This week’s EMC readings include Freud’s Project for a Scientific Psychology (1895) and Beyond the Pleasure Principle (1920). This week we begin our shift from looking at configurations of the organism in the works of Natural History to how the organism is configured within various philosophical projects; often with the purpose of onto-epistemological modeling. Along with Freud, we will also be looking at the works of Heidegger, Merleau-Ponty, and Deleuze.
Part of my reason for including Freud among these thinkers was his use of “the organism” as a model for understanding the ego’s relation to the external (both as world and as stimuli) as well internal (where the stimuli is a frenetic, unmediated degree of intensity which is nonetheless more “commensurate with the system’s method of working than the stimuli which stream in from the external world” (28)). In fact, in the opening pages of BPP, he cites the 1873 work of G.T. Feschner, Einige Ideen zur Schöpfungs und Entwickelungsgeschichte der Organismen (something like Some Ideas on the Creation and Evolution of Organisms).
From Jakob von Uexküll’s A Foray into the Worlds of Animals and Humans:
“A snail [Helix pomatia] is placed on a rubber ball which, because it is floating on water, can slide freely past beneath the snail. The snail’s shell is held in place by a clamp. The snail is thereby free to crawl and also stays in the same place. If one places a small stick at the foot of the snail, it will crawl up on it. But if one strikes the snail from one to three times a second with it, the snail will turn away. However, if the blows are repeated four or more times a second, the snail begins to crawl on the stick. In the snail’s environment, a stick that moves back and forth four or more times a second must be at rest. We can conclude from this that the perception time of the snail takes place at a speed of between three and four moments a second. This has a result that all processes of motion take place much more quickly in the snail’s environment than they do in our own. Even the snail’s own movements do not seem slower to it than ours do to us” (72).
This week’s EMC meeting was on Marie François Xavier Bichat (1771-1802) and Jean-Baptiste Lamarck (1744-1829). It was also my week to present and I had a lot of fun with these texts, building on our conversations from previous classes and trying to draw some connections to last year’s discussions.
Bichat: Physiological Researches upon Life and Death (1800)
- Reiterating a Critique of Foucault
- Organized and Brute Matter vs. Living and Dead Matter
- Physical and Vital Forces: Lamarck vs. Buffon and Bichat
- Living Bodies and their States: First Proposition
- Living Bodies and their States: Second Proposition
- Reactive Power vs. Intussusception
This year, the EcoMaterialisms Collective is working through a three-part nexus: histories and theories of the organism in the fall, of ecologies in the winter, and of cosmologies in the spring. Every now and then I’ll post my reflections to the week’s readings along with what those readings were:
- Pierre Louis Maupertuis (1698-1759): The Earthly Venus
- Georges-Louis Leclerc, Comte de Buffon (1707-1788): Natural History, General and Particular
- Ch. 2. Of Reproduction in General.
- Ch. 4. Of the Generation of Animals.
- Ch. 9. Varieties in the Generation of Animals.
- Ch. 10. Of the Formation of the Foetus.
- Ch. 11. Of the Expansion, Growth, and Delivery of the Foetus.
- Michael Hoffheimer: “Maupertuis and the Eighteenth-Century Critique of Pre-Existence” in Journal of the History of Biology 15(1): 119-144 (1982).
- Paul Farber: “Buffon and the Concept of Species” in Journal of the History of Biology 5.2 (1972): 259-284.
Also discussed: Foucault’s The Order of Things and Hans Jonas’ The Phenomenon of Life.
To begin by sharing, a fascinating book by Roger Caillois, a close friend of Georges Bataille:
The changing banners on this site come from the images in this text.