Plasticity defines substance-subject as giver and recipient of own form

Evidence

Let us recall that the radical application of ‘plasticity’ proposed in this work does not simply characterize a type of individuality. It is meant to contribute to the way we can understand the substance-subject: as something that develops in a temporal fashion, or, so to speak, contains self-differentiation in its very concept. Such a role, far from invalidating the usefulness of plasticity for the analysis of modernity, in fact provides its justification. It is precisely because the substance-subject is plastic – that it is at once the giver and recipient of its own form – that we can establish the evolution of the concept of plasticity. — Catherine Malabou, The Future of Hegel, 850

Categorization

• DEFINE: This is the core definitional anchor of the reading purpose — plasticity as substance-subject containing self-differentiation and being simultaneously giver and recipient of its own form.
• XREF: Directly connects to the reader’s stated goal of tracing plasticity’s theoretical root for brain work — the giver-recipient self-formation is the conceptual link to neuroplasticity.
• QUESTION: Whether ‘giver and recipient of its own form’ can map onto a material brain that is not self-grounding warrants pursuit in the plasticity-to-biology bridge.
• corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — Catherine Malabou, The Future of Hegel: Plasticity,…, 850