic
position that "begins with social formations and material assemblages in order to
extract some (or to abstract some) of the **semiotic components** and abstract
machines from the cosmic and human history that offers them (14)" -- **assemblages
are the nuclei of their enunciation** -- not a re-enunciation since this politics
denies the validity of a metalanguage -- "The collective assemblage of enunciation
speaks 'on the same level' as states of affairs, states of facts, and subjective
states." (14) -- no subject that speaks in the "void", no object spoken in the
"plenum"; these spaces are engineered by the same deterritorialization effect [of
abstract machines? ref. to Adkins' essay on Guattari's schizoanalytic pragmatics,
specifically on the epigrams] -- condition for **connections**: abstract
mechanizations and assemblages **enable a connection to their
deterritorialization** (15) [connection vs specialization (absolute D vs relative D
-> relative R)] -- An "axiomatic returns to the assemblages more deterritorialized
in order to solve the impasse of previous systems of enunciation and untie the
stratifications of the machinic assemblages that correspond to them (15)."

[8] Thom: "every interaction is brought back to phenomena of formal resonance

[universals] in the last analysis" vs Guattari: "I will start with the idea that
assemblages of flows and codes [abstract machines?] are first compared in relation
to differentiations of form and structure, object and subject, and that the
phenomena of formal interaction constitute only a particular case, that of a
borderline case, within the machinic processes that work upon the assemblages
before the substance-form coupling. (15)"

[9**] abstract machines are not stratifications, that is, they aren't layers
"stacked on from the 'outside' on the existing stratifications (15)" -- abstract
machines, within the framework of the general movement of deterritorialization [the
actual and the virtual are realized via deterritorialization?], constitute a sort
of **transformational matter**, an **optional subject**, composed of the crystals
of the possible [quanta of possibles?] which catalyze connections,
destratifications, and reterritorializations both in the living and inatimate world
(16) -- deterritorializations **precede** strata and territories -- abstract
machinisms are realized via an **assemblage of components irreducible to a formal
description** (16) -- no hierarchy can be effectively produced via this mode of
analysis, the "elementary" is just as complex as the "compound" -- molecular [the
more deterritorialized and the more abstract] vs the molar -- "Machinic molecules
may carry the keys of encoding that lead to the most differentiated assemblages."
(16)

[10**] how can abstract machines be thought? first, we need to call into question
the status of **the modes of semiotization and subjectification** -- look to other
processes of encoding and "ensigning" -- "Universality will not longer have the
discourse of a subject, incarnating itself in a word, a revealed text, or a divine
or scientific law, as a compulsory reference. Logical propositions will be crafted
according to **machinic propositions**." (17) -- "The singular features of a non-
semiologically formed matter will be able to lay claim to [relative] universality.
Conversely, the universality of a process of coding or a signifying redundancy will
be able to 'fall' into contingency. While conferring onto singularity points a
particular power of crossing stratified fields, the signs-particles conveying
quanta of possibles will only equip them for a limited number of universal
capacities." (17) -- "Universalist thought always conceals a reverential fear with
respect to an established order--be it religious or natural." (17)

[11] the supposed privilege of linguistics and semiology, alibis for all sorts of
pretexts -- specialization, without regard for the social problematique [refer to
p. 14] -- we will approach the following:
-questions of linguistics and semiology to ground a reconfiguration of how the
unconscious can be thought and of its relation to pragmatics
-questions re **assemblages of enunciation** and **pragmatic fields** vis-a-vis the
unconscious
-2 fundamental categories of the redundancies of the machinic unconscious:
faciality traits and refrains
-the bases of a schizoanalytical pragmatics that's non-reductive with regard to
political and micropolitical problems
-a "machinic genealogy" of semiotic entities that would function, though still well
within a framework of pragmatics, even outside of linguistics and semiotics

[14] models: the syntagmatic tree vs the rhizome/lattice

-contrary to Chomskyan trees (starts at a point S and proceeds by dichotomy) is
presented the rhizome which connects any point whatsoever to any other point
-each trait of the rhizome will not necessarily refer back to a linguistic trait;
sign regimes and non-signs
-relations existing between the levels of segmentarity within each semiotic stratum
will be able to differentiate inter-stratic relations and will function on the
basis of the lines of flight of deterritorialization
-no underlying struture; the machinic unconscious is not a representational
unconscious (unlike the psychoanalytic unsconscious; built like a map
-nature of the map: detachability, connectability, reversability, modifiability

[15] "Within a rhizome, tree structure will be able to exist. Conversely, the
branch of a tree could begin to send out buds in the form of a rhizome." (19-20) --
2 categories of **pragmatic components** [beneficial to return to [10]]:
-**interpretative components** (generic or generative transformations), primacy on
**semiologies of resonance and signification**: (a) **analogical** (iconic
semiologies) and (b) **signifying** (linguistic semiologies) -- only can lay claim
to a dominant position **within** the framework of a particular mode of
subjectification of the contents and formations of power: territorialized or
reterritorialized assemblages of enunciation for analogical transformations and
individual assemblages of enunciation and capitalist subjectivity for signifying
transformations
-**non-interpretative components**/**transformational components**: (a) symbolic
(intensive semiotics (that escape from analogical redundancies)) and (b)
diagrammatic (asignifying semiotics (that proceed through a deterritorialization
relative both to the formalism of content and expression by setting into play
mutant abstract machines (systems of signs-particles and quanta of possibles
working simultaneously within the register of material and semiotic realities)))

[16] semiotic level/fields of coordinates of efficiency, 2 modes of redundancy:

-redundancies of resonance - corresponding to the semiological components of
subjectification and conscientialization (faciality, "refrains", etc...)
-machinic redundancies or redundancies of **interaction** - corresponding to
asignifying diagrammatic components

[17] existential coordinates, 3 levels of consistency

-molar consistency - strata, significations, and realities as phenimenologically
proposed
-molecular consistency - machinic [interstitial?] embodiment of an assemblage (but
on this level we can neither distinguish assemblages from fields [16] nor
components [17]) [is a consistency another way of putting a level of analysis?]
-abstract consistency - the "theoretical" degree of possibility of the two
preceding consistencies

-----------------------------------------

asepticized
morphogenesis
deixis
syntagm
analogical

-----------------------------------------

what is abstraction?