Aufhebung is itself transformed across spirit’s development rather than remaining fixed

Evidence

In actual fact, and in the entire course of spirit’s development, there is no perfect identity between preservation and suppression; they are neither unchangeable nor undifferentiated. What must be demonstrated is the fact that Hegel does indeed restore the essential dialectical performativity of the aufheben and Aufhebung, that he in effect ‘sublates’ aufheben into aufheben, Aufhebung into Aufhebung. The possibility of a new reading of Absolute Knowledge emerges from this truly plastic operation. — Catherine Malabou, The Future of Hegel, 1005

Categorization

• DEFINE: Core definition of plasticity as applied to the Aufhebung: the term sublates itself, so suppression and preservation are never perfectly identical.
• XREF: This is the exact definitional core of plasticity the reader is after; connects directly to Malabou’s plastic reading of Absolute Knowledge. — connects to: Aufhebung’s suppression and preservation each harbor a further double meaning. — Catherine Malabou, The Future of Hegel: Plasticity,…, 1011; The Aufhebung has a history within philosophy, not an idiosyncrasy of Hegel — Catherine Malabou, The Future of Hegel: Plasticity,…, 1008; Aufhebung operates as speculative mourning over spectral past shapes — Catherine Malabou, The Future of Hegel: Plasticity,…, 1013

Broader Connections

• Aufhebung’s suppression and preservation each harbor a further double meaning. #expands (0.85) — Catherine Malabou, The Future of Hegel, 1011
• The Aufhebung has a history within philosophy, not an idiosyncrasy of Hegel #expands (0.80) — Catherine Malabou, The Future of Hegel, 1008