Correct, Deleuze and Guattari’s concept of the virtual is not inherently tied to the digital. However, the digital can be understood as an actualization of the virtual, or as a domain where virtual potentials are explored and manipulated. Here’s a clearer explanation of the relationship between their philosophical virtual and the digital:
1. The Virtual is Ontological, Not Technological
• For Deleuze and Guattari, the virtual is a fundamental dimension of reality that exists independently of any specific medium, including the digital. It refers to the realm of real but non-actualized potential—what could happen, what could emerge, or what underlies the formation of actual things.
• The virtual applies to all domains of life and thought, not just technological or computational systems.
2. Digital as an Actualization of the Virtual
• The digital realm, with its algorithms, simulations, and possibilities, can be seen as an actualized expression of virtuality:
• For instance, a virtual world in a video game actualizes a set of coded potentials. However, the philosophical virtual is not confined to these coded possibilities—it is broader and includes the open-ended processes of creativity and emergence that the digital world may mimic but cannot fully encompass.
• Digital technologies often create environments that simulate or evoke virtual potentials (e.g., virtual reality, AI). These technologies are specific examples of actualizations, but they do not define or exhaust the philosophical concept of the virtual.
3. The Digital is Limited in Scope
• While the digital appears “virtual” in a colloquial sense (e.g., “virtual reality”), it operates within finite, coded parameters. The philosophical virtual, by contrast, is open-ended and infinite in its scope of potential.
• For example:
• A computer program generates possibilities within a pre-programmed framework (e.g., all possible moves in a chess game).
• The philosophical virtual, however, is not constrained by predefined systems; it is the field of all possible emergences beyond what can be calculated or predicted.
4. Virtual as Creative Potential
• Deleuze and Guattari’s virtual is closely tied to creativity and becoming—it is the realm of potential that fuels transformation and novelty.
• While digital technologies often facilitate creativity (e.g., generative art or virtual environments), they are merely tools for exploring one aspect of the virtual’s possibilities, not equivalent to the virtual itself.
5. Analog and Digital in the Virtual
• Deleuze often contrasts analog and digital processes in his works, noting that analog processes (e.g., continuous, fluid systems) may more closely mirror the infinite, immanent nature of the virtual.
• The digital, while useful for discrete modeling and simulation, often imposes boundaries and discretizations on what is otherwise open and continuous in the virtual.
6. Virtual and the Digital: A Productive Intersection
• While Deleuze and Guattari’s virtual is not synonymous with the digital, the two can intersect in interesting ways:
• Digital technologies as explorations of the virtual: By simulating alternative realities or creating new possibilities, digital systems engage with the virtual in specific ways.
• Virtuality in digital spaces: The creative potentials of digital tools (e.g., virtual worlds, AI) can be understood as operating within a broader virtual field, actualizing new possibilities.
• The limits of the digital: Deleuze and Guattari’s virtual reminds us that even the most advanced digital systems are partial, finite, and contingent actualizations of an infinitely broader virtual potential.
In Summary
Deleuze and Guattari’s virtual is an ontological concept that transcends any particular technology, including the digital. While the digital can actualize aspects of the virtual (e.g., virtual environments, computational creativity), it does not define or encompass the full scope of the philosophical virtual, which is about the open-ended, infinite potentials underlying all of reality, not just technological systems.
