Script & sources at: www.thenandnow.co/2023/05/21/the-rhizome-a-thousand-plateaus-deleuze-and-guattari/ ► Sign up for the newsletter to get concise digestible summaries: www.thenandnow.co/the-newsletter/ ► Why Support Then & Now? www.patreon.com/user/about?u=3517018

I always think of Deleuze when doing the gardening.

What deleuze doesn't tell you is in order to understand a Thousand Plateaus, it is best to start with it's conclusion (Concrete Rules and Abstract Machines). Then proceed to read chapter one. The rest is captivating to the mind and spins a wonderful image of thought.

"I have a cold. The virus is a rhizome" >2020 has entered the chat

It would be great if you'd stayed on Deleuze and make an entire series. Thank you for the vid!

A Thousand Plateaus is the most schizophrenic book I ever tried to read. Decided to read it from the end and it all started to make some sense... because at the end all the terms are finally explained!! Although, still when trying to read it, I'm not sure if its genius book or just Deleuze and Guattari being trolls and making things up as they go.

I just want to let you know that this video had such a profound effect on me that it lead to me moving from New York to France. I love your channel. Just know that the content you make is changing people's lives. - Thanks

Wonderful using Kerouac as an example of explicating Deleuze and Guattari.

I am in a rhizomatic state of mind after I wake up in the morning. Everything seems possible in any direction. This usually comes to an end after the first cup of coffee... 😂

you are giving me a better understanding of sociology/politics than my uni course rn, thank you :)

What I love about this, is the way it explains artistic freedom, the creation of an artistic fluidity. As a musician that consciously avoided learning music theory and who refuses to remember what the keys on a piano are, I find the possibility of ‘constantly becoming’ ever present, it’s an adventure each time I’m in a creative moment. I follow where the moment takes me:)

Love how you're able to explain Deleuze concepts in such and easily digestible way! Keep it up, man!

This is a 'Then and Now' masterpiece.

Interesting how the metaphor visualized is topologically homologous to the brain

Beautiful video and nicely read. Thank you. My mind hungered for something like this. I appreciate the time and effort taken to put this out in the world.

Anti-oedipus? Your content is by far the best exploration of post-structural theory on KZfaq.

Wow, this is great! Love your channel

Quality content as usual. You are doing an excellent job. Merry christmas from Sweden.

John Rawls (Theory of Justice) vs Robert Nozick (Anarchy, State and Utopia) debate would also a make a great video in the field of political philosophy

this is excellent! keep up the good work. greatly appreciated!

I watched this one a lot. A fascinating idea and an amazing video giving it life

Fascinating. I'm off to read Deleuze now...

Interesting connection to Kerouac. I wouldn’t have seen it otherwise

Outstanding. Thank you.

Amazing video mate! Non-representational theory one would be great!

Do High Theory people really pronounce "rhizome" like that? Wild!

Loved this, thanks for making it. What was the background music, btw?

Beautiful voice!

great videos!

I just subscribed to your channel yesterday and was wondering if you'll ever do a Deleuze video and by the slimmest of coincidences, you uploaded it the very next day. I tried reading A Thousand Plateaus, I couldn't get past few pages. It's an extremely hard read

Was Deleuze high?

I have difficulties to undestand the concept of stratification in Thousand Plateaus....help!

Beautiful!

from my understanding the rhizome is two fold - an extension and critque on kants schematism?

Could you please do a video on territory, mileau, and the refrain because without it this won’t really be understood by many

thank you

great vid, great channel. what's the music here?

I remember Land (who of course is influenced by Deleuze) remarking that power is not top down like our traditional views of hierarchy but is sprung from the bottom and multiplied like a web, is the rhizome a concept that aligns with such a stance?

wwooww great video

Great video! Where can I find the Jazz quote?

neatly underlinked there

❤❤❤Thank you

Looking good Then & Now, loving the casual look. E

You can read about Deleuze & Guatarri's concept of the rhizome contrasted Derridean ideas through the fictions of Jorge Luis Borges here: thoughtpressings.wordpress.com/the-library-of-babel-and-the-book-of-sand-by-jorge-luis-borges-a-post-structuralist-analysis/

What is the music used here??

Some of the most challenging reading you'll ever do

One of the things I find bothersome with the idea of the rhizome is the, well, contingent weight that it sets upon contingency. Are things truly unhierarchical in the rhizome? In truth things of the most bearing to each other are needfully nearer to one another and thus have a hold on one another and their development. Things are ultimately linked, of course, but that still means things forthgo according to local hierarchies of intensity (things of nearer relationships to one another win over another by means of intensity), and overall there might a hierarchy of all relations and how much each bears upon the other. 'Contingency' itself is an illusion, since things are already foreset in such a way that things cannot be otherwise (though of course we may not see how things turn out) by their intensites and foregoing tendencies. The universe may be a rhizomatic relation of all things, but if there is contingency and no hierarchy of bearing and intensity, then there would be no relations at all, no difference (t.i. intensity and change needfully betoken a kind of hierarchy of how things forthgo and unfold, like there would never be a case where a man laughing would suddenly make the sun of a faroff galaxy go supernova or vice versa, as the intensity of relation between one another hardly exists). So I don't see how there is no hierarchy at all within a rhizomatic structure (see: how in the rhizomatic structure of the throng, folk often go according to foreset paths of least resistance, both through the general living space that the throng besits, as well as through the shifting paths of each other; amongst each other, further, there are those more or less willing than others to yield inroads to others, all already foreset by the given rhizomatic relations between everyone in the crowd, t.i. how everyone feels already before gathering into a throng, how they feel amongst it, how they feel getting out, so on).

sorry about the demonetization

I don't think The Archetype as Carl Jung ment it is at odds with Deleuze/Guattari 's Rhizome. They seem to either overlap or be different ways hinting at the same unspeakable "concept/thing" or whatever mouth noise you want to use to infer what's it infer or points at as I believe both "concepts" are so far abstracted that language can only scratch an echo of their echoes. Or they could be the antithesis of one another and thus be something unkind to two sides of the same coin or like qliphoth and qabalah if anyone reading this is familiar with hermeticism

If the only part of the field we can see is the chaotic field of the Logistic Map, we may walk away thinking there is no hierarchical structure in the pattern. Yet if we were able to observe, in the field, iterations before and after, we might find hierarchical structures more easily detected. In other words, random is probably much more ordered than we have the ability to observe without a scientific lens-such as chaos math, or the convergence of the Logistical Map and the Mandelbrot Set.

So the Rhizome is basically similar to an artificial neural network?

How do I create a body without organs? *Deleuzean anxiety increasing*

Great channel, great video. But I am not sure on the idea that the rhizome is progressive, as you say. If anything, it is without a pre-determined direction...forward, backward, up, down; by steps and leaps and stagnation and offshoots.

Uhhh... truediltom?

Go for Foucault next

It's funny, truediltom *just* did a video on this exact same subject. Is there something driving interest in deleuze or is it just a coincidence I wonder.

What's the essential difference between "Difference and Repetition AND A Thousand Plateaus"?

6:50 youtube demonitized this channel!? WHY would they do that??

A lot of parallels to Aleister Crowleys chaos Magick, I can see why Nick Land in the late 90s fell deep into the occult

Why did they demonetize you?

You’re always a few days behind truediltom

I love your videos but I think that for the metaphorical imagistic notions , especially when the narrative and meaning depends on such notions, it would be worth it to let them take shape for a longer time before moving on. If not, it can just feel hand wavy even if it isn't. That is to say that I felt like this video was too fast-paced in a way: the sentences were too dense with words that carry too much meaning, or the time given in the video for these sentences were too short for the meaning to unfold and carry through. Hope you also appreciate the constructive criticism! Cheers and love your stuff!

reezome

Las ca va arăt eu și anti hero și accelerație și teritorialitate

you should go on Truediltom's podcast, The Absolute State.

3:00 Aunts are not Rhizome, they have biology, BUT 6:41 Virus is a Rhizome. Is not seem Paradoxical? Virus is also have biology. BTW, a great intro, thanks.

Whatever you are trying to get at here, it's not quite as plain or articulate as other videos I've seen. At least it's not working or getting through to me. I wish I knew what the point of this rhizome model was - what context it is a benefit to look at with.

Deleuze is enough for the next 2500 years just as socrates was enough for the past 2500 yrs.

❤❤

What about blockchains or fractals?

I tried to read the books 3 or 4 times. Almost went crazy, didn't understand a thing.

This sounds similar to Timothy Mortons Hyperobjects

the structure of this video is kinda like a rhizome

You seriously need to go on Truediltom's livestream - The Absolute State

book distribution is a rhizome. the typography shows where it came from. look at the bible. it's always with the awesome Lord's type.

I've loved your videos so far. In the beginning I thought you might have a far left bias but your video on Acemoglu and Robinson's "Why Nations Fail" made me understand that you have an open mind about things. From the field of economics, a few suggestions for videos. All of these suggestions are from Nobel Prize winners. The works are highly respected :- Arrow's Impossibility Theorem Amartya Sen's Liberal Paradox Amartya Sen's Development as Freedom Paul Krugman's Pop Internationalism Ronald Coase's Theory of Firm and Social Cost FA Hayek's The Use of Knowledge in Society James Buchanan' The Calculus of Consent Elinor Ostrom's Governance of Commons

I swear I am starting to think you and truediltom are the same person.

I need close captioning for this video. It is not accessible to deaf people.

Hi Lewis. Could you create a little more transparency about who you are. Credentialing you is like credentialing Banksy! If you want subscriber spend, best to put the cards on the table. ; )

Good luck escaping hierarchy

Tripping on acid oh god oh fuck

I have a cold as well

So basically reductionist nihilism mixed with word mangling in the language part?

Artificial multiplicity is another type of singularity. Only natural multiplicity has it's importance. Worshiping of multiplicity is the main error of Deleuze.

Lewis: I like how much you emphasize Habermas’ ‘public sphere’ for democratic discussion/argumentation. The structure of YT is oppressive in how it gives power to YT channel users in discussion at the expense of other commenters. Though, on your last video you removed my 1st intellectual property abolition thread without notice to me. And you removed another comment in this video. So instead of immediately removing comments (or blocking users) from now on, I have a suggestion that you respond to each user with the same or similar following comment: “YT channel users can remove any comments and block other users from commenting for any reason. This is anti free speech and gives power to YT channel users at the expense of other users commenting on their channel. Your last comment _________, however I won’t immediately remove this comment. So instead I’m giving you until 24 hours from now to explain why I shouldn’t remove your last comment. (I’m also open to hearing explanations from anyone for why/how I should change this process)” Please let me know your thoughts. You could substitute “remove your comment” with “block you” or “remove your comment & block you” whenever it seems appropriate. It’s also important YT channels don’t ban any particular terms: *All terms can be ethically used in the right context* . It would be very beneficial for free speech & democracy on the internet if more channel users (& users/mods/platform holders on other sites) started conducting themselves like this.

Alain Badiou, as well as Deleuze and Guattari, Lacan are french joke.

epigenetics & neural pathways

just an early bird, planting their rhizome.

Plus ca aveți reclama la reMarkable

what

mind porn, just sooo goood, awwwww....

Aaaaaaaaaa make it stop I need *STRUCTURE* !!!!!! (jk I'll be fine)

6th Plateaux , no-keeping highTidal ENERGIE ov LIFE FORCE.!! a fe/male in big-time,BIG-EGG.!! TueM. Thanks

Yeah... I'm just going to pretend I understood any of that

This guy was on drugs when he wrote this , dont get me wrong

>metaphor REEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

rizhome94More than94humanlike94 ELEMENT-282 TueM.

Ugh - pointless jargon. Spooky pseudo intellectualism at its finest.

If you take the definition of rhizome seriously, you will unfortunately find that almost nothing is a rhizome. Most of the examples of the video are wrong... Traffic, stated here in this video, is everything BUT a rhizome. Jazz certainly isn't a rhizome, what a ridiculous claim, it's highly ordered and composed with much rationality, also it's very easy to argue that the instruments in jazz do not have the same importance, which is why there are ALWAYS leaders in jazz. We know our jazz musicians by names of people (e.g. Miles Davis, unlike "bands" which we call by a name they chose and that reflect a little more equality, e.g. Beatles). The rhizome is an epiphenomena, an interesting concept but a very limited one in terms of extension. Sorry for disappointing you ideological followers.

Rhizome is pronounced RYE-zome