Logic of Sense
by Beth Metcalf
[Within these articles, I have always tried to indicate a
distinction between Representational thought which is opposed to
Univocity, and the actualized representations of Univocity. I
indicate this distinction by using the upper-case ‘R’
for the Representation of the dogmatic image of thought opposed
to Univocity. I use the lower-case ‘r’ for the
actualized representations of Univocity. I ask the reader to keep
this convention in mind.]
The logic of sense is the logic of expressive Univocity. It is
not to be confused with the Representational logic of a general,
universal, and abstract Signification. Sense is the
transcendental-empirical field beneath representation. It is that
which is presupposed by all significations of representation.
Therefore, sense is not to be confused with signification.
Signification is actualized in the proposition. It is the
conditional meaning which presupposes the sense by which it is
conditioned. However, sense does not represent. Rather, it is the
expressed of the proposition. It expresses an event. Whereas
signification is the equivocity of nouns, sense is the Univocity
of the infinitive verb. Sense expresses all real-formal
distinction of events in one ontological Event. (Difference &
Repetition 35) "What is important is that we can conceive of
several formally distinct senses which none the less refer to
being as if to a single designated entity, ontologically
one." The Univocity of sense (as real-formal distinction
ontologically single) actualizes representational significations
which cannot be totalized into any general language of
Representation. Sense/event is that transcendental-empirical
field by which the conditions of all actualized significations
(Logic of Sense 144-147 “uses” of representation) are
conditioned.
Deleuze continues (DR35-36), “In the ontological
proposition, not only is that which is designated ontologically
the same for qualitatively distinct senses, but also the sense is
ontologically the same for individuating modes, for numerically
distinct designators or expressors…” It is because
being is the same for all these modes that they can now be really
different. It is because being is said of all modes in a single
sense that these modalities do not have the same sense.
Within Univocity’s logic of sense, there is no oppositional
sense/reference split. That is, senses are not correlated with
referents. Such a correlation confuses sense with signification.
Signification is in correlation with denoted referents only
within an actualized frame of reference. However, there is no
generalizing or universalizing correspondence between sense and
reference as there is in Representational thought. There is no
totalizing reference frame. There is not even an infinitely
varied one. That is, there is no infinite Representation of the
identity of conceptual Signification. A correspondence between
signification and denoted referents is actualized only at the
level of “uses” of representation within Univocity.
Deleuze says, (LoS 68) "...what would be the purpose of
rising from the domain of truth to the domain of sense, if it
were only to find between sense and nonsense a relation analogous
to that of the true and the false? We have already seen that it
is futile to go from the conditioned to the condition in order to
think of the condition in the image of the conditioned as the
simple form of possibility. The condition cannot have with its
negative the same kind of relation that the conditioned has with
its negative. The logic of sense is necessarily determined to
posit between sense and nonsense an original type of intrinsic
relation, a mode of co-presence." Sense is the
transcendental-empirical field that does not resemble the
conditioned significations that it conditions.
Sense is the frontier and the articulation of difference between
things and propositions, substantives and verbs, denotations and
expressions. Sense inheres in the proposition, but is attributed
to things. Therefore, one can never denote the sense of a
proposition. Sense has neutrality and sterility. It is
extra-propositional condition of fragile surface effects. (DR155)
“...significaiton refers only to concepts and the manner in
which they relate to the objects conditioned by a given field of
representation; whereas sense is like the Idea which is developed
in the sub-representative determinations. It is not surprising
that it should be easier to say what sense is not than to say
what it is. In effect, we can never formulate simultaneously both
a proposition and its sense; we can never say what is the sense
of what we say.”
Sense is independent of the proposition. At the level of the
proposition (with its actualization in state of affairs), there
is opposition from the point of view of quality, quantity,
relation, and modality. However, sense is at the level of the
sub-representative and extra-propositional. There is no
opposition. The neutrality of sense is not affected by the modes
of the proposition. Sense, in its neutrality, is indifferent to
all opposition, such as universal/singular, general/particular,
personal/collective, affirmation/negation. All appearances of
opposition belong to the actualized aspects of the proposition
(denotation, manifestation, and signification). But sense is
extra-being---the being of the sensible. It is the
transcendental-empirical field. It is that by which the
conditions of the proposition are conditioned.
With Univocity, Being is Saying. Being of the event is the saying
of sense. Being is said in one and the same sense of everything
about which it is said. But that of which it is said is not the
same. This is the disjunctive synthesis that is not mediated by
the oppositions of the proposition. It is the eternal
return---the ideal dice game---the affirmation of chance.
Univocity of Being is the unique event in which all events
communicate. Univocity is both what occurs and what is said. The
noematic attribute of all states of affairs (event) is the
expressible (sense) of every proposition. Univocity is the
identity of event and sense. It articulates sense with event at
the frontier. And since sense is at the sub-representative level
of singularity, the expression of any degree of sense can
articulate difference of content of any degree of event.
Univocity unites all events in one with the expression in
nonsense of all senses in one. Singular difference is articulated
each time.
Therefore, sense is the level at which all events, even
contraries, are compatible. It is the singularity of sense/event
that is compatible with any other singularity. (LoS p.177)
“Incompatibility is born only with individuals, persons, and
worlds in which events are actualized, but not between events
themselves or between their a-cosmic, impersonal, and
pre-individual singularities.” At the level of sense there
is universal communication of events. It is the level at which
all real distinction of events are the ontological singularity of
the Event. Sense is event. It is the strange ideal game of
Univocity. It is the eternal return which affirms the distance of
every sense/event. This is the Univocity of the disjunctive
synthesis. But this disjunctive synthesis is not to be confused
with the exclusive disjunctions of Representational thought. The
disjunctions of Univocity are inclusive of the real, the
possible, and the impossible since all events are compatible at
the level of their intensive singularity. (LoS180)
“[U]nivocity of Being has three determinations: one single
event for all events; one and the same aliquid for that which
happens and that which is said; and one and the same Being for
the impossible, the possible, and the real.” Objects which
are impossible from the point of view of prior signification, are
not impossible within the domain of sense.
Univocity is the pure empty form of time (Aion). Sense is on the
plane of Aion, that pure instant which divides every present into
both future and past directions at once. There is no best
direction of “good sense”. It is the external relation
of things and propositions. Sense is the frontier between
propositions and things that articulates difference. Sense
inheres in the proposition but is attributable to things. There
is no oppositional relation. All real distinction of overlapping
and interpenetrating singularity is ontologically one sense. All
really distinct singularity is ontologically one. It is the
All-One that is not to be confused with any One/Multiple
opposition. Therefore, sense is multiplicity. Any singularity can
be compatible with any other singularity at the level of sense.
This is the communication of all sense/events in ontologically
singular Event. But each really distinct singularity of
sense/event can become actualized in the form of the proposition
(denotation, manifestation, and signification) on another plane.
At this level of actualization, a use of incompatibility is born.
Therefore, with Univocity, we reach the plane of pre-individual,
impersonal, and a-conceptual singularities from which
actualization is generated. However, if we do not first reach the
plane of singular sense/event, then we cannot reach the
actualization of the event either. If we do not reach the
sub-representative and extra-propositional level, then we merely
confuse the virtual with the possible. We, then, remain trapped
in the Representational possibilities of conceptual identity. We,
then, merely confuse sense with signification. When we take sense
to be synonymous with signified meaning, we do not reach that
transcendental-empirical plane of singular sense. We do not reach
that plane from which all concepts and perceptions are
actualized. If we mistake sense to be signification, then we do
not reach the multiplicity/Univocity of the logic of sense. There
can be no real difference at all. We do not escape tracing the
transcendental from the empirical. And, even when denotation is
arbitrary, there can still be Representational despotism of the
overcoded Signifier.
When we reach the Univocity of sense---the logic of sense---then,
we have reached a plane from which there can be the genesis of
really different actualizations. When we reach the plane of
singular sense/event, then the actualization of the event is real
difference, each time. Each actualized individuated world has
real difference from any other, because each is the actualization
of a really distinct singularity. All actualization is the
eternal return of real difference, because there is a newly
created singularity of sense that is being actualized each time.
Actualized worlds cannot be totalized by any Representational
Signifier.
For Univocity, at the level of sense, there are no individuals or
forms that share things in common, because we are at the level of
pre-individual and a-conceptual singularity. There is no
‘common sense’ or ‘common nature’. There are
no numerically distinct substances which could share a common
attribute. There can be no ‘common sense’ from which
could be actualized some ‘common nature’. Each
individual or individuated world is the actualization of a unique
degree of singularity (really distinct but ontologically one).
The ‘vice-diction’ of Deleuze reaches a
pre-individual level of singularity. It reaches the domain
of alogical compatibility. All events are compatible.
Propositional possibilities of compatibility or incompatibility
occur only when events are actualized into convergent or
divergent individual worlds. That is, representation occurs
at the level of individual worlds which actualize events as
compatible or incompatible. Vice-diction actualizes new
individual worlds of really different identities and really
different oppositions each time.
Therefore, for Univocity, there is a pre-individual
transcendental field of sense from which propositional truth is
actualized in really different worlds each time. This means that
there can be no universalizing, general Truth of Representation.
There is no totalizable Truth. Nor are there relative truths in
opposition to some Absolute Unifying Truth. That would still be
the Many/One opposition that does not reach multiplicity.
Univocity shows us the sufficient reason for the
singular-universal truth of each actualized world. Univocity
shows us a multiplicity of worlds individuated differently yet
ontologically single. Each world reveals truth as a really
different actualization incommensuarable with any other.
Therefore, Univocity is the truth of the relative, not the
relativity of Truth.
Expressionism in Philsoophy 335, “In short, what is
expressed everywhere intervenes as a third term that transforms
dualities. Beyond real causality, beyond ideal [R]epresentation,
what is expressed is discovered as a third term that makes
distinctions infinitely more real and identity infinitely better
thought. What is expressed is sense: deeper that the relation of
causality, deeper than the relation of representation.”
Deleuze’s logic of sub-representative sense constructs percept and concept together (in each disparate degree of intensity) to be actualized with real difference (each time) into sense perceptions and corresponding cognitive conceptions that “make sense” (signification) on a plane of reference. But there is no universal generality of common sense or good sense.