Plasticity and ‘to see coming’ function as operative motor-figures rather than thematic concepts.
Evidence
Malabou distinguishes, in what we could call her discourse on method – or her discourse on war – the theme and the strategy. She does it precisely in order to justify her recourse to the couple ‘plasticity’ – ‘to see (what is) coming’, terms which designate, not so much thematic concepts, but rather operative figures, motifs or ‘motors’. As figures or ‘schemes’, these must keep something like a sensuous body in the translation of the categories. — Catherine Malabou, The Future of Hegel, 81
Categorization
- XREF: The distinction between theme and strategy, and the ‘sensuous body’ of figures, connects to Malabou’s own later account of plasticity in her neuroscience-oriented work and to how this book roots her brain concept. — connects to: Plasticity is understood as a verbal and conceptual schema
- SEED: The idea that a philosophical concept can be an operative ‘motor-figure’ rather than a thematic concept — keeping a sensuous body — is a usable lens for writing about how abstract ideas remain embodied.
- recurring: this claim recurs 2 times within its source
Broader Connections
- Plasticity is understood as a verbal and conceptual schema
#corroborates(0.85)