philosophical reference, appearing in articles in and in PowerPoint Wired Magazine presentations made by those advising the US Intelligence Community. Although this reference is often made glibly, it highlights the importance of habits to understanding how causality, correlation and anticipation work in the era of the inexperienceable experience. Deleuze, reading Hume in (a text that would Experience and Subjectivity have a profound affect on his later work), outlines the linkage of experience and habit in theory of causality as follows: causality, Deleuze explains, does not proceed on Hume’s the basis of certainty (it is not based on intuition or demonstration), but rather on the basis of probabilities. This does not mean that causality is derived from probability, but rather that causality forms gradually and is the result of habit, which presupposes experience, even as it does not coincide with it. According to Hume, is a “experience principle, which instructs me in the several conjunctions of objects for the past. Habit is which determines me to expect the same for the Experience another principle, future.” presents cases of constant conjunction to the inspecting mind, but by itself “repetition does not Habit allows the mind to transcend experience: to constitute progression.” reason about experience it transforms belief into a possible act of “as understanding.” Causality is thus both union of similar objects and also a mental inference from one “the object to another.” Crucially, though, habit and experience are not—and do not—always have to be unified. Habit, for Hume, poses the possibility of falsifying experience, for it “can feign or invoke a false experience, and bring about belief through which not ‘a repetition’ ‘is from These beliefs, however inevitable, are, Hume stresses and deriv’d experience.’ ” Deleuze underscores, illegitimate: they the set of general, extensive, and excessive “form
philosophical reference, appearing in articles in Wired Magazine and in PowerPoint presentations made by those advising the US Intelligence Community. Although this reference is often made glibly, it highlights the importance of habits to understanding how causality, correlation and anticipation work in the era of the inexperienceable experience. Deleuze, reading Hume in Experience and Subjectivity (a text that would have a profound affect on his later work), outlines the linkage of experience and habit in Hume’s theory of causality as follows: causality, Deleuze explains, does not proceed on the basis of certainty (it is not based on intuition or demonstration), but rather on the basis of probabilities. This does not mean that causality is derived from probability, but rather that causality forms gradually and is the result of habit, which presupposes experience, even as it does not coincide with it. According to Hume, “experience is a principle, which instructs me in the several conjunctions of objects for the past. Habit is another principle, which determines me to expect the same for the future.” Experience presents cases of constant conjunction to the inspecting mind, but “repetition by itself does not constitute progression.” Habit allows the mind to transcend experience: to reason about experience “as it transforms belief into a possible act of understanding.” Causality is thus both “the union of similar objects and also a mental inference from one object to another.” Crucially, though, habit and experience are not—and do not—always have to be unified. Habit, for Hume, poses the possibility of falsifying experience, for it “can feign or invoke a false experience, and bring about belief through ‘a repetition’ which ‘is not deriv’d from experience.’ ” These beliefs, however inevitable, are, Hume stresses and Deleuze underscores, illegitimate: they “form the set of general, extensive, and excessive
Wendy%20Chun%20-%20Chapter%201%20(DRAFT).docx