 It is interesting to note that several years after the publication of which is philosophy by de Luz and Gattari, which we are commenting now, came up the now famous string theory cosmological astrophysical theory that seems to imply not only that they are multiple universe, but they are some sort of situated on brains, sort of a slices cosmic slices that contain each of them one universe and this is interesting because this coincides with the analogy the metaphor diagram that de Luz and Gattari are proposing here by saying that while the plane of eminence in fact is like a universe in the midst of multiple universes and in fact each of those universes carries the dialectic of the one and all the one and the multiple so there are many ones this functions as rather a Kazi one in a sense The Greeks called it Logos The Greeks were the first I read to conceive of a strict eminence of order to a cosmic milieu that sections chaos in the form of a plane now here we are in complete metaphysics, but it's important to know that the lozen Gattari are very attracted by conceptual character of the idiot which they relate to Descartes also, but in their case, it's more in the sense Dostoevsk in sense of a need for creation authentic creation relationship with the plane of creation and Therefore a certain they say a certain complicity with the idea of absurd Which they relate to creation This is why in fact if we take any moment of their book It might actually seem absurd So before we reach a verdict regarding the absurdity of this book and what does it mean for a book to be absurd we need in fact to Complete our journey through the book as if it were a plane of eminence and therefore embody our reading That's why they say that philosophy is not only a genealogy, but also a Geology it is located in Terrestrial space This is of course a reference to Nietzsche who's you encouraged his reader her reader to be faithful to the earth In the sense that transcendence He's dangerous because it might induce a rejection of our embodied states, and they spend many pages Mentioning that their idea of eminence is not an idea of eminence to a An entity that would be transcendent to that eminence Imminence is imminent only to itself and consequently captures everything absorbs all one and leaves nothing Remaining to which it could be imminent In any case whenever imminent is interpreted as imminent to something We can be sure that this something reintroduces the transcendence Okay, so this is a long tradition in philosophy since Nietzsche to Beware of the transcendent Which Genealogically Is for many related to The idea of the God of course One might ask What is the problem with the idea with God with the idea of God? Well, historically we know that the problem with the idea of God is that it was often used as an instrument of power and control hence the philosophical quest for a Non-instrumentalizable non Manipulable non-transformable into a coercive force of power idea of The divine and hence their Reference to Spinoza whom they call the Prince of Philosophers Spinoza was the philosopher who knew full well that eminence was only imminent to itself and Therefore that it was a plane traversed by movements of the infinite field with intensive ordinance It is therefore the Prince of Philosophers Perhaps he is the only philosopher never to have compromised with transcendence and to have hunted it down everywhere In the last book of the ethics he produced the movement of the infinite and gave infinite speeds to thought In the third kind of knowledge So the third kind of knowledge is this mysterious idea in Spinoza, which is not developed a an intuition That would allow us to be in resonance in Coincidence with the natural plane of eminence They're looking for and they say here's something very interesting is that they mention the possibility of a form of consciousness There would be imminent to imminent as opposed to an imminent to an imminent there would be imminent to consciousness So this sounds a bit complicated, but basically It might be a form of panpsychism in the white-heading sense and we know that Delos Was very influenced by a white head in the sense even of the style the style of this book what is philosophy is not that different From the style of white head In process and reality or this movement of affirmations rather than demonstrations instead of the poetical attempts at Reaching philosophical concepts, right? so I Think we're gonna leave the plane of eminence And jump to the conceptual persona But let's just conclude by saying we were mentioning earlier that perhaps the concept is a machine and They seem to give some credit to this idea When they write Perhaps more attention should be given to the plane of eminence laid out as abstract machine And to create it concerts as parts of the machine We'll continue tomorrow