The more I read Zull's descriptions of the neuronal networks of the brain, the more Zull's points seem to build on Deleuze and Guattari's notion of rhizomatic structues (though Zull doesn't seem to be aware of this connection). I recall reading in Deleuze and Guattari's text, A Thousand Plateaus, how the process of how critical theory and research allows for multiple, non-hierarchical entry and exit points in data representation and interpretation.
On the surface, this seems to reflect what Zull discusses in chapter 6, particularly on pp. 94-99. This seems to fit nicely (too nicely, perhaps) with a prominent conception of knowledge in the West which juxtaposes dualist categories and binary choices. A rhizomatic structure (e.g., like our neuronal network according to Zull) works with planar and trans-species (genre?) connections, while a more traditional taxonomic model works with vertical and linear connections. If our brains work as Deleuze and Guattari contend rhizomes work with "no beginning or end...always in the middle, between things, interbeing, intermezzo," perhaps the way we have been processing and categorizing knowledge in our formal educational systems incorrectly. Then again, isn't this suggestion itself a binary categorization ;-)?
If our paradigm is completely wrong, who wants to start overhauling pedagogy from the ground up?
-R
No comments:
Post a Comment