Okay this might expose me as a little thick but I need to regurgitate something in my head that applies to Deleuze's assumption towards the concept of 'immanence' and it's relationship to transcending Being through repetition:
In trying to relate the notion of immanence to the philosophy of trancending being through repetition, what makes sense to me is that within an existence where everything that is (and ever will be) is already present and accessible to us, the only way to inititiate change within this existence is to constantly repeat the current state of being until we learn to see it in a new way, rather than looking elsewhere for something new. So okay, I get that. But when I think back to the explanation of the realm of Being vs. the realm of Becoming; my understanding is that 'the realm of Being' is a 'coagulation within the realm of Becoming'; this implies that the realm of Becoming embodies a larger space than that of Being, that there is more beyond the realm of Being, that there is an 'other space' beyond the material coagulation of space.
SO: rewind back to the initial statement that explains the fundamental ssumption of Immanence; does this mean that everything that exists exists within the material realm of 'Being', assuming that that is all we humans are able to perceive, the realm in which we exist? Or is he suggesting that the immaterial realm of becoming is within our grasp, that we can transcend the realm of 'Being' by reaching out and pulling the outer realm into our own (thereby expanding the coagulation)? The problem with this take is how this is to be done through repetition which implies (in my understanding) a circular, introverted method, which in my view doesn't equate to my understanding of the differentiation between the space of being and becoming....hope someone gets it! (Or at the very least I hope I didn't spread the confusion!)
Wow...after re-reading this I'd be amazed if anyone understands what I just asked!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment