Hegel’s active and passive nous reciprocally mirror one another as plasticity

Evidence

By inserting the passive νς at the opening of the development of the Philosophy of Spirit, indeed making it the extreme counterpart to that quotation of the Metaphysics which stands at the conclusion, Hegel forces the two notions, in their dialogue, to act as a mirror to one another. To introduce negativity into the state of the pure act or ‘absolute substance’ reveals the process of auto-determination at work via the interplay of πσειν and νεργε!ν. It is precisely this interplay which deserves the name of plasticity. The Anthropology will give it its first concrete enactment, relating the ontological sense of plasticity to its anthropological content, and asking, in particular, what transformation Hegel will impose on the Aristotelian treatment of exemplification in De Anima. — Catherine Malabou, The Future of Hegel, 427

Categorization

• DEFINE: Rehearses the definition of plasticity as the interplay of giving and receiving (positing and acting), here located at the hinge of Hegel’s Anthropology and Aristotle’s De Anima.
• XREF: Continues the thread from earlier chapters on nous as passive-yet-receptive; relevant to the MOC question insofar as it dissolves the agency/passivity binary within a single concept. — connects to: Hexis fuses potential and act through supple familiarization, not wearing-down — Catherine Malabou, The Future of Hegel: Plasticity,…, 1333