March 21, 2005

Machines ...

This page is not available

Posted by hyperstition at March 21, 2005 02:15 AM | TrackBack




There's so much compacted here ... pre-emptive apologies for semi-random responses.
'One' (( )ne?) knot of consistency re-tying some of these threads is the D&Gon discussion of the warmachine Reza refers to, with the immanent problematic of the WM conceived as 'holding open a ( )hole' through continuous vortical behaviour (in the way cyclones perpetuate themselves along with a evacuated inner 'eye') as a singularizing non-unity coinciding with their potential to refuse the model of the State. Thus, despite their (compositional) numerical distinctiveness, they converge upon an indexical zero functioning as the practical principle of interlock and cosmic delocalization.

Reza's last query above also crucial - the way warmachines hunt is entirely different to the way war hunts warmachines. The D&G insistence that warmachines do not have war as an object is interestingly ambivalent here. If their argument is that the warmachine 'aims' at (the perpetuation of) nomos, the ( )hole, is this not in fact the war ('transcendentally' apprehended)?
If 'Western warmachines' hunted their opponents to annihilation, would they not disassemble their own path to autonomization by re-filling the 'inner' ( )hole which liberates them, replacing it with an arrogant and determined peace (New World Order)?

Posted by: nick at March 21, 2005 07:26 AM



PS. Reza, could you say something 'definitional' about affordance?

Posted by: nick at March 21, 2005 07:29 AM



Thanks Reza
"The living mud" getting oozily Tiamaterialist ...

PS. There's a definite 'W' topic latent in post above too - only Neoroman letter with a name, and name itself nomolexic / ambivalent
W = (AQ) 32 or 2^5, binary redoubling and decimally implicated
P-32 = 131, with manifold WoT/apocalyptic associations

Posted by: nick at March 23, 2005 01:04 AM