От	Кактус
К	Пуденко Сергей
Дата	14.12.2007 12:44:50
Рубрики	Прочее;

Re: Продолжение истории

---

>Manifold - эо многообразие или что

А кто его знает? По словарю – и множества, и многообразие и трубопроводы. Надо смотреть по контексту. На практике исследование N-мерных поверхностей шло именно как разработка стереометрии систем трубопроводов в 3-хмерном пространстве, например внутренних каналов и проводящей обвязки авиадвигателей. Может и так. А может это математическое понятие множества.

С уважением Сергей

---

От	Пуденко Сергей
К	Кактус (14.12.2007 12:44:50)
Дата	14.12.2007 13:51:42

Продолжение истории "Work in progress by the author".

---

"Work in progress by the author".
http://www.ruc.dk/demnetgov_en/eu_frameprogramme/conference_nov_2006/papers_conference/joris_van_wezemael/

в ссылках есть эта самая новая книжка ДиЛанды

Manuel DeLanda (2006a) recently proposed a Deleuzian social ontology on the

basis of assemblage theory, which provides – I suggest – a valuable basis to

conceptualise governance networks, allowing for the heterogeneity of their ‘parts’. Its

principal aim is to move beyond the reductionism of the macro to the micro (as in

micro-sociology, e.g. social constructuivism) or vice versa (as in classical

Durkheimian or Parsonian sociology), and also beyond the meso-reductionism of the

practice-turn solution (e.g. ‘structuration’ or ‘habitus’ theory).

Whereas assemblage theory offers an ontological strategy to address

heterogeneous networks, the differentiation between minor and major politics by

Deleuze and Guattari (1987) addresses the critical question of creation and

composition. This ultimately defines the ‘complex art of steering multiple agencies

which are both operationally autonomous from one another and structurally coupled

through various forms of reciprocal interdependence’ (Jessop 1999). Since such

heterogeneous networks ‘become’ with the progress of the governance process, they

are only known ex post (after the event) through the attempts to govern them. The

fetishisation of an already present-identity is the ‘enemy’ of democratic network

governance as it limits the process of creativity to a question of ‘either/or’ and thus

homogenises difference which lies beyond these identities. The minor politics of deindividuation

fuels the construction of an intensive milieu that is never autonomous to

itself, but always composed of different variables in ever new configurations,

constantly changing the assemblage of governance and remaining open for

contestation. This minor composition creates collectivities which emerge not through

unity, but through reconfiguring differences.

In the first part of this paper I introduce a flat ontology on the basis of

assemblage theory. In the second part I draw on post-liberal theories of democracy

and introduce the concepts of major and minor governance. I would like to

concentrate on the theoretical argument in this working paper. Therefore the findings

of an empirical piece of research in which the theoretical framework I suggest here

has been both developed and applied will be but briefly summarised in the end in

order to underline the practicability of the ideas in this article. Thus the result of the

paper is a framework from which a research agenda could be developed.


примеч и сноски

Термин интенсивность
1 Heterogeneities are not equalised in far-from-equilibrium conditions.

2 The Humean principal of association accounts from this basic sense of experience up to the

highest level of social life. This forms the foundation for Hume’s rejection of a contract model of society

in favour of convention alone – a point which may well be relevant when theorising democratic network

governance on the basis of assemblage theory.

3 E.g. an organisation, which might be seen as micro in relation to a larger entity such as city.

4 Deleuze uses the term of the machine because – unlike organisms or mechanisms – a

machine has no organising centre: it is nothing more than the connections and productions it makes

(Colebrook, 2002, 56) and therefore it is a non-essentialist concept. Different assemblages produce

different machines. Therefore the change of relations of exteriority in assemblages (strata of the actual)

produces a different process of deterritorialisation, thus another abstract machine. The virtual and the

actual are both real. Moving from the virtual to the actual is referred to as actualisation, and the opposite

move – which is very important in Deleuze’s philosophy, is referred to as counter-actualisation. The

effect of counter-actualisation is to restore the connection of actual and virtual.

5 In Deleuzes ontology attractors are real even before the actualisation. However, since there

are usually many attractors, an actualisation is at the same time driven by deterministic processes

(attractors) and genuine creations. The multiple attractors together form a “circular causality in which the

effects react back on their causes” DeLanda, M. (no year) Deleuze and the open-ended becoming of the

world. Available at: http://www.cddc.vt.edu/host/delanda/pages/becoming.htm (Accessed: 28.9).. Thus

the determinism of the attractors is not global and unique, but local and multiple.


DeLanda, M. (2006a) 'Deleuzian Social Ontology and Assemblage Theory', in

Fugslang, M. and Meier Sorensen, B.(Eds) Deleuze Connections.

Edinghburgh University Press: Edinghburgh, pp. 250-266.

DeLanda, M. (2006b) Virtual Environmants and the Emergence of Synthetic Reason.

Available at: http://www.t0.or.at/delanda/delanda.htm (Accessed:

DeLanda, M. (no year) Deleuze and the open-ended becoming of the world.

эта старая, в альманахе

---

От	Кактус
К	Пуденко Сергей (14.12.2007 13:51:42)
Дата	14.12.2007 14:16:54

Re: Продолжение истории

---

Упомянутое в реферате эссе Станислава Лема об истории и философии виртуальной реальности со ссылкой на вымышленного автора Пейсли Ливингстона у меня дома есть, только нужно найти. Искать?

С уважением Сергей

---