/lit/ - Literature

>>11343579
can someone explain the concept of body without organs? i cannot fathom what it means beyond a literal desire to be a living person that has no organs

>>11343586
It's pretty much just an egg.

>>11343586
think of it like a storm spirit with 2 shared tangoes and nothing else.

>>11343586
it's when you're on a bunch of drugs and experience sensory crossover.

>>11343586
Its like when you are a thing within itself but then the thing within your self is not actually in your self but externally observing the self but also not existing simultaneously. Pretty simple stuff

>>11343610
i hate these french fags. of what use is such a term, besides confounding poor students and rich pseuds at cocktail parties. it's an almost diogenes level joke.

>>11343669
You take back what you said about diogenes

>>11343599
can he still cast Lightning Remnant

>videogames
Grow the fuck up

>>11343725
he put all his points into overload and stats.

>>11343579
>tfw I download DOTA 2 thinking it was going to be great
>play it
>boring top down repetitive game
>laugh about people who play this game all day
>give it one last try a day later
>conclude anyone who plays this for entertainment is mentally ill, and has something wrong with them
There are unironically people who find this game addictive. Top kek.
Game sucks.

>>11343579
>dota
what year is this 2005 ?

The way I understand it it means sort of "the thing in itself", where the thing is a system of inter-connected units (desiring-machines mostly) and the body without organs is just the connections, not the machines.
I might be completely wrong though, I'm like 1/3 into anti-oedipus and just reading it for the heck of it.

>>11344009
yeah no joke i have serious dota 2 problem on and off for the last 6 or so years.

>>11343994
>tfw can't level stats anymore
hold me /li/

>>11344059
this. the game used to be so goddamn /comfy/ and reborn fucked it all up. take me back to 6.83 year beast menu comfy times.

>>11343740
>fuck
Grow up

>>11343669
Taking shitposts seriously and not detecting sarcasm won't get you any closer to understanding what a BwO is.

>>11344039
You're pretty close, but "thing in itself" is too Kantian since it implies some kind of subject-object relation as its limitation or implication. Deleuze always tried to avoid such relations in favor of a kind of speculative realism (the current defunct "movement" with the same name was heavily influenced by Deleuze).

Basically D&G fucked up with Anti-Oedipus as it was the book equivalent of shitposting, filled with irony and even literally calling psychoanalysts autistic. What's worse is that D&G disagreed bavk then on what a BwO is (they admit it in interviews and essays) and only properly explain it in the BwO chapter of A Thousand Plateaus.

A BwO is the necessary condition of desire understood as every possible experience independent of the desired object, just the feeling associated with any subjective state and the ontological reasons for such affects to arise. Every object in the world can connect to countless desires based on BwOs and their interactions (sex can be arousing as well as anguishing for example). The three examples of BwOs that D&G give in ATP are masochism, drug use and infatuation (falling in love). Part of the reason for this is that our body is covered in erogenous zones which active under certain conditions. The sensation you get when touching a loved one at the height of passion is not the same as when you touch the mouse while browsing the web even though it's still the skin doing the touching so to speak. This allows for complex connections between sensations, such as the connection of pain and pleasure in masochism, made possible by desire reaching a threshold that permits it, in this case a buildup (Deleuze, in Coldness & Cruelty, insisted on how both Masoch and Sade advocated for a suspension of regular sexuality in order to make their practices possible, Sade for example basically insisting on a violent discharge after 2 weeks of nofap so to speak).

Part of the difficulty lies with Deleuze's ontology of intensive differences (intensive as in having their internal logic and capacities irreducible to external phenomena which they condition) producing effects when interacting within the body and with external intensities.The other difficulty pertains to D&G's rhizmatic model of connections which try to go beyond "first person" subject-object relations as well as conceptual barriers (as in keeping the BwO to a bodily description), the result being that the BwO isn't just a "personal" practice, but a social description as well since it is on some basic level political as long as affects and their interactions still govern individual political stances and the genesis of the ideas that carry and perpetuate them.

>>11344456
Sorry for the typos (it's rhizomatic not rhizmatic), phoneposting is annoying as hell.

Just to add a bit: desiring machines are replaced by assemblages in ATP because the first concept or at least the words felt too mechanical and too rigid in their capacities to connect to all kinds of things (not rhizomatic enough). Machinic is different than mechanical for D&G, but the reasons are complex as they involve a kind of infinite movement where if desiring machines did not interrupt one another constantly (like pleasure interrupts the productivity of desire), they would go on indefinitely creating an unbearable experience like that of the people that cannot quench their thirst after a brain injury no matter how much water they drink.

>>11344377
>wanting stats+mom on troll/jugg/sniper to win game instantly meta back

>>11343740
why does playing video games insinuate immaturity? There are different kinds of video games for different kinds of people; sure Dota 2 is more for the children, but looking at games like Factorio, Europa Universalis, or even Dwarf Fortress. These games are more for the enthusiasm of watching a mechanism grow and function to the liking which the player has crafted, which consists of somewhat complex systems that require thorough understanding of the game in order for it to function correctly in the first place. There is no difference between spending one's time on this than those people who spent their time crafting a miniature train system or people who like to watch their garden grow. Plus unlike watching a movie or reading a book, these games require thinking and interactivity, encouraging the player to create something with what they have through countless of methods.

>>11345750
SNAP

>>11345756
thanks i guess

>>11345750
I love the Lisa games.

>>11343669
Its to filter out the brainlets like you

>>11345768
It is my favorite game.

>>11345750
>, but looking at games like Factorio, Europa Universalis, or even Dwarf Fortress

Autism simulators only suited for bugmen who have castrated themselves from life. If you want to talk about mature vidoe games at least talk about something with soul

>>11345750
>I share a board with bugmen like this
Get off of a literature board and jerk off to video games somewhere else

>>11345793
I can somewhat agree that the games that i listed have no soul, but at least list some with soul, because to be quite frankly I don't know any with soul that are "mature".
>>11345815
I stopped playing video games about two years ago, because it was too time consuming and i had to choose whether i wanted to live life or wake up one day old. I am 19.

>>11345838
>but at least list some with soul

Dark Souls, Legend of Zelda

>>11344456
>>11344490
I don't get it. Could you explain it in an ever simplier way?

>>11345889
even*

>>11343598

>>11345889
If you're not being ironic, maybe ask more precise questions concerning what you don't get exactly. I'd be glad to answer them as best I can.

>>11345851
>Dark Souls, Legend of Zelda (implying Twilight Princes, Majora's Mask, or Ocarina of Time)
Sorry bucko, but edginess doesn't equate to mature.

>>11345976
Twilight is garbage, Wind Waker is the shit

>>11344009
do you play LoL anon?...

>tfw arborescent

>>11344059
wtf :(
Honestly one of the biggest problems with games/esports is their constant need to change. If you look at football it hasn't changed that much in the last 100 years, while video games like wow or dota change everything every two years or so.
A game like dota 2 with such a thriving pro scene could honestly stop making new content, and just add a few hotfixes once in a while, and the game would still feel fresh.

>>11345913
Could you try to elaborate the concept but by making more references to the examples (drugs, infatuation)?

>>11346198
Gonna start with a bit of a tangent since drug use at least implies many interactions. It gets quite complicated once the problem of stratification is introduced since for D&G strata aren't merely horizontal layers in the world (like sediments in the earth or layers of tissues in the human body), but also thresholds such as the boiling point of water. At the same time add to this emergent properties and their "relational" topology (hydrogen and oxygen in isolation work as fuels, H2O has the opposite effect of putting out fire). Basically drugs can have the effect of temporarily severing certain connections by exceeding certain thresholds (perhaps in other ways as well) thus the resonance that usually constitutes our "self awareness" from one subjective state to another can also get suspended. I mentioned this in another thread: "
D&G never take reason for granted. It's always the product of unreason. If it were otherwise you could easily convince a mad man that he's being unreasonable in his beliefs. It's more a matter of how reason, as a problem solving capacity (a plant is contemplating the water and nutrients it takes out of the soil, it's reasonable in a sense), can account for the unreason at the core of every assemblage that has its own reason. For example, someone about to commit a crime of passion has his practical reason specific to that assemblage (that is to say, his way of going about achieving his goal of revenge), even if at a different moment (while in a different assemblage) he would consider his past actions unreasonable and dangerous (ruining his life if he gets caught)." If the self gets suspended the hope is that the assemblages themselves can be more authentically experienced and even changed (most smokers struggling with addiction manage to quit smoking after taking LSD).

Of course, drug use is a vague term since there are many factors. Amphetamines and such drugs have an effect on differential speeds which also influence the genesis of thought (your thoughts seem to run away from you or come to you faster than you can process them for example) while MDMA will heighten sensations. The BwO is always created anew in many different ways as a result of all of these connections and our capacities to affect and be affected differ with it. We can do things under pressure, due to adrenaline for example, which we could not do otherwise even if we had the courage to do so.

The implications of all of this are important for D&G's critique of jouissance in psychoanalysis as always something that eludes us (we can never have that infinite enjoyment that our drives want, but we can get excessive enjoyment which turns pleasure into pain or the sadness of missing this impossible jouissance: the orgasm as le petit mort and post-orgasmic depression).

(continued in the next post)

>>11346307
D&G will say that this psychoanalytic approach is a pseudobond (rather than an authentic one) between desire as a creative force that puts constantly creates disjunctive syntheses, that is to say puts collages together of things that often don't even go together, and the pleasure which interrupts it (the orgasm for example). We must reject this pseudobond in favor of a plateau (as in A Thousand Plateaus) as Gregory Bateson saw it: a constant self-sufficient level of sensation. Like Nietzsche said, man would trade all the ecstasies of the world for a bit of constant happiness. Of course D&G's point isn't to be content with little, but rather to not fall into the trap of believing that the impossible jouissance that the drives desire would somehow solve desire if it were possible. It's a different way of viewing what we should desire, a way of rejecting the transcendence of pleasure's structural insufficiency.

Gonna post some quotes from the BwO chapter in ATP, they might help.

>>11346329
> A BwO is made in such a way that it can be occupied, populated only by intensities. Only intensities pass and circulate. Still, the BwO is not a scene, a place, or even a support upon which something comes to pass. It has nothing to do with phantasy, there is nothing to interpret. The BwO causes intensities to pass; it produces and distributes them in a spatium that is itself intensive, lacking extension. It is not space, nor is it in space; it is matter that occupies space to a given degree—to the degree corresponding to the intensities produced. It is nonstratified, unformed, intense matter, the matrix of intensity, intensity = 0; but there is nothing negative about that zero, there are no negative or opposite intensities. Matter equals energy. Production of the real as an intensive magnitude starting at zero. That is why we treat the BwO as the full egg before the extension of the organism and the organization of the organs, before the formation of the strata; as the intense egg defined by axes and vectors, gradients and thresholds, by dynamic tendencies involving energy transformation and kinematic movements involving group displacement, by migrations: all independent of accessory forms because the organs appear and function here only as pure intensities.7 The organ changes when it crosses a threshold, when it changes gradient. "No organ is constant as regards either function or position, . . . sex organs sprout anywhere, … rectums open, defecate and close, ... the entire organism changes color and consistency in split-second adjustments."8 The tantric egg.

>>11346346
> Every time desire is betrayed, cursed, uprooted from its field of immanence, a priest is behind it. The priest cast the triple curse on desire: the negative law, the extrinsic rule, and the transcendent ideal. Facing north, the priest said, Desire is lack (how could it not lack what it desires?). The priest carried out the first sacrifice, named castration, and all the men and women of the north lined up behind him, crying in cadence, "Lack, lack, it's the common law." Then, facing south, the priest linked desire to pleasure. For there are hedonistic, even orgiastic, priests. Desire will be assuaged by pleasure; and not only will the pleasure obtained silence desire for a moment but the process of obtaining it is already a way of interrupting it, of instantly discharging it and unburdening oneself of it. Pleasure as discharge: the priest carries out the second sacrifice, named masturbation. ^ Then, facing east, he exclaimed: Jouissance is impossible, but impossible t jouissance is inscribed in desire. For that, in its very impossibility, is the Ideal, the ^manque-a--jouir that is life."10 The priest carried out the third sacrifice, phantasy or the thousand and one nights, the one hundred twenty ^ days, while the men of the East chanted: Yes, we will be your phantasy, your ideal and impossibility, yours and also our own. The priest did not turn to the west. He knew that in the west lay a plane of consistency, but he thought that the way was blocked by the columns of Hercules, that it led nowhere and was uninhabited by people. But that is where desire was lurking, west was the shortest route east, as well as to the other directions, rediscovered or deterritorialized.

>>11346352
> The most recent figure of the priest is the psychoanalyst, with his or her three principles: Pleasure, Death, and Reality. Doubtless, psychoanalysis demonstrated that desire is not subordinated to procreation, or even to genitality. That was its modernism. But it retained the essentials; it even found new ways of inscribing in desire the negative law of lack, the external rule of pleasure, and the transcendent ideal of phantasy. Take the interpretation of masochism: when the ridiculous death instinct is not invoked, it is claimed that the masochist, like everybody else, is after pleasure but can only get it through pain and phantasied humiliations whose function is to allay or ward off deep anxiety. This is inaccurate; the masochisfs suffering is the price he must pay, not to achieve pleasure, but to untie the pseudobond between desire and pleasure as an extrinsic measure. Pleasure is in no way something that can be attained only by a detour through suffering; it is something that must be delayed as long as possible because it interrupts the continuous process of positive desire. There is, in fact, a joy that is immanent to desire as though desire were filled by itself and its contemplations, a joy that implies no lack or impossibility and is not measured by pleasure since it is what distributes intensities of pleasure and prevents them from being suffused by anxiety, shame, and guilt. In short, the masochist uses suffering as a way of constituting a body without organs and bringing forth a plane of consistency of desire. That there are other ways, other procedures than masochism, and certainly better ones, is beside the point; it is enough that some find this procedure suitable for them.

>>11346364
> Similarly, or actually in a different way, it would be an error to interpret courtly love in terms of a law of lack or an ideal of transcendence. The renunciation of external pleasure, or its delay, its infinite regress, testifies on the contrary to an achieved state in which desire no longer lacks anything but fills itself and constructs its own field of immanence. Pleasure is an affection of a person or a subject; it is the only way for persons to "find themselves" in the process of desire that exceeds them; pleasures, even the most artificial, are reterritorializations. But the question is precisely whether it is necessary to find oneself. Courtly love does not love the self, any more than it loves the whole universe in a celestial or religious way. It is a question of making a body without organs upon which intensities pass, self and other—not in the name of a higher level of generality or a broader extension, but by virtue of singularities that can no longer be said to be personal, and intensities that can no longer be said to be extensive. The field of immanence is not internal to the self, but neither does it come from an external self or a nonself. Rather, it is like the absolute Outside that knows no Selves because interior and exterior are equally a part of the immanence in which they have fused. "Joy" in courtly love, the exchange of hearts, the test or "assay": everything is allowed, as long as it is not external to desire or transcendent to its plane, or else internal to persons. The slightest caress may be as strong as an orgasm; orgasm is a mere fact, a rather deplorable one, in relation to desire in pursuit of its principle. Everything is allowed: all that counts is for pleasure to be the flow of desire itself. Immanence, instead of a measure that interrupts it or delivers it to the three phantoms, namely, internal lack, higher transcendence, and apparent exteriority.13 If pleasure is not the norm of desire, it is not by virtue of a lack that is impossible to but on the; contrary, by virtue of its positivty, in other words, the plane of consistency it draws in the course of its process.

Those were some of the easier passages hopefully. The chapter has many more: http://www.generation-online.org/p/fpdeleuze2.htm

What is some /lit/ approved Video games?

>>11344009
Is a strategic game like Chess or any other cold system shit.

So this thread is somehow related to literature but the other thread about books on logic is gone?

>>11346375
is she thinking about cum? when grils do this are they just thinking about taking facials?

>>11346408
Dota shitposting aside, Deleuze is literature.

>>11346375
Where do you get this kind of shit? Please tell me.

>>11346516
Sick parents get contact with jews: Jordyn Jones is what you see.

>>11346375
everything about her scream "i fuck niggers"

>>11346375
Metro series

>>11345750
You are right in saying that films don't require creativity but books do. You create images in your head.

>>11345750
>Plus unlike watching a movie or reading a book, these games require thinking and interactivity
sure Dota 2 is more for the children, but looking at games like Factorio, Europa Universalis, or even Dwarf Fortress

>>11344493
alright what patch do you want? ill take anything before 7.00.

>>11346375
Dark Souls and Bloodborne. Playing those games is better time spent than a lot of the shit posted here.

>>11347047
5.84c

>>11347055
>souls games
Corny trash

>>11347241
Who said you could post?

>>11344041
SAMEEEEE i got fucking suckered and bought the battle pass fml...

>>11343586
The key to total control of the self.

>>11343586
I'm not a Deleuze expert so forgive me if this post is brainlet-tier but from what I understand the Body without Organs is just a body that is free from constraints. Deleuze brings up patients who develop a pathological desire to remove their malfunctioning organs and be free of their tyranny. Someone with liver disease might proclaim that they wish they could just get rid of the whole thing. Similarly the human subject has many 'virtual' organs i.e. functions that take genuine desire and process it into something that controls you. For instance you have actual physical genitalia but you also have virtual genitalia, the virtual genitalia is all the social norms which subject and control your body as a whole 'oh I have to get laid this month or all my friends will think I'm gay and I won't be a man.' These organs don't have to correspond to real-life organs, if you are obsessed with looking nice and browse /fa/ you could be said to have a fashion organ. 'I have to spend lots of money to look good otherwise my internet friends will think I'm a dumb faggot'. A BwO is a person that has removed these virtual organs removed and is free to live out genuine desires. Basically it's an overly complex way of describing a genuine individual who isn't ruled by social ideas.

>>11347600
Thanks

>>11347600
Spot on, but there are reasons for the BwO being described in such detail, namely because it isn't just a negative description (free from something), but also positively correlated to desire (no matter what it is).

>>11346307
Is your terminology the same as Deleuze in his works? Because it seems coherent just dressed up in unnecessary language.

Also thanks for the quotes they help a lot in understanding.

>>11349164
>Is your terminology the same as Deleuze in his works? Because it seems coherent just dressed up in unnecessary language.

Yes and yes. Believe me, I'm not trying to make it more difficult than it already is, but Deleuze talks about things on many different levels all at once and it's difficult to capture that when explaining him or even when trying to understand him. Somehow intensive differences, assemblages, capacities to affect and be affected, the virtual, differential speeds, thresholds, connections of various kinds (disjunctive, conjunctive and the third one I forgot), different types of movement, among other things, have to be thought all at once.