Forming the self must be reimagined through plasticity, not flexibility or rigidity.

Evidence

But let us not forget that the question What should we do with our brain? is a question for everyone, that it seeks to give birth in everyone to the feeling of a new responsibility. The inquiry conducted here thus ought, beyond the critical imperatives just announced, to allow anyone who consents to follow its path to think new modalities of forming the self, under the name of ‘‘plasticity’’ and beyond the overly simplistic alternative between rigidity and flexibility. This means asking not ‘‘To what point are we flexible?’’ but rather ‘‘To what extent are we plastic?’’ — Catherine Malabou, What Should We Do with Our Brain?, 61

Categorization

• DEFINE: Establishes early that plasticity names a distinct mode of self-formation set against the rigidity/flexibility dichotomy the reader wants to be able to catch being collapsed.
• SEED: Only a fragment of context given, but the plasticity-vs-flexibility rebrand already suggests an essay angle comparing how corporate culture borrowed plasticity vocabulary while gutting it to flexibility.
• XREF: connects to: True plasticity requires already being formed, not merely receiving any shape. — Catherine Malabou, The Future of Hegel: Plasticity,…, 1224