, ,

This is a file from the Wikimedia Commons.

I’m going to take a stab at this, but I don’t fully understand its purpose.  I found this description which was sort of helpful.


So he asks, “how do you make yourself a body without organs.”  A body without organs is the pre-individual.  An individual has attributes and characteristics, organs and senses, desires, etc.  The pre-individual has none of these.  “The BwO is what remains when you take everything away.  What you take away is precisely the phantasy, and signifiances and subjectifications as a whole” p. 151.  This is a different school of thought, because previously people would try to understand our realities and the reasons behind our social interactions by devising unreal things, ie. ideology, culture, practice (we discussed this in class).

The body without organs is a desire, something we strive to but cannot fully achieve (a limit or asymptote).  A body without organs is removed of all attributes, and these attributes are really just a pool of intensities.  “There is a continuum of all of the attributes or genuses of intensity under a single substance, and a continuum of intensities of a certain genus under a single type or attribute.  A continuum of all substances in intensity and of all intensities in substance”  P 154.

The body without organs “as an abstract machine” differentiates the substance because of desire, but by what measure or judgment? “the plane of consistency” (p165).

I think the summation at the end of the chapter is as concise as it gets, “All we are saying is that the identity of effects, the continuity of genera, the totality of all BwO’s, can be…”

I guess I’m so heavily indoctrinated with illustrations of “ideology”, “socialization”, and “culture”, that I can’t really wrap my head around this pre-individual pool of matter theory.