“the contrast between organized experience and corporeal experience in Deleuze – the latter being akin to the non-figurative dimension of desire (what appears often as imperceptible), to contagion, to unnoticed becomings. The contrast can be found in a space of external relations understood as place that provides movement, speed, slowliness on the one side and the organized structures that give specific paces to movements, the projects and their agencements, the transcendent principles and rules on the other. This was present at least from Difference and Repetition, although in different forms. It is sometimes a contrast between the plane of immanence and the created concepts in a philosophy (in What is Philosophy), sometimes a friction by means of which difference makes repetition possible (in D&R), sometimes the schizo – and the intensity zero of the body without organs itself – in the background of territorial machines that make use of devices like the Oedipus operation (in Anti-Oedipus) and sometimes explicitly as in the distinction between the plane of immanence and the plan of organization (in 10th plateau of Mille Plateaux). It is as if there is experience making any plan, organization, agencement, concept possible – while those things populate, to be sure, experience. The transcendental empiricist thesis is that there is not much transcedental below experience – in any case, to ask for the conditions of possibility of anything one needs to engage with experience.”

rest @ http://www.philpercs.com/2016/04/reading-deleuze-from-the-point-of-view-of-artaud.html

see also https://terenceblake.wordpress.com/2016/04/30/deleuze-without-return/