Thus far we see how D&G sum up philosophy in chapter 3 as the “laying out, inventing and creating” of concepts. This process of “laying out, inventing, and creating concepts”, also denoted as the “philosophical trinity”, essentially enables one to engage philosophy as a study. The laying out of concepts via plane of immanence, the “inventing” and “bringing to life” made possible through the conceptual personae, and the subsequent creating of concepts complete the this “philosophical trinity” (76). These tree elements of philosophy, which, again, constitute the “philosophy trinity”, correspond in nature to our faculties of reason, imagination, and understanding (in that order; see page 77). In some ways, one could argue how the process of “laying out, inventing, and creating” becomes the duty of all philosophers to philosophy. Thus it becomes important for the philosopher to cultivate her faculties of reason, imagination and understanding when trying to discover/create new philosophical concepts.
Yet philosophy requires more than simply possessing reason, imagination, and understanding, which alone does not properly qualify one to engage philosophy. This is where the notion of taste finds relevance to our study of philosophy. Taste, as an independent faculty, allows for the “philosophical coadaptation” of reason, imagination, and understanding. Taste is essentially the cornerstone of philosophy which unites the philosopher’s faculties of reason, imagination, and understanding. Taste creates a philosophical harmony between our faculties of reason, imagination, and understanding and allows them to work unison. It is through the faculty of taste that the philosopher’s duty to philosophy ultimately becomes manifest.
If the philosopher is a like a three-piece puzzle, comprised of reason, imagination, and understanding, then taste is how we go about putting the pieces of the puzzle together. Moreover, if taste is the “love of the well-made concept” then disciplining our faculty of taste becomes an integral part of philosophy.
An issue I take with D&G’s notion of taste examines where taste comes from. Reason, imagination, and understanding are seemingly inherent faculties of the mind, but where and how do we employ our faculty of taste. More importantly, how do we cultivate taste? If we taste is the “love of the well-made concept”, then where do we find the “well-made concept”.
In my opinion, D&G’s explanation of taste as the “philosophical coadaptation” of reason, imagination, and understanding is the most important point they’ve made thus far. Nonetheless, it demands close attention for we cannot progress on the subject of philosophy without a clear understanding of taste.
I can identify with your concerns regarding taste, Kyle. However I think that we might keep in mind our discussions on taste in Aesthetics and remember how difficult a phenomenon taste is to define. Keep that in mind and consider how difficult it was to grasp D&G's earlier ideas and it may seem reasonable that we have issues with their assertions on taste. At the same time I believe D&G have a responsibility to answer our concerns.
ReplyDeleteDeleuze and Guattari seem to provide the tools and knowledge necessary for an individual to become a philosopher. In order to “lay out, invent, and create” concepts, the philosopher must educate himself in the ways of the world and avoid stupidity and forgetfulness. In addition, the philosopher must also have the capacity to use his mind without the influence mental illnesses and substances that distort the use of reason. It seems as though the individual must also cultivate his/her own faculty of taste in order to become a true “friend of wisdom.” Although it is still unclear as to how we specifically develop and employ this faculty, D and G make it clear that this is an important requirement for the formation or concepts. Without taste, the philosopher’s faculty of reason, imagination, and understanding would not be able to operate in harmony.
ReplyDelete