Quiet Power of Actuality

To William and Terence Blake; To Steven Hickman (Noir-Realism); To Bill Benzon; To Joseph Weismann (Fractal Ontology); To Anthony Paul Smith; To speculativeheresy; To Jordan Peacock and reastudent (my online classmates at Stranger Thought); To Simple Pleasures; To inthesaltmine; To larvarsubjects (for replying to my comment); To my students; To readers; To followers (of this blog for cruising with Kafka); To Adam Kotsko (for at least misreading my words); To the Hobbesian sovereignty as an artificial soul that anticipated the internet; To Katerina Kolosova,
To Francois Laruelle
My way of thanking people and technical objects for keeping thinking alive between work and duty, between being and being-more.
As the Blake I met expressed it in his provocative syntax, gnosis has always resisted totalization in the sense of falling into expert hands. It has always been the privileged knowledge of the heretic whose indifference to Life rather affords her the simplest understanding of the Real, indifferent to any kind of objectification, including this one we have achieved so far, but much more to a kind that betrays a motive to totalize, such as making it a part of official narrative.
If Deleuze has successfully historicized this great enfolding of human narrative by singularizing the flux into struggles to differ, to enfold, to measure productivity against the throw of the dice, it only shows that in the beginning DIFFERENCE has always been aimed at silencing the already quiet power of actuality. If  enfolding is to proceed at all, it must already be there, what Terence–Stiegler’s works in mind–describes as “default of origin.”
Gnosis is this default, the lived, no less the impossibility of imposing a precedence, a sign that an offer of totalization is refused. The default is a ‘non-precedence’ which simply means ‘refusal’.

Perhaps, matched only by a replicator, self-forming, auto-catalytic, the heretic is already burdened by thrownness, by gameness to metabolize. Thrownness is the probability that life is not just one but two, even more. Yet the ‘One’ is tolerant of doctrines, replication or reproduction, it doesn’t matter.

The history of a thousand plateaus, a thousand potential Folds yet to be enfolded into territories is pitted against the right knowledge that all folds are disbursements, neologisms, facsimiles,  exits to creations, all on behalf of Life, the creative process itself whose mystery started with making explicit a certain kind of refusal. Brandom may refuse this.

Yet, true knowledge is this quiet power of refusal.

3 thoughts on “Quiet Power of Actuality”

  1. Thanks for this synthesis. So very well said.
    1) noun: all, the totality, is refuse, garbage. You lose nothing much by refusing it.
    2) verb: refuse the totality, refusal comes first, precedes and has precedence over the totality. As Deleuze says correcting Foucault resistance is first. But why do we need a “negative” word to say what is primary?

  2. Thank you, this flows beautifully. And is it not, at this stage, a matter of a certain flow of thought-action? As Terence pointed out, there is indeed a noun, which acts in an affirmation, while the verb-form acts in a negation.

    True, resistance is also a negation of power which comes after that power; but, resistance is most importantly an affirmation which must come before power, in another arena or “mise en scene” entirely.

    We must think, and therefore act, this primal positivity of resistance. Best wishes, David.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s