This separation between disciplines is also typical of
the compartmentalization between fiction and philosophy, which we tend to radically separate. It's clear when we're watching a film or reading a novel and when we're dealing with a philosophical text. In fact, in practice,
it's very difficult to confuse them; moreover, publishing policies explicitly indicate what type of text the reader is
encountering.
Intersections between the two fields occur on the condition that the differences are established with the utmost clarity. Thus, a novel like Musil's *The Man Without Qualities*
can be interpreted philosophically, or a film like *The Matrix* can be analyzed in the same way. Similarly, a philosophical text is often given a literary evaluation, as is the case with
Nietzsche. These cross-readings do not erase the boundaries between these fields, but rather reinforce them. Nor is this a case of using fictional narratives
to develop a philosophical discourse, generally with pedagogical intentions.
Discerning the fictional
aspects of some philosophies becomes even more complex because fictional segments can coexist with strictly philosophical parts within the same work; a single
author can write both a philosophical work and one that falls within the realm of philosophical fiction.
In most cases, a hybrid condition arises: the
superimposition of philosophical statements
alongside fictional texts. A careful and meticulous analysis is needed to determine which works or
fragments fall within this type of fiction.
These
philosophical fictions are not subject to analysis of their truth content. When a statement like “The King of France is bald” is presented, its truth value cannot be
determined because there is no King of France; but we can imagine a film that invents a situation in which there is a King of France, and in this case, it is possible
to say whether the statement is true or false depending on whether or not the king
in the film is
bald. The reading of philosophical fictions is not subject to scrutiny of their truth value; rather,
it aims
to question the imaginary world in which
such discourses are uttered.
The importance of this analysis
lies in the fact that we use these philosophical fictions as true philosophies, and with them we construct interpretations of reality, which lead to certain ways of acting within society, without the social actors
realizing that what illuminates
their practice is a fiction
quite similar to a novel.
To fully understand what philosophical fiction is, it is worthwhile to examine a paradigmatic case, such as
Deleuze and Guattari's
A Thousand Plateaus. Readings of this work have proliferated endlessly; its concepts have been applied to the most diverse fields of knowledge. Being a Deleuzian became
fashionable. Who didn't become a
follower of Deleuze?
However, it shows signs of exhaustion. Current phenomena escape its theoretical
framework, and the political ambiguity of its propositions is perceptible. Furthermore, major transformations, such
as the technological
ones we are experiencing now,
remain unexplained. (Deleuze and Guattari, 2002)
I propose a hypothesis regarding
A Thousand Plateaus: this work is philosophical fiction and falls within the realm of fictional
narrative. Perhaps it approximates a science fiction novel, albeit with a theoretical discourse format. If this is the case, then the question of the text's truth, as an adequate image
of the world, will no longer be relevant.
Within this work, Chapter 4, November 20, 1923 Postulates of
Linguistics, quite clearly expresses
its belonging to the field of fictional texts. A first guideline, not applicable in all cases, but particularly useful here, consists of determining whether the theses presented in the
chapter are applicable to the discourse in question.
The central thesis of chapter
4 argues that the fundamental function of language
is the
issuance of orders that must be obeyed and that
are expressed
through slogans: “Language is not even made to be believed in, but to obey and to make others obey.” (Deleuze
and Guattari, 2002, p. 81) Thus, language does not inform or communicate, but rather issues orders.
If this strong thesis is applied
to Chapter 4 itself,
turning the premise
against itself, then the question
that emerges in all its radicality is expressed as
follows: when reading
the series of apparent arguments contained
in the text, they should
be treated not as statements
that inform and communicate certain content, but as commands. Therefore, one must ask about
the commands that Chapter 4 is issuing and that readers either obey or reject.
But if this
is true, then the entire chapter says nothing; it doesn't affirm what we believe it's arguing. On the contrary, it's necessary to embark on the discovery of the mandates
that are required to be fulfilled. Conversely, if we say that the statements in Chapter
4 are indeed
informative statements of the theses held
by Deleuze and Guattari, then there's a contradiction within the text, because this discourse in A Thousand Plateaus escapes the definition that language is primarily a directive to be
carried out.
If the text of
Chapter 4 is considered
strictly philosophical, a thorough debate would have to be held
on the functions of language and the impossibility of reducing them to their perlocutionary function. But this
leads to a
trap, because
regardless of the arguments
for or
against, its status as philosophical
discourse remains.
By introducing the hypothesis that considers the text in question to be philosophical fiction,
a significant shift occurs, leading
to a different set of situations, especially because the realm of
truth is abandoned. In this way, the discourse of Chapter 4 is placed on the same level as
the
phrase "The King of France is bald," which, lacking a referent,
ceases to be either
true or false.
The status of the phrase “Language is not even made to be believed, but to be obeyed and
to
make others obeyed”
leads to a shift in its discussion from the realm of philosophical
statements to that of fictional propositions. The question is no longer whether it possesses
truth
value, but rather,
first and foremost, under what conditions
this phrase could be
uttered, under what conditions it could be used appropriately, as Wittgenstein would point out.
Following Umberto Eco, especially in Lector in fabula
(Eco, 1981), we are called
to construct a possible world where the fundamental function of language is indeed to transmit
commands. Let us undertake
this task; let us imagine a world in which the primary function of language is the issuance of commands.
Captain Picard, aboard the Enterprise, arrives at Kepler-452b, a super-Earth located in the
Cygnus
constellation. Upon
disembarking with his
crew and encountering the planet's inhabitants,
a woman elegantly dressed and adorned
with many ornaments
says:
Our planet has three suns and orbits each of them every 36 days.
Here, of course, from a fictional perspective, there is a universal translator that allows them to communicate immediately.
Captain Picard replies:
We come from planet Earth, located in the Solar System in the Milky Way.
Immediately, confusion ensues. An electronic cage encloses the Enterprise crew, who don't understand what's happening. The inhabitants of Kepler-452b shout and yell at each other, and things are about to turn violent. At that moment, Picard orders all weapons placed on the ground
and deactivated, and they bow respectfully before the Keplerians. The din ceases, and the Keplerians smile. The electronic cage disappears.
This is not the place to elaborate on the history of this world; suffice it to say that Captain Picard has discovered that the phrase “Our planet has three suns and orbits each of them every 36 days” is not merely informative, but rather a command or order. It means: “You must disarm and show respect for our planet and its inhabitants.” Ultimately, the crew of the Enterprise learns a language composed of commands.
Far from being a purely academic exercise,
the elucidation of the philosophical fiction of a world where language consists of giving orders offers lessons about our own world. What have Picard and his crew learned?
It has led them to reflect on the importance of preserving the
other functions of
language, such as its informative and communicative ones, in order to combat the tendency to transform language into a mere vehicle for imposing the dominance
of some people or classes over others,
by obtaining obedience to the dictates of established
power.
A long-term task would consist
of analyzing which authors, books, discursive fragments,
of philosophers of
any era, but especially
contemporary ones, wrote
philosophical fictions, which have been interpreted as philosophies in the strict sense.
This project should be complemented by a history
of Western philosophy that includes,
in addition to philosophical
fictions, myths, magical elements, the fundamentalism of absolute origins, the symptoms of civilization's malaise, theodicies, and theological turns.
In other words, a critique of impure reason, which has characterized
Western thought,
is needed.
Bibliography
Deleuze y Guattari. (2002). Mil
mesetas. Valencia: Pre-Textos.
Eco, U. (1981). Lector
in fabula. Barcelona: Lumen.
Spivak, G.
(2009). Muerte de uan disciplina. Xalapa: Universidad Veracruzana.
