1 new comment 9 FarzanZarghamy

 r/Deleuze    r/Deleuze  Search Reddit       Advertise

 1 karma 

r/Deleuze

Posts

Posted by u/NoCranberry4182 1 day ago

  About Community 
24 What does 'body without organs' mean?


Question
r/Deleuze
Very simple question (I know). I have tried to read definitions online, and I am still not sure I
understand. What does 'body without organs' mean? Gilles Deleuze was a post-structuralist
French Philosopher writing in the latter half
(Maybe examples could help)
of the 20th century. He worked extensively
with Felix Guattari, most famously on the
 18 Comments  Award  Share  Save  two Capitalism and Schizophrenia entries:
*Anti-Oedipus* and *A Thousand
Comment as FarzanZarghamy Plateaus*. Discussions of their writings,
whether it's about or inspired by Deleuze,
What are your thoughts?
is strongly encouraged.

 Created Sep 21, 2011

8.4k ● 11 Top 10%

Members Online Ranked by Size

            Markdown Mode

Joined
Sort By: Best

Create Post

Successful_Impact22 · 22 hr. ago

“Simple question” is a funny way to put it. Deleuze has a quote somewhere that’s something COMMUNITY OPTIONS

along the lines of “some people will read books on what the BwO is and not really get it while
others will hear the phrase and understand.”
r/Deleuze Rules
I think Spinoza is good here. The universe, everything, is one substance with things just taking on
different forms. Man attempts to divorce himself from nature - this turns man into an organism -
rather than recognizing that man is nature. 1. This is a Deleuze Subreddit. Keep it 
Deleuze-y
D+G describe the BwO as an egg. When an egg isn’t hatched, proteins and gradients are
constantly changing. This is how we should be. Never hatched, always becoming. 2. Stay Civil, Constructive, and Without 
Slurs or Hate.
 23   Reply Give Award Share Report Save Follow
3. Audio/Video Links Require Abstracts 
(In Comments)
NoCranberry4182 OP · 20 hr. ago

Simple question
Moderators
Haha, I was wrong

7  Reply Give Award Share Report Save Follow  Message the mods
u/PreacherClete
metadatame · 4 hr. ago
u/triste_0nion
yeah my simple engineer`s brain renders it as continually reconfigurable. the parts
reorientate to feed in the direction of the current desire and environment u/8BitHegel

2  Reply Give Award Share Report Save Follow VIEW ALL MODERATORS

8BitHegel · 20 hr. ago Back to Top

Existence is made up of partial objects. TONS of them. (partial objewcts are a whole thingf unto
themselves) that either do or don't do shit when connected. When connected they forma desiring
machine,an that machine produces. It does something. As it does, it disconnects. When it does,
this connection/disconnection produces one thing rdirectly, but also a second element. A breast-
babymouth machine perhaps produces milk, sure. But with that it also produces an ineffable
something, a satisfaction of sorts.

This doesn't do shit. it's just a memory of the thing in a sesne. Alone it's nothing. But it's kept.
This connection doesn't just happen once. It''s A LOT. babyies suck lots of boob. And each time
it's recording this memory, like magnetic tape, over itself, over experience. But things that
repeat, things that satisfy the same way, sort of last longer. get overwritten less.

No, start with this baby, and apply this to EVERY MACHINE they are a part of. LIKLE WOW so many
fucking machines. MILLIONS. Toe-bed connections, lip boob, finger lip, smell mouth, eye sun,
whatever. LIKE TONS.

Over time, this becomes a massive constellation of experience. The baby doesn't retain this. It
doesn't make sense of any thing thing., That's absurd. Instead over time patterns show up. It
noticies certain machines lead to certain things. Over and over. Repetition belies reality. And
soon it starts almost predicting outcomes. And it's right!

Soon it starts to see mommy as a thing - not as a collection of machines, but a thing. Daddy too.
Doggie. cat. Whatever.

Then at some poiunt it sees itself as a thing. No longer organs and machines. A body, a singular
element. And it thinks it is real.

But this body doesn't do shit. It ACTS like it does. We like to think 'Oh that's me' when we see
actions done, but thta's absurd. It's tons of little machines, and the body takes credit - the body.
Without Organs.

 11   Reply Give Award Share Report Save Follow

NoCranberry4182 OP · 19 hr. ago

Then at some poiunt it sees itself as a thing. No longer organs and machines. A body, a
singular element. And it thinks it is real.

This sounds like Lacan's mirror stage

4  Reply Give Award Share Report Save Follow

8BitHegel · 19 hr. ago

Sounds like but is very different. For lacan there is already something to look into the
mirror, a subject, an ego, a thing, and now aware of itself it moves into a new type of
understanding. . This is not the case with D&G who instead put forth the idea that there is
no singular thing before - or after. This after image of experience is produced but is not
productive, and even then the bwo is not a singular ‘thing’ but instead a surface, a
topology that is emergent.

7  Reply Give Award Share Report Save Follow

NoCranberry4182 OP · 19 hr. ago

Thanks for making that point.

3  Reply Give Award Share Report Save Follow

sprkwtrd · 19 hr. ago · edited 19 hr. ago

What's an organ? An organ is essentially a part of your body which is demarcated from the rest
by its particular function: lungs are for breathing, eyes are for seeing. A body without organs, by
contrast, would be one in which there is not this demarcation. We shouldn't understand this in a
physical sense (a body without organs isn't just a big glob of goo), but on a psychical level: there
is a level of experience of 'our' body (is it still ours?) in which we do not have any organs.

One of the seminal discoveries of psychoanalysis, regardless of whether you like Freud, is a
certain flexibility of our psychic apparatus in the way in which it employs its own body. This is
particularly clear in the case of sexuality, which, as Freud explains in the three essays, is
characterised by a break with teleology: sex without procreation, fetishes, etc. Organs lose their
proper function here. The capacity for this to happen in the case of sex reveals that there's a level
of the unconscious at which desire is produced, but where desire doesn't have fixed objects that
it wants yet, let alone lacks or needs. In the simplest terms: you can't have a foot fetish without a
body without organs, at the level of which you can question what feet are really for. Anti-Oedipus
is about describing this level without supposing it to be structured by the familial themes of
classical psychoanalysis (father/mother/child).

3  Reply Give Award Share Report Save Follow

Streetli · 19 hr. ago · edited 16 hr. ago

I wrote a thing on this that you may find helpful!

5  Reply Give Award Share Report Save Follow

NoCranberry4182 OP · 18 hr. ago

Thanks!

2  Reply Give Award Share Report Save Follow

fluchtlinie · 22 hr. ago · edited 20 hr. ago

here's a non-answer that's more of a reaction to the question:

basically, the better you understand it the less normal you become

accepting deleuze and guattari's definition of the organism is already a big alteration to how you
see the world

it's an incredibly rich concept and you just keep falling deeper into it if you decide to see it
through

so i don't think there's a way to achieve a good understanding of it noncommittally like an

academic, and attempts to sum it up seem to degenerate into repeating the same vague (at least
vague without the context) overused phrases

i'd say this concept is a libidinal construct, not a logical one (the logic is unconscious and
subterranean relative to our statements)

8  Reply Give Award Share Report Save Follow

NoCranberry4182 OP · 19 hr. ago

basically, the better you understand it the less normal you become

How so?

4  Reply Give Award Share Report Save Follow

Successful_Impact22 · 19 hr. ago

D+G are writing about a materialist psychiatry. You see those “crazy” people on the street
yelling at the sidewalk? That’s a result of the social phenomenon - For D+G, Freud and
Lacan are lacking (no pun intended) the political economy while Marx doesn’t take into
account the libidinal economy enough. The libidinal economy and political economy are
one and the same… What does all this mean? Well it means that the clinical entities you
see in mental institutions are not natural but a byproduct of how fucked society is/can be.

Society is fucked? Well who is part of society? You are. This means that the political
economy is a reflection of you and vice-versa. D+G are advocating that we should become-
animal, become-child and get to that point where we act in accordance with our unbridled
desire. You are deemed crazy for dancing in public, but is this not natural?

Think about it: psychiatrists diagnose you with X - you aren’t normal. But what is normal?
They think normalcy is a 9-5 job under capitalism. But wait. Wait if we’ve been duped into
thinking this is normal?

This is why the more you understand D+G’s workC the more you will realize how much
social conditioning (fascism) has gone on and the necessity to break away from it.

5  Reply Give Award Share Report Save Follow

NoCranberry4182 OP · 19 hr. ago

Okay, thanks for the comment. I am glad that what your write in regards to D&G
somewhat aligns with my understanding of what I have read so far (the societal
critique).

However, I just don't get what the body without organs is, and I am going a bit crazy.
Each time I read a definition, or see it used, it seems like it has a different meaning.

Is the body without organs any of these things below?

Capitalism? (A system with its own logic and drive, but no body)

The crazy people yelling on the sidewalk?

(just asking to try and near anything close to an understanding)

3  Reply Give Award Share Report Save Follow

Successful_Impact22 · 19 hr. ago

I should’ve been more clear: the crazy people yelling on the sidewalk are those who
are clinical entities i.e. those who have fallen into madness.

It’s important to know you won’t grasp the BwO in its entirety because it’s a constant
process. If you understand the societal criticism, then imagine this: Imagine all the
conditioning that you’ve encountered vanishes right now. What are you? Who are
you? This is the BwO - everything is taken away where you desire without any
complications.

The problem however is that D+G are aware that people won’t let you experiment in
peace. Id recommend reading the How Do You Make Yourself a BwO plateau in ATP

As for capitalism, I feel someone else might have a better response. If no one
responds, I’ll give any insight I have later

also: I could be wrong in my interpretation of D+G so take this with a grain of salt ;)

3  Reply Give Award Share Report Save Follow

NoCranberry4182 OP · 18 hr. ago

How Do You Make Yourself a BwO plateau in ATP

Thanks, might have to give it a shot.

3  Reply Give Award Share Report Save Follow

fluchtlinie · 19 hr. ago

well for one the body without organs is a set of resistance practices that you find for
yourself

that's not very normal

2  Reply Give Award Share Report Save Follow

mtraven · 11 hr. ago

Fuck if I know, but here's a record of my attempt to figure it out, maybe it will help
http://hyperphor.com/ammdi/body-without-organs

1  Reply Give Award Share Report Save Follow