Receptivity to stimuli is the very process by which organs acquire form

Evidence

For example, an animal will form the habitus of sight by determining how luminous stimuli, otherwise scattered and diffuse, are reproduced on the privileged surface of its body. ‘The eye binds light, it is itself a bound light.’ The activity of binding difference (in this case, the perception of light) is dual. On the one hand it is contemplative, for vision is achieved only by seeing, hence by submitting the eye to the action of the sensible. But on the other hand, it is also active: for it is by submitting itself that the eye paradoxically acquires its form and exercises itself. In a certain sense, the eye is produced by the material it contracts and invests in during the process of contemplation. — Catherine Malabou, The Future of Hegel, 517

Categorization

• XREF: Directly relevant to my enmity question — this is the plastic-receptivity machinery Anidjar draws on; the eye’s submission-to-acquire-form is the passive-screen half of the binary I’m trying to find conditions for. — connects to: An organ acquires form by submitting to and binding its stimulus
• DEFINE: Clarifies how ‘plastic receptivity’ works at the organic level: contemplation (passive submission) is itself what exercises and forms the organ.
• DEEPTHINKING: This paragraph dissolves the activity/passivity binary from within — submission is what produces form — which is exactly the conceptual knot at the center of the plasticity/enemy question.