I have been having trouble understanding what the plane of immanence is. I get that it has to do with thought and is infinite in some way, but I am unable to say anything deeper about it. Perhaps by speaking on what I understand of concepts and thoughts my classmates can show me where I’m leaning in the right and wrong direction.
To me the plane of immanence is something like the realm of thought. This may not be what the authors were aiming for, but the way it makes most sense to me is as the place where thoughts occur and where concepts are made and used. I think there is a divide between what we think and what we speak. When we speak, we have to be sure to use terms that are understandable by our interlocutors and use them correctly. Most arguments or disagreements are a product of misunderstanding what either party is saying. The realm of thought is not bound by these restrictions and problems. We have all had problems, say when writing a paper, of actually getting our thoughts out on the page. You have ideas, you know what you want to talk about, but you have trouble actually saying or writing it.
The plane of immanence is infinite, which also corresponds to how I think about the realm of thought. Anything can occur there and all concepts are used there. Our realm of thought does not begin nor end; it is continuous in our lives. It seems impossible to split our train of thought up; we are constantly moving around in our thoughts and using all the concepts available to us.
I am probably wrong in drawing a comparison between the plane of immanence and my own ideas about the realm of thought, but I have nothing else to really go off of. Can you guys steer me in the right direction?
Kip,
ReplyDeleteI am glad to know that I was not the only one who has not grasped a full understanding of the plane of immanence. I feel that the abstractness of the whole idea makes it hard to reach a conclusion or a more solid definition. I liked your comparison to the realm of thought. There do seem to many similarities such as the plane of immanence is "like a section of chaos and acts like a sieve." I think to more clearly draw a conclusion we would need to define a realm of thought, which I think would take some serious consideration.
When I think about the plane of immanence, the first thing that comes to mind is the scene in the Matrix when Trinity introduces Neo to the gun stockroom:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y70vcs3oV14
The room appears to go off into infinity.
I have also had a difficult time wrapping my head around the idea of the so called "horizon of events" (although the book explains that the plane is not a concept that can be thought). The plane of immanence, rather, is the "image of thought" (37). I'm not sure I fully understand this description either. However, there is one aspect of the plane of immanence that seemed to click for me: the "things" in the image that threaten thought, including stupidity, forgetfulness, delirium, and madness. If you were to place this idea within my example, I would imagine that it would be similar to an error with the programming.