Manuel DeLanda provides the first detailed overview of the assemblage theory found in germ in Deleuze and Guattari’s writings. Through a series of case studies DeLanda shows how the concept can be applied to economic, linguistic and military history as well as to metaphysics, science and mathematics.
DeLanda then presents the real power of assemblage theory by advancing it beyo...
Manuel DeLanda provides the first detailed overview of the assemblage theory found in germ in Deleuze and Guattari’s writings. Through a series of case studies DeLanda shows how the concept can be applied to economic, linguistic and military history as well as to metaphysics, science and mathematics.
DeLanda then presents the real power of assemblage theory by advancing it beyond its original formulation – allowing for the integration of communities, institutional organisations, cities and urban regions. And he challenges Marxist orthodoxy with a Leftist politics of assemblages.
作者简介
· · · · · ·
Manuel DeLanda is an internationally recognised philosopher. He is a professor of philosophy and science in the Architecture Departments at Princeton University and University of Pennsylvania. He is the author of many well-known works including Philosophy and Simulation (Continuum, 2011), Deleuze: History and Science (Atropos Press, 2010), A New Philosophy of Society (Continuum...
Manuel DeLanda is an internationally recognised philosopher. He is a professor of philosophy and science in the Architecture Departments at Princeton University and University of Pennsylvania. He is the author of many well-known works including Philosophy and Simulation (Continuum, 2011), Deleuze: History and Science (Atropos Press, 2010), A New Philosophy of Society (Continuum, 2006), Intensive Science and Virtual Philosophy (Continuum, 2002), A Thousand Years of Nonlinear History (Zone Books, 1997) and War in the Age of Intelligent Machines (Zone Books, 1991).
目录
· · · · · ·
Acknowledgements
Series Editor’s Preface
Introduction
1. Assemblages and Human History
2. Assemblages and Linguistic Evolution
3. Assemblages and the Weapons of War
· · · · · ·
(更多)
Acknowledgements
Series Editor’s Preface
Introduction
1. Assemblages and Human History
2. Assemblages and Linguistic Evolution
3. Assemblages and the Weapons of War
4. Assemblages and Scientific Practice
5. Assemblages and Virtual Diagrams
6. Assemblages and Realist Ontology
7. Assemblages as Solutions to Problems
Bibliography
Index
· · · · · · (收起)
The way in which the authors express this idea, however, seems to deny any autonomy to the components of an assemblage. As the above quotation continues, for example, Deleuze and Guattari assert that ‘technical objects have no distinctive intrinsic characteristics’. If by that one means that there are no necessary and sufficient properties characterising weapons and tools as general categories, then we may agree with that assertion. Entities like ‘the weapon’ and ‘the tool’ are only reified generalities and as such have no place in assemblage theory. But to say that a technical object remains entirely undetermined runs the risk of transforming the concept of assemblage into something like a Hegelian totality in which the very identity of the parts is constituted by their relations in the w... (查看原文)
No doubt the progressive differentiation of technical objects was guided by the social assemblages (farms, armies, temples, workshops) of which they were parts. But they nevertheless retained their own properties, a fact that explains, for example, how they could be detached from one assemblage and plugged into another, as when firearms were transferred from sedentary armies to nomad ones. And technical objects have their own history, in the sense that the pace of technological development may accelerate relative to that of institutional development, forcing the latter to catch up. [...] Thus, we must preserve both bottom-up and top-down forms of causality within assemblage theory, and never conceive of the latter as determining the very properties of an assemblage’s components.
(查看原文)
鵝毛玉絮髒狸奴
2 有用 fff勒内 2022-04-18 08:36:19
202404重读+ch2。整本书的确是对dg概念的归拢和再阐释。意识到ontology的claim同等重要：whole与part存在于同一维度。Braudel对城市的关注因而必须是assemblage（及其不同方向的发展）。反马克思的线性发展观。ch2讲语言实践实在太你法…三个维度复刻并颠覆。Lefebvre｜202204 ch1。emergence+exteriority和Benjamin的co... 202404重读+ch2。整本书的确是对dg概念的归拢和再阐释。意识到ontology的claim同等重要：whole与part存在于同一维度。Braudel对城市的关注因而必须是assemblage（及其不同方向的发展）。反马克思的线性发展观。ch2讲语言实践实在太你法…三个维度复刻并颠覆。Lefebvre｜202204 ch1。emergence+exteriority和Benjamin的constellation只能说是一模一样（没人写的话我就当仁不让了哈。 (展开)
1 有用 Eco 2023-11-08 10:01:53 山东
对德勒兹与加塔利《千高原》中“装配理论”的发展，「拼裝」一詞指涉的是一種將各種成分、部分加以配對的、組裝的「行動」，而且是適切地、完善地拼裝行動。但是這些相互異質的部分可能來自不同的脈絡，隱含迥然不同的語境、觀念等，因此，如何將彼此相互異質的部分加以拼裝、融合即是本書所欲呈現的。这么看来配置即蒙太奇的哲学外延了
2 有用 wolfsring 2020-08-02 21:33:51
lucid interpretations with abstruse examples
0 有用 余颜 2024-02-15 22:20:17 北京
草草看完，严格讨论德勒兹的部分兴趣不大，用布罗代尔当标杆做了各种改造，最有用的还是强调「尺度」和「层级」问题，比原生的组构论更容易被社会科学化。问题在于跨尺度分析好像只有历史社会学会比较在乎或者说有应用场景，而历史社会学者在什么情况下才会走投无路去用德勒兹呢？
1 有用 Sugar Lady 2016-09-07 21:35:58
把不同的事情组合在一起，去处理某个问题的。读了不代表看的懂
0 有用 芬尼根的守灵人 2024-04-22 17:36:42 甘肃
奔着德兰达如何阐释整体与部分的关系来的，反而对“内在性平面”“虚拟”“吸引子”等概念更感兴趣，不得不说德兰达是一位优秀的德勒兹阐释者
0 有用 余颜 2024-02-15 22:20:17 北京
草草看完，严格讨论德勒兹的部分兴趣不大，用布罗代尔当标杆做了各种改造，最有用的还是强调「尺度」和「层级」问题，比原生的组构论更容易被社会科学化。问题在于跨尺度分析好像只有历史社会学会比较在乎或者说有应用场景，而历史社会学者在什么情况下才会走投无路去用德勒兹呢？
1 有用 Eco 2023-11-08 10:01:53 山东
对德勒兹与加塔利《千高原》中“装配理论”的发展，「拼裝」一詞指涉的是一種將各種成分、部分加以配對的、組裝的「行動」，而且是適切地、完善地拼裝行動。但是這些相互異質的部分可能來自不同的脈絡，隱含迥然不同的語境、觀念等，因此，如何將彼此相互異質的部分加以拼裝、融合即是本書所欲呈現的。这么看来配置即蒙太奇的哲学外延了
2 有用 fff勒内 2022-04-18 08:36:19
202404重读+ch2。整本书的确是对dg概念的归拢和再阐释。意识到ontology的claim同等重要：whole与part存在于同一维度。Braudel对城市的关注因而必须是assemblage（及其不同方向的发展）。反马克思的线性发展观。ch2讲语言实践实在太你法…三个维度复刻并颠覆。Lefebvre｜202204 ch1。emergence+exteriority和Benjamin的co... 202404重读+ch2。整本书的确是对dg概念的归拢和再阐释。意识到ontology的claim同等重要：whole与part存在于同一维度。Braudel对城市的关注因而必须是assemblage（及其不同方向的发展）。反马克思的线性发展观。ch2讲语言实践实在太你法…三个维度复刻并颠覆。Lefebvre｜202204 ch1。emergence+exteriority和Benjamin的constellation只能说是一模一样（没人写的话我就当仁不让了哈。 (展开)
0 有用 一棵萝卜 2022-03-18 11:55:40
毕业之后再也不看外文书了（我发誓）🥲