Divine subjectivity is a process of temporalization, not a fixed presence
Evidence
Obviously the notion of passivity is not sufficient on its own to describe this dual aspect. Consequently we must return to the idea of plasticity, in its twofold meaning of a receiving and a giving of form. An example of originary synthetic unity which lends itself to all it creates, the subjectivity of God, from the perspective of plasticity, appears not as an absolute presence paradoxically deficient in its relation to itself, but as the living source of a process of temporalization. — Catherine Malabou, The Future of Hegel, 648
Categorization
- DEFINE: Defines plasticity’s twofold meaning (receiving/giving form) and recasts divine subjectivity as originary synthetic unity that becomes the source of temporalization rather than a deficient presence.
- XREF: Core concept link — this is the plasticity-as-brain-plasticity root connection driving the reading purpose. God’s subjectivity as originary synthetic unity maps onto the brain’s self-formation through receiving and giving form. — connects to: Divine life-process temporality is that of a subject posited ahead of itself — Catherine Malabou, The Future of Hegel: Plasticity,…, 865; Divine alienation is a temporalization, not a sign of incompleteness; Divine alienation manifests a new ontological mode of time, not lack — Catherine Malabou, The Future of Hegel: Plasticity,…, 822 (+1 more)
- DEEPTHINKING: The core redefinition of divine subjectivity as originary synthetic unity lending itself to all it creates, opening onto temporality — genuinely dense and paradigm-shifting for the plasticity concept.
Broader Connections
- Divine alienation is a temporalization, not a sign of incompleteness
#expands(0.88) - Divine alienation manifests a new ontological mode of time, not lack
#corroborates(0.85) — Catherine Malabou, The Future of Hegel, 822 - Hegel inserts time rather than lack into divine subjectivity.
#responds-to(0.85) — Catherine Malabou, The Future of Hegel, 898