I agree absolutely (just said as much on Jaap’s blog). D&G have given us an interesting metaphor -= which comes from botany, and we can think about that independently of reading D&G and see how the metaphor applies to learning. I’m going to read D&G because I have two degrees in philosophy and that’s what I do, but it doesn’t mean that I am more qualified to give opinions in #rhizo14 than anyone else.

I do think that the theory is helpful for me to understand rhizomatic thinking, because it connects up to other metaphors, such as the nomad, the war machine (hence my user name) and stuff like that. It is REALLY hard to write about though (I find the same with Foucault). I’m trained as an analytic philosopher and this continental stuff is alien to me. I will try, though. 🙂