Guattari’s Machinic Heterogenesis: What the?

&De Landa’s “Bloodless Transfusion”

Guattari’s Machinic Heterogenesis: What the?

&De Landa’s “Bloodless Transfusion”

Presentation by Edward ColussiPresentation by Edward Colussi

Background:Background:

• Pierre-Felix Guattari: French Philosopher, militant and psycho therapist.•Very in depth thought stemming from influences of Lacan and Oury.

• De Land: Writer, Philosopher and professor within many academic communities.

•Both focus on the concepts of value, chaos, the concept of the machine, and finally, that of assemblage.

MachinesMachines

• Machines make the naturally impossible, possible.

• Within each machine, a new outlet of accomplishment is created.

•Not only technology, but living things also.

•Guattari is a bit all over the place.

Being a machineBeing a machine

• The concept of being a machine is not limited solely to the final material apparatus

• Can also be the ideas leading towards it.

• Challenges values, meanings, concepts and relations to allow a better understanding and clarity on not only machines, but many aspects of life.

• E.g. the meaning of “assemblage” as just a rigidly set plan of how things go together or combinations of interactions to create different outcomes based on the interacting aspects?

• Metal Head, wooden handle• Even disassembled, still recognisable as a hammer• Contextually relevant.• Most relevant within its own “ensemble” of current context as well as historical context.• Value decreased due to the simplistic nature of “machine”.

E.g. The HammerE.g. The Hammer

• The value is based on its relevance within social context.

• However, can also have adverse affects on determining value by changing the values themselves.

• Is using technology creating better thought?

•Maybe even an improvement?

•Is it still human if the machine is causing it?

What can it mean?What can it mean?

Define:MeaningDefine:Meaning

• Signifiers are used to collectively represent certain items based on physical characteristics, similarities in conceptual portrayal or subjective meaning.

•By the constantly evolving machine, the signifiers would constantly change, making their existence redundant, if not less applicable as a definitive value.

•Creates problems for discourse within discussing machines or assemblages theoretically.

So?So?

• Guattari uses the concepts of separate universes to divide up each aspect of machines.

• Machines are not just technology, but anything which has independent, yet inter-relative components

• A pile of rocks and a wall are only conceptually different, but are comprised structurally of a relation of stones in a certain configuration.

So, almost anything is a machine?So, almost anything is a machine?

• Anything which involves a multitude of different aspects to create a final result, either physically, theoretically or otherwise, can be seen as a machine at work.

• Allopoeitic – Ovens make bread, Matches make fire

• Autopoeitic – Schools further creating students and teachers through replication of education standards and social norms.

• Not all at once; happens at different times in different places.

De Landa: SimulationsDe Landa: Simulations

• Discusses Turing machine; simulated other machines.

• The constant progression of machine simulating machine may eventuate in human will being removed.

• Comparative to soldiers who had their free will to function as an individual removed and (eventually) given back.

• War: Artificial intelligence that can kill us all?

Questions:Questions:

• What kind of assemblages have these readings opened your eyes up to and would there be a complication in creating an overarching malleable definition of machines and assemblages?

• Similarly, what are all your thoughts on creating a machine capable of maintaining, replicating itself and being autonomous? Would this help or hinder the human species? What about the species of technology?

•Does one really need to think so deeply into this? What does it achieve for technology, humanity, or philosophy?