We can clearly see that there is no bi-univocal correspondence between
linear signifying links or archi-writing, depending on the author, and this
multireferential, multidimensional machinic catalysis. The symmetry of
scale, the transversality, the pathic non-discursive character of their
expansion: all these dimensions remove us from the logic of the excluded
middle and reinforce us in our dismissal of the ontological binarism we
criticised previously. A machinic assemblage, through its diverse
components, extracts its consistency by crossing ontological thresholds,
non-linear thresholds of irreversibility, ontological and phylogenetic
thresholds, creative thresholds of heterogenesis and autopoiesis. The notion
of scale needs to be expanded to consider fractal symmetries in ontological
terms.

Dunamis wrote:

Lacan was Guattari's Analyst.

Annan wrote:


Slavoj: since clothes can be stored in cupboard, wardrobe is simply a convention established by the capitalist so when you set up bedroom you buy wardrobe while cupboard is spacious. See, you are missing the reality of clothes.

Housewife: hmm... I’m just worried that the clothes might get soaked with smell when I bake apple pies.

Slavoj: [rubs nose] you don’t need apple pies, your kids obtain exactly the same nutritions from eating apples and wheat separately. Apple pie is an invention of the capitalist glutton who sells ovens, so to speak. Actually, I should say that in reality the kitchen itself is a myth... as part of a mythology consisting in the marriage between women and houses. So ridicules. Tell me, won’t you join us proletariat?

Housewife: it moves me that you have such a passionate cause... where shall I put the clothes?

Slavoj: do I look like housewife? Just put them wherever you want, that’s the point!

Housewife: in the wardrobe then, the kitchen smells. By the way I'm going to bake that apple pie now, won't you stay for dinner?

Slavoj: [burps] thank you very much.