Four Ways of UnderstandingA Concept Note

P.Madhu

Here, in this short note, I draw attention to the four ways of understanding of
any phenomenon, including the social. A phenomenon can be taken as the
combination of name or action, entity or group process1, becoming or
unbecoming and stable or in-transition. Any phenomenon that first appear as
nominal stable entity when better understood its becoming, unbecoming,
active and manifold2 aspects looms larger.
Becoming

Study of an object that

is taken to have
become stable
nominal entity.

Study of an object that

is taken to have
(un)become stable
reproductive action.

Stable

Entity

Study of a group
process that is
understood as
unbecoming
in action

Transition

Group

Study of a group
process that is taken
to have become
nominal entity in
transition.

Name

Unbecoming

Action

Group Theory : Group is a set of elements in progressive differentiation, combination of which produces
objects. Group theory is about combination of elements making up objects. For example, the set consisting
rotations by 0, 90, 180, 270 degrees producing a rotation, and a full circle provided 360 degrees is taken as
zero. Group theory helps one to understand geometrical objects as consequent of progressive differentiation
of elements. Group theory is useful in understanding geometric figures by their invariants. Mathematically, a
sphere is more symmetrical than a cube because the degree of symmetry measured by the number of
transformations in a group that leave a property invariant, and relations between figures may be established if
the group of one is included in (or is a subgroup of ) the group of the other. Group theory de-essentializes
what was taken to be fundamental geometric forms under the Euclidian classification. (Delanda, 2005:17)
2
Manifolds are heterogeneous multiplicity assembled as curved space through the group process of
progressive differentiation. Though manifolds themselves are complex curved space, the local spaces within
them appear flat.

The greater a student fixed to nominal and static definitions of self and
everything else the farther will be her positing her study as that of an external
object fixated with its apparent nominal identities. A closer look will reveal
that the object under study has become so through an historical process. That
gives her the opportunity to understand her object of understanding has no
other ontology than the historical one. A further look closer will reveal, the
object under study indeed is an activity appears to be a stable entity by the
reproductive schema of singularities condition it. It appears to the researcher
the identity of the phenomenon has been historically occurred and concurrently processed by singularities, pulsations and gravities of the meshwork
within which it is located. The gravity of the meshwork is worded as field of
production by Bourdieu. The phenomenon along with its field of meshwork is
called assemblage by Deleuze and Delanda. A greater understanding lets the
researcher to recognize the dynamics of the meshwork always lets the
phenomenon observed to unbecome from what it was yielding to the ever
renewing currents of the meshwork. At this level of understanding, one
recognizes all explanations that took a phenomenon as static identity that has
become so to stay there is erroneous.

References
Bourdieu, Pierrie, (1993) Field of Cultural Production. Columbia: Columbia University Press
Delanda, Manuel (2005) Intensive Science and virtual Philosophy. New Delhi: Continuum.