Balder started a thread on this at FB IPS and asked: "Spiritual materialism. Materialistic spirituality. Materialist spirituality. What would these distinctions mean to you?" After some discussion he asked: "If
we agree basically on our understanding of the three terms opening this
thread, where do they lean into or tend to become one another?" I said:
We might say spiritual materialism and materialistic
spirituality are based on strict dichotomies and the excluded middle,
where materialist spirituality (or spiritualized material) includes the
middle. Spirit and matter lean into one another, or share partial space, at their borders in what
Varela calls structural coupling while each still retains its
structural identity. So not one, not two.
Some of the resources I cited:
Between Deleuze and Derrida (2003):
"The
Baroque is defined, above all, by both a separation and interactiveness
of the material and the spiritual.... It expressed the transformation
of (the Neo-Platonist) cosmos into into a 'mundus.' This architecture
enacts a complex reciprocal interplay--interfold--of materiality and
conceptuality.... It differentiates between, and yet also relates,
'folds' together" (103-4).
From "Piaget, DeLanda and Deleuze":
"Returning
to DeLanda’s example, in terms of genetic structuralism neoteny is a
fine example of the way structure grows out of structure in a process
that at bottom yields increased complexity by generating a new developmental
level. The problem that makes discussions of evolution difficult is
that Deleuze rejects the notion of epistemological and developmental
‘levels’, which is essential to Piaget. Instead, Deleuze introduces the
concept of ‘strata’, which are intermingled or folded into one another
and shot through by escape routes or ‘lines of flight’. At one point
Deleuze says that among strata there is no fixed order, and one stratum
can serve directly as a substratum for another without the
intermediaries that one would expect from the standpoint of stages or
degrees. Or the apparent order can be reversed."
"Practical mysticism and Deleuze's ontology of the virtual":
Abstract:
Deleuze’s philosophical method is analyzed and positioned against the
background of the intellectual/religious tradition of practical
mysticism that has been traveling the globe across
times, places, languages, and cultural barriers. The paper argues that
Deleuze’s unorthodox ontology of the virtual enables a naturalistic
interpretation of the functioning of mysticism when the triad of
concepts, percepts and affects is formed in accordance with the logic of
the included middle.
And let's not forget Bryant's recent work on the fold:
"The
point is merely that bodies are always within the world. There are no
transcendent beings that are out of field. If God exists even God is
attached to a world without which God could
not be. Every body has its geography; both its internal geography
consisting of its composition and its location within a field of
liaisons, of relations, to other bodies."
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.