Deleuze & Guattari: Rhizome

In this episode, I provide a snapshot of Deleuze and Guattari's notion of the "rhizome."

If you want to support me, you can do that with these links:

Twitter: @DavidGuignion
IG: @theory_and_philosophy
Tiktok: @theoryphilosophy

[Lastrevio]

Fun fact: Out of all people, D&G took this analogy of the rhizome from Carl Jung's biography "Memories, Dreams, Reflections", who used it there first.

[AnthonyLongboarding]

The concept helps us, I feel, understand that we can organise society in line with anarchist notions of federations instead of relying on centralised and hierarchical institutions.

[gregpappas]

This makes sense. It seems it can be derived from Hume’s notion of self. With that said, there are patterns of behaviors that are enduring that we must understand if we hope to change. Personality is one such structure. The patterns have deep multifactor causes. Saying a person is like a rhizome does little to help us overcome the determinants of behavior. The notion of neuro-plasticity, also well described, explains the basis of change and gives some clues on how behavior change can be enhanced. Debating Freud on the point has little utility. He was a foundational thinker 100 years ago but neuroscience is a place where philosophy should engage. I love your channel.

[brianschram]

I'm a sociologist, so, obviously a caveat on disciplinary convention, but there is also a negative reading of the rhizome as a characteristic of late capital to create new spaces for economic capture and the "bringing-together" of previously-sequestered institutional discourses or data in a kind-of chaotic, but durable and resiliant capitalism.

[numbersix]

YES this further explanation helped immensely, particularly the attribute of Untraceability. Rhizomatic learning offers an alternative to Freudian overdetermination (I'm a progressive neo-Freudian).

The comment by Karpos about the mycelium being rhizomatic must be correct. Some believe that mycelia may support a planetary-scale consciousness.

I've worked with banana plants, which I believe may have taught primitive agriculture to humanity, possibly in Peninsular India, and also with bamboo trees, which are amazing!

[soundmind]

Thank you for your explanation. I would offer that to be rhizomatic is to be radical. Indeed this refers to the source or root, which appears chaotic, but this is only because we cannot see nor fathom the fullness of its expression. In actuality, the root and tree are one in the same. Rooted means fixed, does it not? The only difference being that a root is fixed in a way that is unpredictable and that challenges our fragility. We may try to mitigate our discomfort by calling it silly names such as 'free radical'. We label humans in similar ways when we don't understand or accept what we are witnessing. Certainly its no coincidence that those humans which appear to live in harmony with nature are associated with the source or root. We call them natives (natal) or aboriginal (from the origin). Yet when they inconvenience us or give us the opportunity to see how foolish we are, we condemn them as irrelevant or backwards. ...Be radical my friend.

[rika]

I agree in the aspect that consciousness is very very malleable and there are a lot of dimensions that we haven't mapped down at all, so treating it as a No Holds Barred situation can be healthy, though of course without throwing out what we've learned can often be the case to be the case a lot of the time still
Helps with the idea of what a tulpa is capable of for instance.

[airbornepizza]

Thank you, this is a good starting point to visualize this concept. What are some of the other qualities, beyond Freud's, as mentioned in the end of the video? Also what does rhizomal living vs arborescent look like?

[karpos.entropy]

I think the perfect example for the rhizome is mycelium and how it spreads

[shahradghaffari]

The method of it applied to the everyday routine is an embrace of spontaneity. Which is a Nietzschean notion in itself. It could be best used in studying in my opinion and finding entries wherever your whim takes you. But the question is that if an untraceable life with a rhizomatic rejoice is even possible in this world which is close to the societies of control which Deleuze talks of or not ? I know they have their own schizoanalysis which is a hopeful project but does this mean that they are really that optimistic about the idea of untraceable life in these times?(fyi I've only read Anti-Oedipus and not A thousand plateaus. That's why I'm a little confused.)

[Ben-vfjv]

The rhizome is my favorite idea from Deleuze and Guattari. As someone who appreciates the rhizome, but does not appreciate the rejection of nothingness and ideology, I find that the rhizome is something which can be embraced even without the cumbersome metaphysics of D and G.

[PunishedFelix]

Hey T&P just wanted to apologize for my erratic behavior a few years ago on Twitter and I hope youre doing well.

[CassandraForAGlobalTroy]

I don't think that rhizomes on their own are a particularly useful tool. They have to be taken with the rest of Capitalism and Schizophrenia. They are useful in understanding the rest of the text and in helping you to recognize the ways that smoothness and striation manifest in the world around you and particularly in understanding D&G's critique of the ways in which the left had been organizing (I don't necessarily think their model is any better, but I use their critique in trying to explain the rehabilitation of counterculture and radicalism and the process by which liberal authoritarianism makes striated that which is smooth). Like much of C&S, it serves as a useful examination of why we are so stuck in the cultural and political place we are and some of the ways in which we are kept here.

[Nilnaberius]

Please for the love of god define everything in anti oedipus so i can start reading there instrsd of backing up to logic of sense, i like guattari more ;-;

[royeric]

Rhizome Rhizome Rhizome Rhizome Rhizome Rhizome Rhizome Rhizome Rhizome

[maxwellmills]

I think that the rhizome as metaphor (and in botany) is useful in terms of the unpredictability and untraceable qualities, particularly in terms of illegibility to the nation-state. However I feel like there is something to be said for being rooted in a place, and I think about how capitalism thrives off of displacing people, destroying their connection with place, and I wonder if the rhizome metaphor in a way could be used to justify capitalist displacement and destruction of relationship to place. But then again maybe the rhizome isn't really rootless as much as modular and decentralized in it's relationship to place.

[MagnumInnominandum]

It is comprehendible as an analogy but I am not finding it particularly compelling. Plant roots and mycelium are very similar. Their cells multiply fastest where the moisture and nutrients are at the most optimal levels. Both have binary branching structures that are fixed architectures that tend to repeat unless prohibited by some local condition non optimal to growth and expansion. Arborescent structures do literally harden with greater rigidity than the undifferentiated growth of mycelium. Mammalian cortical structures tend to differentiate early and lose much plasticity when long developed. There can be some cross growth and use of disused loci by other damaged nearby structures. Though it might seem more flexible and desirable, I do not believe we can much emulate myceilial function as our physiology and memory are more analogous to arborescent forms. I have studied basic plant physiology and dicotylous plants in particular over 25 years and the mycology of basideomycetes fungi over 15 years. With a healthy sprinkle of Human brain physiology and neurology. I am interested in the hypothesis offered but am sceptical of it's practical utility.