Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10077/28388
Title: L’humaine mesure ou l’institution des registres catégoriels de l’humain et du non humain
Authors: Cormier, Stéphane
Keywords: Human / non HumanAnthropologyPhilosophyCatégorial InstitutionsSciences
Issue Date: 2019
Publisher: EUT Edizioni Università di Trieste
Source: Stéphane Cormier, "L’humaine mesure ou l’institution des registres catégoriels de l’humain et du non humain", in "Etica & Politica / Ethics & Politics (2019) XXI/2", Trieste, EUT Edizioni Università di Trieste, 2019, pp. 43-57
Journal: Etica & Politica / Ethics & Politics 
Abstract: 
Which do we conceptualize like Human in opposition to non Human? The institution of
“large shares” or “The Great Divide”, in terms of categories between the Human one and the
non Human one, is far from to be always established in various times and Human spaces, such
as we generally think it. This apparently natural institution, even expresses, appears after examination
much less obviates that we thought it traditionally. For this reason, it constitutes an object
of intellectual investigations of choice for many traditional knowledge such anthropology,
the history, philosophy, theology, but also for the whole of contemporary sciences. Because,
this category institution questions the identity even the EC what we indicate like human, and
consequently, like nonhuman. Indeed, about what and which precisely speak us when it is
question of Human or the Human ones, about humanity in generic term? What do we seek to
describe and qualify under the registers of Human and non Human? Which are the non Human,
of the binarism category ones presupposed which institute the registers of conceptual dualism
Human/humanity/inhumanity? What do we seek to think in the idea of one “beyond the
human one”, which the latter institutes a differentialism between the beings or entities or contrary,
seeks with the indifférencier as in certain news of anthropology who challenges any anthropocentrée
& humanistic design?
Most traditional definitions tend to affirm that this we claim to conceptualize & to subsume
under the concept of “Human” constitutes something like a certain exception in the order of
the alive one. What is it exactly of this alleged “human exception”? What does it recover precisely?
In addition, to answer the interrogation: “That are the non Human ones and which is
the human ones? ”, does not have anything manifesto apart from this we can crudely observe
and who allows us to or not retain, more or less, certain features of appearance and the behavior.
We could also answer in a provocative and relativistic way: “With each one its Human and
its non Human, its humanity and its nonhumanity”, according to the configurations which we
institute to return account of the whole of the interactions that we let us have or not with our
multiple, material & immaterial, visible & invisible environments! There thus do not exist
standards which would tend in manner more or less final and universal to govern the uses category
of Human and of the Human one.
For these reasons, the challenge of our short communication will be to expose presupposed
and reasons of such an interest category, conceptual and descriptive fundamentally Human for
the non Human one which gives an account of the multiple forms of the institution of human
the versus the nonhuman one, while founding, in addition, a whole range of beings or of entities
going from the one with the other, thus questioning the imaginary and real bases of our multidimensional assignments in category terms, of identity, anybody, cognitive faculties, various
heritages, sensitivity, etc.Which do we conceptualize like Human in opposition to non Human? The institution of
“large shares” or “The Great Divide”, in terms of categories between the Human one and the
non Human one, is far from to be always established in various times and Human spaces, such
as we generally think it. This apparently natural institution, even expresses, appears after examination
much less obviates that we thought it traditionally. For this reason, it constitutes an object
of intellectual investigations of choice for many traditional knowledge such anthropology,
the history, philosophy, theology, but also for the whole of contemporary sciences. Because,
this category institution questions the identity even the EC what we indicate like human, and
consequently, like nonhuman. Indeed, about what and which precisely speak us when it is
question of Human or the Human ones, about humanity in generic term? What do we seek to
describe and qualify under the registers of Human and non Human? Which are the non Human,
of the binarism category ones presupposed which institute the registers of conceptual dualism
Human/humanity/inhumanity? What do we seek to think in the idea of one “beyond the
human one”, which the latter institutes a differentialism between the beings or entities or contrary,
seeks with the indifférencier as in certain news of anthropology who challenges any anthropocentrée
& humanistic design?
Most traditional definitions tend to affirm that this we claim to conceptualize & to subsume
under the concept of “Human” constitutes something like a certain exception in the order of
the alive one. What is it exactly of this alleged “human exception”? What does it recover precisely?
In addition, to answer the interrogation: “That are the non Human ones and which is
the human ones? ”, does not have anything manifesto apart from this we can crudely observe
and who allows us to or not retain, more or less, certain features of appearance and the behavior.
We could also answer in a provocative and relativistic way: “With each one its Human and
its non Human, its humanity and its nonhumanity”, according to the configurations which we
institute to return account of the whole of the interactions that we let us have or not with our
multiple, material & immaterial, visible & invisible environments! There thus do not exist
standards which would tend in manner more or less final and universal to govern the uses category
of Human and of the Human one.
For these reasons, the challenge of our short communication will be to expose presupposed
and reasons of such an interest category, conceptual and descriptive fundamentally Human for
the non Human one which gives an account of the multiple forms of the institution of human
the versus the nonhuman one, while founding, in addition, a whole range of beings or of entities
going from the one with the other, thus questioning the imaginary and real bases of our multidimensional assignments in category terms, of identity, anybody, cognitive faculties, various
heritages, sensitivity, etc.Which do we conceptualize like Human in opposition to non Human? The institution of
“large shares” or “The Great Divide”, in terms of categories between the Human one and the
non Human one, is far from to be always established in various times and Human spaces, such
as we generally think it. This apparently natural institution, even expresses, appears after examination
much less obviates that we thought it traditionally. For this reason, it constitutes an object
of intellectual investigations of choice for many traditional knowledge such anthropology,
the history, philosophy, theology, but also for the whole of contemporary sciences. Because,
this category institution questions the identity even the EC what we indicate like human, and
consequently, like nonhuman. Indeed, about what and which precisely speak us when it is
question of Human or the Human ones, about humanity in generic term? What do we seek to
describe and qualify under the registers of Human and non Human? Which are the non Human,
of the binarism category ones presupposed which institute the registers of conceptual dualism
Human/humanity/inhumanity? What do we seek to think in the idea of one “beyond the
human one”, which the latter institutes a differentialism between the beings or entities or contrary,
seeks with the indifférencier as in certain news of anthropology who challenges any anthropocentrée
& humanistic design?
Most traditional definitions tend to affirm that this we claim to conceptualize & to subsume
under the concept of “Human” constitutes something like a certain exception in the order of
the alive one. What is it exactly of this alleged “human exception”? What does it recover precisely?
In addition, to answer the interrogation: “That are the non Human ones and which is
the human ones? ”, does not have anything manifesto apart from this we can crudely observe
and who allows us to or not retain, more or less, certain features of appearance and the behavior.
We could also answer in a provocative and relativistic way: “With each one its Human and
its non Human, its humanity and its nonhumanity”, according to the configurations which we
institute to return account of the whole of the interactions that we let us have or not with our
multiple, material & immaterial, visible & invisible environments! There thus do not exist
standards which would tend in manner more or less final and universal to govern the uses category
of Human and of the Human one.
For these reasons, the challenge of our short communication will be to expose presupposed
and reasons of such an interest category, conceptual and descriptive fundamentally Human for
the non Human one which gives an account of the multiple forms of the institution of human
the versus the nonhuman one, while founding, in addition, a whole range of beings or of entities
going from the one with the other, thus questioning the imaginary and real bases of our multidimensional assignments in category terms, of identity, anybody, cognitive faculties, various
heritages, sensitivity, etc.
Type: Article
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/10077/28388
ISSN: 1825-5167
DOI: 10.13137/1825-5167/28388
Rights: Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internazionale
Appears in Collections:Etica & Politica / Ethics & Politics (2019) XXI/2

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat
3_EP2019_2.pdf139.66 kBAdobe PDFThumbnail
View/Open
Show full item record


CORE Recommender

Page view(s)

16
checked on Dec 5, 2019

Download(s)

1
checked on Dec 5, 2019

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons