Chaosophy - autonomous learning

human science par excellence. The problem is to know how a
number of "machines" equipped with revolutionary possibilities
will be connected. For example, the literary machine, the psychoanalytic
machine, political machines. They will either find a point
of contact, as they have up till now within a certain system of
adaptation to capitalist regimes, or they will find a boisterous
unity directed toward revolutionary ends. We shouldn't put the
question in terms of the primacy of this or that discipline, but in
terms of their use or utility. What use are they Up till now psychiatry
has clothed itself in family affairs, a family orientation,
which amounts to a decisively reactionary use of its energy-even
if people working in the field of psychiatry may be revolutionary
by inclination.
While philosophic or scientific thought proceeds by manipulating and
contrasting various concepts, mythic thought draws on images derived
from the world of the senses. That's how Levi-Strauss puts it. In his
book The Interpretation of Schizophrenia! Silvano Arieti maintains
that the mentally ill rely on an intelligible logic, a "coherent logical
system"-even if it has nothing to do with the logic which is based on
concepts. Arieti speaks of "paleo-logic" and says that in fact this
'coherent logical system" recalls mythic thought, the thought of so-called
primitive societies, in that it proceeds by the "association of sensible
qualities. " How can we explain this phenomenon Is schizophrenia a
defensive strategy that pushes one to refuse even our system of logic
And if this is this case, doesn't the analysis of schizophrenic language
provide an instrument of incomparable value for social sciences, for
the study of our society
Gilles Deleuze: I understand the question very well: It s a very
technical question. I'd like to hear what Guattari thinks.
.I 61