برزنتيشن عن body language
برزنتيشن عن لغة الجسد بالانجليزي
برجراف عن الجسم
برجراف عن your body بالانجليزي
موضوع عن جسم الانسان بالانجليزي
body language presentation powerpoint
short presentation about body language
برجراف عن جسم الانسان بالانجليزي
مقدمة عن لغة الجسد
موضوع عن جسم الانسان بالانجليزي
برجراف عن جسم الانسان بالانجليزي
برجراف عن الجسم بالانجليزي
اعضاء الجسم الداخلية بالانجليزي
اعضاء الجسم بالانجليزي مترجم بالعربي
موضوع قصير عن جسم الانسان
اعضاء الجسم بالانجليزي للاطفال
اسماء اعضاء الجسم بالانجليزي بالصور
اعضاء جسم الانسان التناسلية بالانجليزية
Staying healthy as long as possible has become the new
ideology of Western man. The biotechnological century (J. Rifkin, 1998), which
opens, should be that of a change of perspective (F. Dagognet, 2002): rather
than locking man in a science from within, the biotechnological transformations
of his bodies will be understood here as the invention of a body embodying the
subject.
The living body
2
Should the living body remain natural and integral? The
intentional modification of the human body has always been a source of
progress: surgery, grafting, implants, vaccines, nanocybernetics ... offer real
changes to the physical state of the human being, existence and action. The
physically handicapped body is bio-artificially equipped to overcome the
accidental or essential state of its activity. The mentally handicapped body
suffers the prejudice of a natural determinism that alienates any possible
choice of its being: nature has chosen for him his being. What hazardous nature
decides would impose fatal training and acceptance. No intentionality of
nature, no intervention of man, the unborn child having to become what he has
to be: his being is foreseen and foreseeable by the study of his DNA.
3
The freedom to choose one's natural body is null, but once it
is born, the human person could, if he had access to it, modify it by a
restorative medicine. Insofar as it is aware (which is not always the case for
children under guardianship and / or mentally handicapped), it would manifest
the intention to free itself as a subject of that natural state, thus giving
its consent explicit. By acting on the body to be born from its conception, the
eugenic intention, according to Habermas (2002), would prohibit and condemn all
subjectivity to the parental dependence of the genitor. The quality of the
living body would determine the body experienced, the image of the body, the
intergenerational consciousness and the filial relationship. The eugenic
intention, through the reprogramming and selection of the genome, precedes the
subject, which would prevent him from becoming an intentional being in his own
right: his body would decide his degree of intentionality and communicability,
his being would be lessened . This determination of the body experienced by the
sanitary intentionality of the living body presupposes that the subject
pre-existed to the quality of his body. The avoidance of the genetic instrumentation
of the human body would guarantee the exercise of subjectivity by maintaining
the subject in Kantian universality.
4
Autotransformation of the species would be based on the
disappearance of the conceptual boundary and the boundary between prevention and
improvement. This dedifferentiation, carried out by biotechnology for Habermas,
no longer allows the person to be in his own body, because being himself can
postulate an identity and a transmission of the living body: "But in order
for the person to be able to do that with one's body it seems necessary that it
should be experienced as part of natural growth-as the prolongation of organic
life, regenerating itself, of which the person is born by birth "(Habermas
2002, 131). Is there not in this postulate the idea of a transcendence of the living body whose natural
integrity must be preserved in order to exercise full subjectivity?
5
The identification with the living body, if it ensures an
incarnation of the person in a natural filiation, is not sufficient to
guarantee the subject an acceptance of his essential or accidental state. The
dispossession of origin by the genetic design of its existence is also a source
of freedom, in the absence of liberation, in the face of the individual,
relational, affective and social consequences of the corporal dependence of
bodily and / or mental disability. Is it necessary to refuse biotechnological
progress since it proposes, in the aftermath of a choice made without the
consent of the subject, possibilities of existence and action greater than what
the subject could have been without it? What could the subject say, as
evidenced by the Perruche affair, if he could know that it might have been
different? The question about virtual identity in relation to identification with
the living body comes from the body experienced, reflected, informed and now
claiming a biosubjective construction of the self.
6
The criticism of biotechnological progress can no longer
remain in opposition to the living body / human body. Biotechnology transforms
the subject's relationship to nature by making his body an environmental
result. Now parents can be responsible for the malformation or not of their
unborn child, as they may or may not know the genetic destiny of their child:
the child's body becomes a valuable medium, a mode of valuation and active
control of the transmission.