witnessing the inhuman

8/3/2019 Witnessing the Inhuman

1/22

South Atlantic Quarterly 10:1, Wnter 2008

doi 10.121/003828-200-01 200 Duke Unversty Press

Jean-Philippe Deranty

Witnessing the Inhuman:Agamben or Merleau-Ponty

A great part twenteth-century (cntnen-tal) phlsphy cul be characterze as theattempt t slve the cnunrum the emse humansm. Mst the majr thnkers thesecn hal the twenteth century belevethat humansm ha becme a categry that nlnger hls, that t cllapse wth the hrrchstrcal experences a ma century. Theybeleve that the categry s nt just epstem-

lgcally awe, but, mre pressngly, that t s acategry that s ethcally an pltcally tante, tthe pnt where t can be cnstrue as ne thekey categres t ecnstruct urgently n rert av repeatng the hrrrs an all-t-recentpast, t step ut the pssbltes a anger-us uture. The suspcn all these thnkers snt easy t athm, because ne cul apparentlyargue wth g lgc that t s precsely the nr-matve meanng the human that allws net cnemn the hrrenus crmes cmmtteby human bengs aganst ther human bengsas alng the test humanty. It s nt an easytask t cnvncngly artculate why the repeateextremes nhumanty perpetrate n the pastcentury, culmnatng n the nustral plannng the ttal ehumanzatn an estructn


2/22

1 Jean-Philippe Deranty

mllns peple, als ncts wth t the nrmatve categry human-sm. The cre ea justyng ths rejectn the nrmatve categry nthe name hstrcal examples s that t s precsely the bele n a spe-cal human essence, mplyng as t es a structural separatn betweenthe human an the nhuman that has cnsstently helpe t justy theehumanzatn s many human bengs.

Ae t the prblem humansm s the culty that nne thethnkers wh enunce the perls separatn at the heart the humanbeleve that t wul be enugh smply t abann the categry. On thecntrary, they all thnk that the task phlsphy, ater the crtque anthe Destruktion humansm, s t prpse a new kn humansm, a

paraxcal psthumanst humansm that wul ully acknwlege thennhuman, yet av the mstake smply erasng the ference betweenthe human an the nnhuman. Fr these thnkers the mst urgent task phlsphy s thus t wtness the nhuman.

The uble sgncatn ths mtt hghlghts the culty pst-human phlsphy. Wtnessng the nhuman means, rst all, makngsure that phlsphy es nt bracket the hstrcal speccty the pastcentury, that t sets tsel as a prmary task the agnss the causes an

the extent the catastrphes. The rst meanng witnessing s smplythe enuncatn the lgc separatn peratng at the heart tra-tnal humansm. Secnly, hwever, ths prgram crtcal agnsss the negatve se a pstve wtnessng, the ne that s well artcu-late by Grg Agamben n Remnants o Auschwitz: Human bengs arehuman nsar as they are nt human r, mre precsely, human bengsare human nsar as they bear wtness t the nhuman. Fr the phls-phers mentne, t s precsely the structure the epch that mae thewtnessng the nhuman n the human mpssble, that mae the thernhumanty pssble, the utter vlence perpetrate by humans n therellw humans.

Ths essay engages tw attempts at slvng ths uble task wtnessngthe nhuman. In the rst part, Agambens ethcs testmny s stuaten hs general prject a ecnstructn what he sees as the nherentlyangerus metaphyscs Western logos cnucve t the estructve b-pltcs that un n Auschwtz ts ateul realzatn. Rather than a cr-tque at a cnceptual level, Agambens verall prject s questne here

n the bass ts practcal cnsequences, the purely negatvstc, evanes-cent ethcs, pltcs, an aesthetcs that arse ut hs racal crtque


3/22

Witnessing the Inhuman 17

metaphyscs. Aganst such a sempwerng praxs, Maurce Merleau-Pntys alternatve me cnstructng the wtnessng the nhuman suphel. Merleau-Pntys crtque humansm s the mst rutul ne, Iclam, because t s the ne that pens the mst prmsng hrzn r trulyefectve mels ethcal, pltcal, an aesthetc praxs.

Witnessing the Inhuman: Agamben

Wtnessng the nhuman r Agamben has the tw ntmately relate mean-ngs alreay mentne: the crtcal task bearng wtness t the realty the tme, n all ts past an ptental hrrr, an the escrptve task en-

tyng the nhuman n the human, wth the ea that the ateul expulsn the nhuman rm the human has been the rgn thse scpltcalramewrks that pruce the nhuman pltcs the tme.

T the rst task, an entre bk s amusly ecate, Remnants o Ausch-witz. The bk has the ambtn, as Agamben wrtes n the ntructn, ferng the Ethcs mre Auschwtz emnstrata, whch n ther bk ethcs has manage t prve s ar (RA, 13). Agamben es nt see n thsa pretentus r an verly ambtus clam. Fr hm, there are cmpellng

reasns why n bk ethcs has been able s ar t grapple wth the hs-trcal experence summarze n the name Auschwtz, why n genunephlsphcal testmny testmnes has yet been fere. Ths s rst all because all ther ethcal prncplesr example, gnty, respect ansel-respect, the recprcty cmmuncatn, Netzschean amor atibecme cmpletely rrelevant n the ace the extreme stuatn theMuselmnner, the rwne human bengs, as Prm Lev amusly callethem. Snce cmmn ethcal prncples make n sense n the ace theMuselmann, they are smply nt aequate r the task: I there s a zne the human n whch these cncepts make n sense, then they are nt genu-ne ethcal cncepts, r n ethcs can clam t exclue a part humanty,n matter hw unpleasant r cult that humanty s t see (RA, 3). In act, bere the Muselmann, t s nrmatvty tsel, the bearer allther mels ethcs, that becmes rrelevant, thus revealng the nae-quacy all ethcs that cntnue t perate as thugh Auschwtz ha nthappene.

There s a secn, eeper reasn explanng the lack relevance ethcs

t ate when cnrnte wth the extreme stuatn the rwne. Thss the culty testmny tsel. The culty secn-rer testmny,


4/22


the ne encuntere by ethcal thnkers cntemplatng the testmny len the extermnatn camps, seems t stem rm the culty the rsttestmny (RA, 333). But sn the specc analyss the mprbablty nrmatve ethcs n the cntext Auschwtz rejns a eeper strann Agambens thught, ne that emnstrates the mpssblty bear-ng wtness (RA, chapter 3) n general an eventually s synnymus wthhs entn subjectvty. It s the very structure all true testmnythat t s smultaneusly an abslute cmman, the true ethcal mpera-tve, an als essentally mpssble. Auschwtz thus brngs t lght n theace the mst hrrble human experments the structural mpss-blty bearng wtness n general, nt just bearng wtness t the hr-

rr the camps. Ths startlng sle between the wtnessng a specalevent an the allege general ntlgy testmny that s als suppset lea t a general thery subjectvty an language, the ferencesbetween thse separate questns an tw separate realms were let unjus-te, cul appear as an abhrrent cnceptual cnusn, as an rrespn-sble metaphyscal play wth an event wth whch t s nt pssble t beplayul.4

In act the cnnectn between the wtnessng at Auschwtz an wt-

nessng n general s supprte by a strng mmanent justcatn wthnAgambens wrk. Remnants o Auschwitz an the ther vlumes n homosacerwere nrme by mst hs many prevus bks. Many the s-turbng aspects Remnants o Auschwitz sslve when the bk s relcaten ths mre general cntext. T ully grasp the startlng sle n Agambenbetween testmny n general an Levs testmny, ne nees t return ths theres language an the subject. It s hs cmplex relatnshp wthMartn Heeggers accunt metaphyscs an the mplcatns thsr language, subjectvty, hstrcty, an pltcs (t name but the mstmprtant els) that justes ths sle.

The general mvement Agambens thught s nspre by Heeggerrst all n the sense that ts mst unamental premse s that a hstry Beng cnsnant wth the hstry metaphyscs. At the same tme, hw-ever, Agamben ams t vercme what he cnsers t be Heeggers aleattempt at steppng ut what, lke hm, he sees as a sastrus hstryenng n catastrphe. The mst ecsve task thnkng, r Agamben,cnssts therere n a gesture characterstc pststructuralst thnkng,

n ecnstructng the remnants metaphyscal thnkng that cntnue tperate wthn the Western wrl, n warnng the perncus efects stll


5/22


t be expecte rm an uncrtcal use screte categres: We lvetay at the extreme ege metaphyscs, at the pnt where t returnsasnhlsmback nt ts very wn negatve unatn.5

The rgnalty Agambens pstn n ths stems rm hs nterpre-tatn the nearus cntent metaphyscs, rm the hghly sphst-cate an syncratc way n whch he nterprets the nhlsm Westernsubjectvty an hstry. The central prblem that he agnses n West-ern metaphyscs cncerns the nherently nhlstc nature ts entn the subject an language, what he calls the metaphyscs the Vce.The argument unerpnnng ths enuncatn has remane cnstantthrughut hs evelpment rm Inancy and History (198), t Language

and Death (1982) untl Remnants o Auschwitz (1998) an the ther bksn homo sacer, rght thrugh t The Open (2002).

The startng pnt hs reectn les wth mle Benvenste an thethery enuncatn. In hs later wrk, the great lngust ha crrecteFernan e Saussures amus stnctn between parole an langageby racalzng t nt the stnctn between semiotics an semantics. Thesemtc rer esgnates the rer language as a system establshesgns, whle the semantc rer esgnates the rer scurse where the

semtc elements becme meanngul by beng use n actual speech acts.The prblem s the ne attache t that passage t scurse: the semtcrer n tsel es nt cntan the explanatn r the pssblty seman-tc use, a meanngul scurse aresse meanngully by ne lcutr tanther wh unerstans t.6 Ths s the ea mst crucal r Agamben, smuch s that t reappears, prbably n a hghly unexpecte way, at the enRemnants o Auschwitz (RA, 1131).7

Enuncatn, r lngustcs, s the answer t ths prblem the passagerm the semtc t the semantc, as t ncates an xes the nstance scurse, the scursve reerence pnt, rm whch all ther reerencesystems wthn scurse (t bjects, specc spatal an tempral rers,rst-, secn-, an thr-persn perspectves) take ther bearng an sub-sequently enable the meanngul use language n speech. Agambensthery language an subjectvty s the result an emphass n enun-catn an ts lnk wth language an speech. The rgnalty Agambenstake n the questn enuncatn, wth prun mplcatns n manyther areas hs thnkng, s that he nterprets the sht rm language

t speech n a nnpsychlgcal, nee, an ntlgcal, way. What thsference an ths sht pnt t, accrng t hm, s a takng place


6/22


scurse, an event language t be stngushe rm scurse tsel, asmeanngul cntent (RA, 11). The actual, exstental (Rman Jakbsn)reerence pnt rm whch language s use n actualty es nt esg-nate an nvual stanpnt, a spece, human pnt reerence, but astructural mensn language, that s t say, a mensn languagerreucble t the rer meanng an grammar, a mensn prr t t.Ths s the smple yet necessary mment n whch language shws tselt take place, language ncatng tsel as a meanngul event prr tany cnseratn the cntent an meanng scurse. Agamben usesseveral expressns t help us unerstan ths ference between languagean speech, between semtcs an semantcs, whch he nterprets n terms

a structure language, by characterzng t as a ference between say-ng, the event language, an the sa, the cntent scurse, r as theference between ncatn an sgncatn, r between shwng ansayng (IH, ).

In Inancy and History, the mplcatn the thery enuncatn rthe thery subjectvty s phrase n terms nancy. Frm Benvenste,Agamben brrws the thess accrng t whch subjectvtythe capactyr the subject t reer t tsel n the rst persn, t take the eg ps-

tns pssble nly thrugh the use a ptentalty prve by lan-guage rather than n the bass reectve experence. The Is whever saysI (IH, 9). The Is thus the paragmatc example the system enun-catn: a mment when scurse takes ts place, sets tsel up, as t were,as the cntn r all ulterr meanngul speech. The mplcatn thesestnctns r the thery subjectvty n ts relatn t experence srastc, as t means that there s an rreucble gap between the human anthe lngustc. I accessng the rer language entals a mment enun-catn that s nly the system sgns settng tsel up n a sel-reerentalcrcut (the prnuns an ectcs make sense nly as pnters wthn theverall system language; they have n bjectve reerence external t thssystem), then the whle man experence sappears n enuncatn.Ths s precsely what in-ancy means: that state beng human utse language use. It s mprtant t nte that t s prr t language use an ntt language n general, as enuncatn s nly what makes the passage rmlanguage t speech pssble. In ther wrs, human bengs nly ever startt speak n the bass repressng ther wn experence. On the ne han,

It s thrugh language that the nvual as knwn t us s cnsttute asan nvual (IH, 9). Yet n the ther han:


7/22


I the subject s merely the enuncatr, . . . we shall never attan n thesubject the rgnal status experence. . . . On the cntrary, the cn-sttutn the subject n an thrugh language s precsely the expr-pratn ths wrless experence; rm the utset, t s alwaysspeech. A prmary experence, ar rm beng subjectve, cul nlybe what n human bengs cmes bere the subjectthat s, berelanguage; a wrless experence n the lteral sense the term,a human nancy, whse bunary wul be marke by language.(IH, )

Ths startlng stnctn between the human beng an the subject,

between the human an the lngustc, s cnstrue by Agamben thrugha lgc that s characterstc hs thught, ne that antcpates the amuslater analyss exceptn as nclung exclusn/exclung nclusn. Thesubject tsel s sa t be brn ut a suppressn that mantans: thesubject results rm the suppressn an experence that t keeps at tsheart as ts very cntn pssblty. Inancy s nt a genetc stage pre-ceng subjectvtyt s the transcenental-hstrcal cntn t.Agamben ntes: The experence, the nancy at ssue here, cannt merelybe smethng whch chrnlgcally precees language an whch, at a cer-

tan pnt, ceases t exst n rer t spll nt speech. It s nt a parasewhch, at a certan mment, we leave r ever n rer t speak; rather, tcexsts n ts rgns wth languagenee, s tsel cnsttute n thevery mvement language whch expels t n each nstance t pruce thenvual as subject (IH, 8; translatn me). As Agamben makesclear, speech an nancy are lnke n the mst substantal way: as theexpulsn nancy, speech reles precsely n the latter n rer t besuccessul, as the negatve that t requres even as t represses t. Inancy

s the rgn language, nancy s languages transcenental lmt, butn the ther han, language is the origin o inancy (IH, 8), as the event expulsn that cnsttutes what t separates thrugh ts cnsttutve bun-ares. Ths s snmc wth the lgc the creatn bare le by sveregnpwer: each s the rgn the ther.

Gven that the subject as a whle s seen as the result the acqustn ectc an mre speccally prnmnal expressns, the paraxcalunty between speech an nancy can easly be generalze nt an verall

anthrplgcal argument. On that accunt, homo becmes truly humanas a beng enwe wth language, nly at the cst repressng the veryexperence upn whch the use language was precate. Ths, then,


8/22


becmes the specc ference the human beng. Whereas anmals nact are alreay nse language, man nstea, by havng an nancy, bypreceng speech, splts ths sngle language an, n rer t speak, hast cnsttute hmsel as the subject languagehe has t say I. Thus, language s truly mans nature . . . , then mans nature s splt at ts surce,r nancy brngs ts scntnuty an the ference between languagean speech (IH, 2). Ths scntnuty between language an speech sseen nt nly as the grun subjectvty, but, n a urther generalza-tn, as the pnt entry nt the symblc. Agamben hls what s n theen a rather classcal phlsphcal anthrplgy whereby the thery theaccess t language prves at the same tme the answer t the puzzle

the symblc unctn (IH, 90). The sht rm nature t culture tsels grune n the splt wthn language. Frm that pnt, a urther gener-alzatn s mae pssble, as the thery language leas (as n Heegger)t a thery abut the grun hstrcty: It s nancy whch rst pensthe space hstry (IH, 3).

The step that leas t a negatvstc thery human hstry s nw easyt antcpate. It remns ne the arguments n the Dialectic o Enlighten-ment. I the prcess hmnzatn an the ntlgcal grun hst-

rcty are t be un n a vlent separatn (r rather, suspensn, excep-tn), then hstrcty an hstrcal evelpment are vtate rm theutset. The erasure experence n mernty s nly the realzatn the structural repressn the nant wthn the ault, whch s at the heart all symblc use.

The ethcal an pltcal aspects Agambens thught w rectly rmthese eep anthrplgcal/ntlgcal metatns. They lcate the cause the catastrphe mernty at the eepest rt subjectvty tsel:n a hen chasm between the human beng an the subject, betweenlanguage an scurse. Only a human praxs that wll retreve the nantn the subject wll av the ateul structural reshrtenng humanexperence, whch s the rgn , an s brught t ts terrble cmpletnby, Western mernty. Gven the ecsve, nee, exclusve, rle playeby language n Agambens thery subjectvatn an hmnzatn, theprvlege rm such a praxs wll be an alternatve experence lan-guage, an experimentum linguae as the preace t the French etn Inancy and History puts t: what ne experences n ths experimentum

linguae s nt smply an mpssblty sayng, snce speech s precaten the suspensn experence, but rather an mpssblty speakng


9/22


n the bass language; va ths nancy whch rests n the chasm betweenlanguage an speech, ths s the experence the very aculty speakng,r the pwer speech tsel, bere r beyn actual speech. Ths sthe experence language as penng Beng: It s the unhennesswthut presuppstn whch humans always alreay nhabt an where,by speakng, they breathe an mve. Alreay n the wrtngs the late190s, Walter Benjamns thery messanc revlutn, premse as twas n an ea pure language thrugh whch human language wulrecnnect wth the language thngs, wul pen authentcally ntBeng, rme the hrzn Agambens pltcal wrtngs.

Publshe ur years ater Inancy and History, Language and Death wrks

wth very smlar eas but als ntruces the three unamental ntns the Vce, eath, an the anmal, an thus cmpletes the agnss thenhlstc metaphyscs logos at the backgrun the well-knwn analysescnucte n the ferent vlumes Homo Saceran n Agambens recentbk The Open.

Wth the theme the Vce, Agamben eshes ut the ntutn at thebass hs messanc ethcs an pltcs: the ea the takng place language that s ferent rm, nee, that s the cntn pssblty,

a represse ne, sgnyng language. As we saw, the great lngustsha ente the necessty, r ncatn t be at all pssble, that therebe a cntempranety (Benvenste), an exstental relatn (Jakbsn)between the ncatrs ( tme, presence, etc.) an the nstance s-curse expressng the message. Agambens key nnvatn s t argue thatths exstental cntempranety can be thught prperly nly n terms aVce as the lcus n whch the event language takes place (LD, 8).

Agamben ferentates between the vcal aspect speech n ts trans-rmatn language, rm the Vce, as that aspect language n whchlanguage truly shws tsel as takng place, as the pure ntentn sgny-ng beore the text sgncatn. Ths Vce s the meum the takngplace language, the mensn language that excees anmal artcula-tn (phone) but precees sgncatn (logos) (LD, 2). Wth ths, Agambensmply reterates the crucal stnctn nte between signicability, theptental t sgny, an signication. He nce agan slates a pure pten-talty sgncatn as a mensn nt always alreay encmpasse nthe sgncatn tsel. Ths penng sgncablty as separate rm sg-

ncatn has extremely mprtant resnances n hs entre wrk. Snce,llwng Heegger, he sees the penng Beng n the experence


10/22


language, the experence pure sgncablty beyn sgncatn cr-respns t ntlgcal ference tsel (LD, 8). But Agambens aetwst s that the new experimentum linguae s als an experence the rre-ucblty ptentalty t actualty, an experence alreay characterze byHeegger n hs reangs Arsttle. Agambens negatvstc narratve Western logos an hs search r an alternatve metaphyscs that wul ntbe grune n a nhlstc unatn s precate upn ths crtcal rea-ng ptentalty. It pnts t an experence language as the experence the pwer language bere ts reuctn n speech an scurse. Thsn shrt ncates an alternatve experence the Vce as the lcus thepure event language.

Agamben, hwever, es nt spare Heegger hmsel, espte hs strngrelance n hm. The Vce, as the categry categres (LD, 3), s thename r the clearng Beng tsel, but accrng t hm, t has nly everbeen analyze n terms negatvty by the Western tratn, nclungan mst especally by Heegger. It s the act that, thrugh an nterpreta-tn the Vce as the vce eath, negatvty has been mae cnsttutve Beng tsel, whch ultmately s respnsble r the nhlsm at the heart metaphyscs.

Ths negatve cre metaphyscs s t be un rst all n the ublenegatvty structurng the Vce, as an nstance n between the n-lnger-beng anmal, the Vce asphone, an ts nt-yet-beng sgnyng language,the Vce as logos. Agamben cuses especally n the tw gran attemptsat evsng a pstmetaphyscal metaphyscs, Hegels lgc an Heeggersntlgy. In bth cases, a cnsttutve negatvty perates at the heart human subjectvty, the nstance n an thrugh whch the spaces truthan Beng are t be pene. Frm the specal place these tw granrecnstructns metaphyscs wthn the latters lng hstry, Agambencan cnclue that the Vce, as the categry categres, as the lcus enuncatn ( Beng), has always been thught n that tratn as nega-tvty, as the Vce eath. Gven the abslutely central place the Vcen the very prcess hmnzatn an r the passage t secn nature,Agamben can cnclue t the essental nhlsm Western metaphyscs,t the act that ts thery subjectvty an ts characterzatn theclearng Beng s base n a ealy unatn: The mythlgeme the Vce s the rgnal mythlgeme metaphyscs; but nasmuch as the

Vce s equally the rgnal lcus negatvty, negatvty s nseparablerm metaphyscs (LD, 12).


11/22


Aganst the backgrun these early reectns, the later texts nbpltcs take n a specc lght. They elabrate n the pltcal an thejurcal the general narratve the nhlsm Western metaphyscs thatwas evelpe n stues n subjectvty, language, an hstrcty. At thebass Agambens analyses the law, the state, an the ctzen les thsunamental premse that Western metaphyscs s a metaphyscs eath,a ealy metaphyscs. The structure sveregnty an the unamentalperatns the law are perectly snmc wth the mre general struc-ture the metaphyscal cnstructn language, whch als prves thekey t the mst general structure the passage rm nature t the sym-blc. In all thse cases, the same vcus transcenental-hstrcal lgc

s at play, whereby symblc nsttutns (sgncatn, nrmatvty n thegure mral nrms an pltcal laws) rely n the repressn thatwhch makes them pssble. In all these cases, the lve prncple (the Vce,bios, sgncablty) s nclue thrugh ts expulsn by the nsttutns(language, the state, culture). In ther wrs, the alectc s at the heart Western culture an spreas ts ealy negatvty ver t, culmnatng nracal eath at Auschwtz.

The slutns t ths ealy metaphyscal lgc presente n Agambens

later stues are the same as thse suggeste n the rst tw bks: t steput hstry snce hstry tsel s premse n repressn an negatvty;t step ut the lgcs law an sveregnty as they perate n the sameway as logos capturng/negatng ts wn nancy. Instea, salvatn s t besught n a ferent experimentum linguae, whch has ts prme examplesn partcular wrks petry that perate beyn the stnctn signieran signied.4 The am s t establsh a new eths, n the sense He-eggers Letter n Humansm, a new relatn t Beng, ne, hwever, ncntrast wth Heegger ths tme, whch s n lnger meate by eath.5Ths s where Remnants o Auschwitz ens: t speak the mpssblty speakng, t n reemptn n a new use language, whch wll be thetestmny t the mpssblty beng a subject.

Aganst ths rch an cmplex cnstruct, the task wtnessng thenhuman has tw mensns that can be scusse separately r the sake analyss. The nhuman s, rst all, that grun subjectvty that srepresse as the subject becmes tsel by accessng symblc structures,remst amng them, language. Agamben calls ths experence an the

human n cntrast wth the lngustc. But by human we unerstanthe cmmn ntn a separate creature arsng rm nature thrugh


12/22


ts access t symblc unctns, then the prelngustc human must beesgnate as nhuman. Wtnessng the nhuman n ths sense s the taskt whch Remnants o Auschwitz s als ecate, beyn the testmny racal ehumanzatn thrugh the hrrr the camp.

But there s a secn aspect t wtnessng the nhuman that Inancy andHistory an Language and Death have alreay scusse at sme length.Ths tme, the rupture that leas t subjectvty, culture, an hstrcty snt cnsere as the rupture wthn the human between the presubjectvean the subjectve, the nant an the subject. It s the rupture, wthn thehuman, between the human an the anmal.

These tw ferent ruptures crrespn t the tw pssble mean-

ngs anthrplgy: rst as the stuy the ferent ways accessngan makng use the symblc unctn, an secn as the cmparsnbetween the human an the anmal. The analyses n Agambens rst bksare nt just prlnge an evelpe n hs stues n Homo Sacer. Theyare als pursue n The Open, wth the eepenng the prblem thehumans relatnshp t the anmal.

The structure negatve suspensn s agan at play here, the lgc an nclusve exclusn, whch creates a zne nstnctn where the law

exceptnthat s t say the pssblty ttal vlences sveregn.In ths case, the nstnctn s that between the human an the anmal:the human beng becmes human by separatng wthn tsel the humanrm the anmal an by unng the rmer n the repressn the latter.Ths s what Agamben calls the anthrplgcal machne: the nnhumans pruce by separatng an expellng utse the human what s sup-pse t be beneath, yet als smehw mmanent t, t. Agan, negatvtys the cre mtr ths alectc: the human penng an nt the wrls pssble nly n the bass the negatve experence a capture anrepressn anmal le.

Ths lgc has a harmless ace when t unctns as the pructn theanmal as that whch exsts wthn the human (logos) as the nt-yet-human(le). It s the same lgc, hwever, that cntnues t perate when a less-than-human s ente as a beng wth human trats wh s nt ullyhuman. It s bvus, gven the metaphyscal unerpnnng these s-tnctns, that r Agamben there s a seamless cntnuty between the twpructns. Gven the lgc the anthrplgcal machne, t s a ms-

take t thnk that ne can escape t rst by acknwlegng the anmalty


13/22


the human an then, n a secn mment, by passng n t humans sec-n nature, n ther wrs, ther sublmatn anmalty n the pruc-tn a truly human, hstrcal wrl.6 Ths me argument als n thesame way an r the same reasn as es the vercmng metaphyscs.

Instea, what s requre s an ext rm the anthrplgcal lgc, nethat wll bear the same rmal trats as the new experence languagebeyn enuncatn an the new experence the cmmunty beynsveregnty. Lke thse ther emancpatry experences, the new anthr-plgcal experence entals a paraxcal relatnshp t ts ppste, nethat s n lnger alectcal. Ths s anther wtnessng the nhuman,n lnger the transguratn the nhuman, but a new experence the

separatn that es nt en up n suspensn r exceptn. Agambenstates: T rener nperatve the machne that gverns ur cnceptn man wll therere mean n lnger t seek newmre efectve an mreauthentcartculatns, but rather t shw the central emptness, the ha-tus thatwthn manseparates man an anmal, an t rsk urselves nths emptness: the suspensn the suspensn.7

Witnessing the Inhuman: Merleau-Ponty

T ppse Merleau-Pntys late wrk t Agamben n the specc ssue wtnessng the nhuman mght appear arbtrary an cult t justy.Hwever, a number cnseratns make ths cnrntatn plausble.Merleau-Pnty als ame t vercme what he saw as the nherent cntra-ctns cntemprary humansm. Lke Agamben, hs nal am was analternatve ntlgy that wul nt repeat the cntractns tratnalas well as Husserlan an Heeggeran metaphyscs. Merleau-Pntysalternatve ntlgy nvlves, lke Agambens, a rethnkng the human nts relatn t ther bengs an especally n ts relatn t anmals. It s alspremse n an rgnal phlsphy language. Lke Agamben, Merleau-Pnty saw the cre ssue n crtqung metaphyscs an n establshng analternatve, ethcally an pltcally mre satsyng ntlgy n the crrectcharacterzatn an lcatn negatvty. In act, t cul be argue thatths, the mprtance accre t negatvty, s the precse pnt where thetw prjects are mst cmparable, an where they verge the mst. It sals the pnt where Merleau-Pntys alternatve prpsal uncvers the r-

gn the lmtatns n Agambens ethcs, pltcs, an aesthetcs. Ther


14/22


racally ferng unerstanngs negatvty lea t tw extremely cn-traste ntlges: ne, Agambens, structure arun transcenence, anthe ther, Merleau-Pntys, bult n mmanence.

The rst step n characterzng ths ppstn s t start by ntng thatMerleau-Pntys unamental methlgcal premse s the rejectn ntlgcal ference as ference. What he calls n hs lectures n Naturethe bncularsm an the strabsm all phlsphy (nclung EmunHusserls an Heeggers) s the chtmy between the ttal rer Beng (G, the n tsel, Nature, the realm bjectvty) as ppse t therer exstence that escapes the ttal mmanence Beng (the createwrl versus the prncple creatn, bengs an nt Beng, the subject

an nt the bject, etc.): What s gven s the metamrphss brutebeng, the gvng brth. We are gng t Beng by passng by bengs. . . .There s a crcular relatn between Beng an bengs.

Secn, as the mentn metamrphss an brth ntmates, centralt ths nrect ntlgy s a productive cnceptn negatvty. Merleau-Pnty arrves at a pructve entn negatvty because he lnks trectly t a cnceptn le that ges beyn the tratnal antnmy mechansm an nalsm. Fnalsm s screte by mern scence, even

thugh the crrect characterzatn the rgansm verges precaruslyn t. Mechansm, n the ther han, whch seems t be natural scenceslgcal cnclusn, als alls shrt the cmplexty rganc le. Frexample, t cannt explan anmal embrync evelpment as stue bymern blgsts, wh hghlght the act that there s at sme pnt ntgeness a general rganc ntegratn beore the ull evelpment the neural system, a act that prves that t s reuctve t escrbe anmalntgeness n terms neurlgcal causalty (N, 139). Instea, nemust cnclue that the anmal rgansm s, n act, best explane n tsunctnng an geness as the lcus behavr, n whch the ttalty tran-scens the parts by ntegratng them nt ne general theme, the syn-cratc, melc me beng n an cmng t grps wth that enttysenvrnment.

Merleau-Pntys negatvty stems rm ths ntn a general behav-ral scheme specc t each rgansm, whch s antcpate n the evel-pment the rgansm an retractvely, but nt telelgcally, gues t:We must place n the rgansm a prncple that s negatve r base n

absence. We can say the anmal that each mment ts hstry s empty what wll llw, an emptness whch wll be lle later (N, 1). An n


15/22


a later passage, he wrtes: The true nthngness s nt nichtiges des Nichts[the nthngness the Nthng], but an Etwas [smethng] always n thehrzn, the pstve etermnatns whch are the trace an the absence(N, 2). Ths entn negatvty as the absence a meanng t cme,whch haunts the present an gues t alreay, characterzes rganc le.Crucally, t has the exact same structure as expressn. Ths s Merleau-Pntys unamental ntutn: that le s expressve an expressn s le,hwever sphstcate r prmtve the rms le, t whatever egree cmplexty ths pwer s ncarnate; n ther wrs, le s the rgn meanng an symblsm.

As le s expressn, all lvng rgansms can be shwn t be expressve

n terms ther behavr. An even mre racal mplcatn ths prn-cple expressn s that the mst cmplex rms rganc ntegratn(hgher anmals) share a unamental aculty wth the lwer nes. Hgherrgansms replcate an cmplcate n ther nteractns wth the wrl anamng themselves an expressve capacty that was alreay at play, hwevercruely t was efecte, n lwer rgansms.

The vew rganc le as penng, qua behavr, a mensn mean-ng wthn the materal wrl enables Merleau-Pnty t evelp an mma-

nentst phlsphy nature, where the superr levels actualze ptental-tes that were alreay nscrbe n the lwer nes. In the Nature lectures,r example, the reang G. E. Cghlls stuy n the axltl leas t theunamental nsght that the rgansm an the behavr are ne, whchmakes the by n lnger an nert mass anatmy but a carrer mean-ng. Ths then leas t the reang Jakb vn Uexkll an the well-knwn cmparsns between lwer an hgher anmals. Here the alreaycmplex reactn lwer anmals t the external wrl, unerst nlnger n the causal terms stmulus respnse but as the specc theme that anmals rganc schema, leas wthut scntnuty t the evenmre cmplex elaye an ne-tune respnse hgher anmals. These,Merleau-Pnty argues, react n lnger t stmul but t sgns, n such away that wthut ther actve nvlvement (ther mvements, ther behav-r) thse sgns wul nt exst as such. In ther wrs, hgher anmalscreate rms meanng, a prtsymblsm wthn nature. Ths s ne way nterpretng Uexklls amus ntn Umwelt. The upsht s: At thestage hgher anmals, the Umwelt s n lnger a clsng-f, but rather

an penng. The wrl s pssesse by the anmal. The exterr wrl sstlle by the anmal, wh, ferentatng sensral gvens, can respn


16/22


t them by ne actns, an these ferentate reactns are pssble nlybecause the nervus system amunts t a repructn the exterrwrl, as a repructn r cpy (N, 11). Merleau-Pnty es nt hes-tate t characterze the perceptn-reactn hgher anmals as the rstopening, r clearng, the wrl, bere human nterventn. Ths s nrect cntractn t Heegger an, llwng hm, Agamben, r whmthe pen s the reserve Dasein. Mre generally, Merleau-Pnty lcatesthe rgns symblsm, culture, an cmmuncatn n the nstnctualbehavr hgher anmals (N, 19). Ths, bvusly, s n stark cntrast wthAgambens lgcentrc phlsphcal anthrplgy, whch entes n theacqustn language, n enuncatn, the passage t secn nature.

Merleau-Pntys ntlgy s thus an ntlgy n spral, whch seeks thghlght the vertcalty Beng, such that n scntnuty r transcen-ence nees t be ntruce between any ts successve layers. Thevectr carryng rm ne layer t the next, rm nature t sprt, s letsel, n ts nvsble pwer as expressvty, an the uel that vertcalcntnuty s negatvty unerst as meanng-t-cme. In ths mma-nentsm, negatvty s nt equate wth eath but as the prncple expres-sve le. The specal ntlges are nt nly cntnuus but snmc;

they cncern the leaves ne sle Beng whch can be glbally eneas what s nt nthng (N, 220). T put t n terms the nterpretatn Hegel (an essental mment n Agambens agnss metaphyscalnhlsm), Merleau-Pnty, cntrary t Agamben, smply accepts Hegelsea that negatvty s the heart le an meanng.

The tp the spral s ccupe by the passage rm the vsble t thenvsble, where logos s thus shwn t be rte n le.4 The prvlegepnt passage between the vsble an the nvsble s bvusly the humanby cnceve as esh. The esh, as s well-knwn, s the by as t makesthe experence reversblty, the experence that t s bth sensng anpart the wrl that t senses, the realzatn that t stans between whats n rnt an what s behn me an s thus n crcut wth the wrl.As a result ths, the ntegrate pstures the by schema are nt justsubjectve aaptatns t the Umwelt, but they map ut the wrl tsel,such that the human esh becmes the ncatr the esh the wrl(N, 223). In the human rgansm, the eeback mechansm alreay at playn ther hgher anmals s evelpe t ts ull ptental an becmes a ull

crcut, such that perceve thngs [are] crrelatns a carnal subject,rejne t ts mvement an t ts sensng; ntersperse n ts nternal cr-


17/22


cutthey are mae the same stuf as t. . . . The esh the by makesus unerstan the esh the wrl (N, 218). Ths vtalst ntlgy theIneinander, where thngs cntnually step into each ther, cntracts rn-tally the man eatures Agambens pst-Heeggeran prject premseas t s n a strct aherence t the ntlgcal ference. The ualsm the human an the anmal s n lnger neee.5 Fr Merleau-Pnty, theres a way cncevng all le as bios wthut havng t resrt t any e-nte separatn between the human an the nnhuman. Snce r hm les alreay expressve, human language an all symblc nsttutns mregenerally are rte n the meanngul ttalty rgansms that are sym-blcally, an even semtcally, lnke t ther external an scal wrls,

qua ntegrate rms behavr. There s n nee, therere, t ppselanguage an experence. The rejectn such a chtmy s the bass rall Merleau-Pntys wrtngs n language, rm the amus sxth chaptern the rst part The Phenomenology o Perception (The By as Expres-sn an Speech) t hs later Saussuran wrtngs, mst ntably n ThePhenmenlgy Language.6 Hs phlsphy language hghlghts theseamless passage rm the experence t language, an hs later wrk secate speccally, as s well knwn, t ths ublng the vsble by the

nvsble, the lnng embe experence wth ts symblc reappr-pratns, n lngustc, artstc, scentc, an phlsphcal expressns.Such a phlsphy language has ts wn take n the questn enun-

catn. It nterprets the cntempranety between ncatrs pres-ence an the nstance scurse as the ambguus relatnshp betweena lve experence that creates the unamental el presence rmwhch scurse makes sense, an the gven, nsttute languages that par-tally spssess the nvual act speech. Merleau-Pnty es nt enythe esubjectyng efect language use, but nstea cnclung rmths t a racal chasm, he emphaszes the culty true expressn,the culty transrmng an mpersnal, sel-relatng language nt avehcle a unque, embe experence, a culty, r a alectc that sstructurally the alectc le tsel.

In such an ntlgy, wtnessng the nhuman becmes the task bengtrue t the structural empathy that allws the human esh t be n tunewth the esh the wrl. Ths means nt just a retreval the structuralnterhuman ntercrprety at the bass the human esh. It esgnates

als the Ineinander the human an the anmal an, even mre racally,that I am wth thngs n a rapprt Einhlung: my nse s an ech


18/22


ther nse (N, 22). T be ully human n ths accunt s t welcme thennhuman n nes esh, t recgnze nes ull presence an partcpatnn the sensble wrl.

The crtcal cunterpnt t ths unerstanng the nhuman s that ts nhuman, n the nrmatve, crtcal sense ths tme, t establsh separa-tns where there are nne. Merleau-Pnty has n specal thery Ausch-wtz. He has n separate mral thery, n thery evl n partcular. Thss all lnke t hs phenmenlgcal meth, whch escrbes cnsttu-tn an can prve nly an mplct accunt nrmatvty.7 Ths t es,hwever. Merleau-Pntys pwerul mel the cnsttutve nnhumantywthn the human embment pnts nrectly t an ethcs beng n

the wrl, where the ethcal uty s t be a ull partcpant recgnzng theexstence an rght all that partcpates n nes wn esh. Crtcally, thswul allw r a agnss thse hstrcal phenmena n whch n-vuals an cmmuntes have renege upn ther nhumanty by creatngabstract separatns between themselves an the wrl, the wrl therhuman subjects, anmals, an nature tsel.

Pltcally, Merleau-Pntys wrtngs n hstrcal praxs smply raw thecnsequence the ambguus status the human beng n the wrl, as a

beng that s bth able t create nsttutns an change hstry (be expres-sve), but n the bass a racal passvty, as a beng t whm meanngan nsttutns are alsgiven an wh must cnstantly measure the extent her wn gnrance an pwerlessness. Ths s hs unerstanng thealectc at the heart hstrcal praxs, as a sel-crtcsm that can neverbe nterrupte but that s als cnucve t meanng-creatve actn. Thspruces a blueprnt r a substantve phlsphcal justcatn pl-tcs as hstrcal praxs, where the ambgutes an uncertantes cllec-tve an nvual actnmmerse as they are n the nntely pen ancmplex hrzn hstryare ully acknwlege, yet the necessty anthe prmse actn are als uphel.

In terms the cntent praxs, the ethcal mperatve an actveacknwlegement nes ull partcpatn n the wrl was nterpreteby Merleau-Pnty as synnymus wth a crtcal (Marxst) humansm thatwul be gue by the gal the abltn nequalty an njustce.But snce the actve partcpatn n the wrl als entals a unamen-tal empathy wth the nnhuman, hs pltcs easly lens tsel als t a

translatn n a racal pltcal eclgy. Brun Laturs argument n avr a pltcal representatn all bengs nvlve n, an afecte by, ur


19/22


actns cul be seen as ne pssble evelpment Merleau-Pntys un-amental nsghts.

Fnally, a substantve aesthetc perspectve s als pene by Merleau-Pntys vtalst ntlgy. Ths s an aspect hs later thught that s wellstue, especally the great ncsveness an rgnalty hs wrtngs npantng, but we shul nt rget the mprtance lterature r hm,especally the nvel. The ntlgy an ethcs ull partcpatn nthe wrl emphasze cnstantly, as ne ts key peratng cncepts, themracle expressn. The wrks art an n partcular truly creatve ln-gustc expressn are use by hm as paragmatc cases, ntably n TheProse o the World. The expressn acheve n wrks art stans ut as

beng clse t mraculus, because, as n the paragmatc example PaulCzanne, the expressn what exists s an nnte task, as t s at rst annsluble prblem t be able t justce thrugh artstc expressn t theexpressn that the wrl tsel s.

The eal a ull embrace the wrl that nspres Merleau-Pntysntlgy mmanence, ts resultng ethcs an pltcs engage par-tcpatn, an the substantve rms praxs that they unerpn cntraststarkly wth the evanescent negatvsm characterzng Agambens ethcs,

pltcs, an aesthetcs. Because, lke Heegger, Agamben lcates thenhlsm mern culture n the metaphyscal nature ts logos, hs cr-tque s nthng but racal. It appraches wth uncmprmsng suspcnall categres, all lgcal lnks between them, all prevus mes thnk-ng realty, artculatng experence, r ther suspecte cllusn wtheath, as all cnvergng twar Auschwtz, beyn all ntc ferences thatbecme nsgncant.4 Cnversely, because the crtque s ptche at sucha racal level, a nnnhlstc apprach t the wrl an t human exper-ence, nnnhlstc rms praxs that cul be base n them are aval-able nly by steppng ut an gng nt the beyn. But snce the beynunerst n a straghtrwar sense wul smply renstate the lgc separatn an chtmy, Agambens beyns are paraxcal nes thatsmultaneusly state an eny ther attachment t what they leave behn.They all unctn n the bass a paraxcal lgc, the lgc suspensn,whch allws hm t evke realms that are beyn the entty r ference entty an ference, realms that pst an eny at the same tme untyan separatn. Ethcs becmes a practce that s nt practcal: t nvlves n

actn an nly cntngently atttues twar thers. It s a nrmatve att-tue beyn the nrmatve, an experence the subjects relatn t tsel,


20/22


where the latter speaks ts wn mpssblty. The experence languaget reles n s t testy t the metalngustc cre language. Pltcs s apractce where the ntn praxs s suppse t have been mae reun-ant, a hstrcal experence beyn hstry, a cmmunal actn that rejectsthe ntn cmmunty, a challengng the law beyn the ntn thelaw. Petry an lterature are uses language beyn the sgner an thesgne, suspcus the ealy, hen grun expressvty.5

It s cult t brush f the mpressn that, espte ts amazng sphs-tcatn an erutn, Agambens phlsphy nly leas t an evanescentthery praxs that has lttle t say an nee s nt really ntereste nhavng anythng t say t an abut real practces. Merleau-Pntys ull-

ble ethcs an engagement wth the wrlpremse as t s n anunerstanng alectc as the challenge ambguty, a negatvtythat s the prmse, pssble but always uncertan, nsttutng new mean-ngsseems t utlne a much mre rutul grammar r pructve prac-tces. I wtnessng the nhuman s t reman mre than a phlsphcalexercse, t s n substantal rms praxs that t wll have t be realze.

Notes

1 Grg Agamben, Remnants o Auschwitz: The Witness and the Archive, trans. DanelHeller-Razen (1998; New Yrk: Zne Bks, 1999), 121. Hereater cte parenthetcallyby page number as RA.

2 I have attempte t evelp such a crtque n Agambens Challenge t Nrmatve The-res Mern Rghts, Borderlands 3.1 (200), www.brerlansejurnal.aelae.eu.au/vl3n1_200/eranty_agambnschall.htm.

3 The ultmate testmny t whch he wants t bear wtness phlsphcally s bvuslythat Prm Lev. See RA, 9.

Ths s ne aspect Jay Bernstens sphstcate crtque Agambens aesthetczeapprach t the Shah. See Bare Le, Bearng Wtness: Auschwtz an the Prngraphy

Hrrr,parallax10.1 (200): 1. Grg Agamben, Language and Death, trans. Karen Pnkus an Mchael Hart (1982;

Mnneapls: Unversty Mnnesta Press, 1991), 99. Hereater cte parenthetcallyby page number as LD.

Grg Agamben, Inancy and History: Essays on the Destruction o Experience, trans. LzHern (198; Lnn: Vers, 1993), 99103. Hereater cte parenthetcally by pagenumber as IH.

See als IH, 3.8 The penultmate sectn the chapter cmpares ths scntnuty wth Claue Lv-

Strausss thery the myth as precsely prvng the lnk between language anspeech.

9 Ther Arn an Max Hrkhemer, Dialectic o Enlightenment, trans. Emun Jeph-ctt (Stanr, CA: Stanr Unversty Press, 2002).


21/22


10 There s n space t cmpare ths thery nancy wth Jean-Frans Lytars late wrt-ngs (partcularly n The Inhuman). The verlaps are many an sgncant. Lytar, TheInhuman: Refections on Time, trans. Gefrey Bennngtn an Rachel Bwlby (Stanr,

CA: Stanr Unversty Press, 1992).11 Grg Agamben, Enance et Histoire: Destruction de lExperience et Origine de lHistoire,

trans. Yves Hersant (Pars: Payt, 2002), 11.12 Agamben, Enance et Histoire, 18.13 Ths ea a pure ptentalty beyn ts reuctn t actualty (whch generalzes the

lngustc stnctn between semiotican semantic) s ne the threas runnng thrughAgambens entre by wrk. It s a key argument n Homo Sacer: Sovereign Power andBare Lie, trans. Danel Heller-Razen (Stanr, CA: Stanr Unversty Press, 1998),8. It s substantally relate t Heeggers late ethcs Gelassenheit, lettng be.See Grg Agamben an Valera Pazza, LOmbre de lamour: Le concept de lamour chez

Heidegger(Pars: Payt, 2003), .1 Hence there s a substantal lnk between the pltcal an the petc n Agamben. See

especally Agamben, The End o the Poem: Studies in Poetics, trans. Danel Heller-Razen(Stanr, CA: Stanr Unversty Press, 1999).

1 Martn Heegger, Letter n Humansm, n Martin Heidegger: Basic Writings, e. antrans. Dav Farrell Krell (New Yrk: HarperCllns, 1993), 213.

1 Heegger was r hm the last phlspher t stll beleve n ths slutn. See GrgAgamben, The Open: Man and Animal, trans. Kevn Attell (2002; Stanr, CA: StanrUnversty Press, 200), .

1 Agamben, The Open, 92.

18 See Merleau-Pntys 19 lectures at the Cllge e France n the phlsphy nature:Maurce Merleau-Pnty, Nature, trans. Rbert Valler (Evanstn, IL: Nrthwestern Un-versty Press, 2003), 13. Hereater cte parenthetcally by page number as N. Ths trans-latn s at tmes serusly naccurate an msleang. I have altere t t ten t nte.

19 See als ths passage rm The Visible and the Invisible: One cannt make a rect ntlgy.My nrect meth (beng n the bengs) s alne cnrme t beng. Maurce Merleau-Pnty, The Visible and the Invisible, trans. Alphns Lngs (Evanstn, IL: NrthwesternUnversty Press, 199), 19. Nte that n the same passage Merleau-Pnty escrbes thsmeth as sgetc, as an explratn the Abyss, whle the very same ntn thesgetc s Agambens early tag r the nhlsm Western metaphyscs (LD, 1).

20 As evelpe mst substantally, r example, n Maurce Merleau-Pnty, The Prose othe World, e. Claue Lert, trans. Jhn ONell (Evanstn, IL: Nrthwestern UnverstyPress, 193), 1. In a later passage, Merleau-Pnty sees n the pwer expressn the truemeanng alectc (120).

21 Nte the very ferent nterpretatn the axltl by Agamben n Idea o Prose, trans.Mchael Sullvan an Sam Whtstt (Albany: State Unversty New Yrk Press, 199). Inthe regressve evlutn that seems t be at play n ths speces, Agamben ns a naturalequvalent t hs ea the structural nancy at the heart the human. Merleau-Pnty,by cntrast, llwng the blgsts, cuses n the lessns ne learns abut geness

rm the amus lzar.22 Merleau-Pnty es nt wrte rplque (retrt r rejner to) but rplque e, therepructn, r replca, o.


22/22


23 Merleau-Pnty, The Visible and the Invisible, 18.2 There s a Lgs the natural, aesthetc wrl, n whch the Lgs language reles

(N, 212).

2 Agambens pstn n ths s ambguus snce, espte hs enuncatn the anthr-plgcal machne, he mantans sme rm ualsm because hs apprach t lan-guage an hs lngustc thery hmnzatn that separate the human realm rmther realms le.

2 Maurce Merleau-Pnty, The Phenmenlgy Language, n Phenomenology, Lan-guage, and Sociology, e. Jhn ONell (Lnn: Henemann Eucatnal, 19), 819.Maurce Merleau-Pnty, The Phenomenology o Perception, trans. Cln Smth (Lnn:Rutlege, 2002).

2 See, hwever, a passage n a newspaper artcle n whch Merleau-Pnty rejects the ent-catn ascsm an cmmunsm an ges n t say, ths means that we have nthng

n cmmn wth a Naz an that we have the same values as a cmmunst. A cmmunst,ne mght say, has n values. He r she nly has delities. We wul answer that he rshe mght what he r she can t acheve ths, but that, thank gness, nby canlve wthut breathng. He r she has values espte hmsel r hersel. Merleau-Pnty,LURSS et les camps, n Signes (Pars: Gallmar, 190), 333.

28 Ths s the basc thught unerpnnng the crtcal analyses n Adventures o the Dialectican hs versn hstrcal materalsm. Maurce Merleau-Pnty, Adventures o the Dia-lectic, trans. Jseph Ben (Evanstn, IL: Nrthwestern Unversty Press, 193).

29 Merleau-Pntys Phenomenology o Perception, r example, ens wth a vbrant call tactn.

30 See a nce ne-lne summary, agan n the last page Merleau-Pnty, Phenomenology oPerception: Yur reem cannt be wlle wthut leavng behn ts sngular relevance,an wthut reem r all ().

31 Brun Latur, Politics o Nature, trans. Catherne Prter (Cambrge, MA: Harvar Un-versty Press, 200).

32 Maurce Merleau-Pnty, The Prose o the World, trans. Jhn ONell (Evanstn, IL: Nrth-western Unversty Press, 193).

33 Maurce Merleau-Pnty, Czannes Dubt, n Sense and Non-Sense, trans. Patrca A.Dreyus an Herbert L. Dreyus (Evanstn, IL: Nrthwestern Unversty Press, 19),21.

3 Rbert Snnerbrnk hghlghts very well the cnceptual an nrmatve levelng that ccursas a result grunng crtque n a general narratve n metaphyscs an n ntlgcalference. See Snnerbrnk, Frm Machenschat t Bpltcs: A Genealgcal Crtque Bpwer, n Critical Horizons (200): 239.

3 See Agamben, The End o the Poem, 02.

witnessing the inhuman

Documents