Let Us Transform the Knowledge of Man Rather than Transform Man
François Laruelle
From Théorie des étrangers: science des hommes, démocratie, non-psychoanalyse (Paris: Kimé, 1995), p.110-112.
As a philosophy, humanism identifies two activities that a transcendental science alone distinguishes: elucidate the essence of man, but also to claim make this elucidation happen within man’s essence through this operation of elucidation. While the “Philosophical Decision” is the amphibology of these two operations, one such science protects the first, renounces the illusions of the second and replaces the aberrant and dangerous project of a transformation of the Real (of the essence of man) with the project of a real transformation (of the effectivity of man). In essence and more rigorously than any transcendent ethical postulation, this principle grounds the limits of the possible action upon the human being. The new rules that implement the induction and deduction of the Stranger through the Ego make a use out the Human Sciences but not a use out of man themselves. We must globally reduce the technical objects of the human body, for example bio-technologies, to the state of restrained models that “interpret” for transformation by the science of man: the transformation of the knowledges of man, rather than transforming man themselves. No more than they themselves use transcendence to think transcendence, but they think a unique or simplified, unfolded [non repliée] transcendence once-each-time on the immanent mode, man is no longer directly transformable by science which, by contrast, uses bio-technological or other transformations as materials under certain conditions and always in the name of its identity. All that which is philosophizable of man solely belongs to the objective givens that a non-philosophical science by itself requires. For example, the relationship between the observer-observed, more or less undecidable, is “real,” but here, this word means “existent” or “effective.” Man alone through their essence is real, and human phenomena are solely effective. As such, this relationship belongs to the objects of a science, but not to its Essence (of) science and cannot contribute towards defining the Essence subject to dissolving its reality once and for all in universal authorities [instances] (Reason, Being, Consciousness, Language, Communication, Spirit, Matter, etc.). The cause (of) science is not reduced to the observer, and the observer belongs to the “objective givens” rather than to the essence of science. The duality of the unified theory is non-positional (of) its objects and is never related to them in an objectivating way: this is what philosophy does and is attributed to this alienation.
The unilateral human duality (Ego, Stranger) means that man is the real base, in some way the ultimate phenomenal content of any possible “infrastructure,” and that it is on this basis and by means of the knowledge that it becomes possible to transform the social, political, philosophical, etc. aspects of their existence as a Stranger. The point is to go from the untransformable reality of man, incapable of progress, perfection and destruction, racist or other, incapable of “perfectibility,” to what the reality allows for us to transform of effectivity by the means of knowledge, rather than from effective man who is already interpreted and transformed by philosophy, to transform man a bit more. Nothing, if not good will – and yet… – distinguishes the perfecting and destruction of man; and nothing, if it is not the philosophical decision as the ultimate authority that subjugates man, distinguishes the good will from the pure will to power. We must finally choose: either the ultimate authority and violence of philosophy that decides on the essence of man and confounds science and decision, science and will; or a human science that will not only have the advantage of theoretical rigour over the philosophies but the advantage of ethical rigour. The human science has the advantage of being scientifically and ethically possible by considering man as un-transformable in their essence and thus possessing an absolute standard measure, but of-the-last-instance, of the transformations done to transcendent human phenomena. Genuine humanism is not a supplement of decision upon the being of man. It is what is grounded upon where man is really and solely the “cause” then the “subject,” the Ego then the Stranger. This is why man must be protected not only from dogmatic metaphysics but, beyond it, from any form of transcendence – from philosophy as such. Ethical and juridical rationalism do not seem strong enough to us for the goals that it fixes: precisely perhaps because it still reasons in terms of finality. Instead, a human science alone liberates man from any philosophical finality and, contrarily to what is ordinarily done, submits philosophy to man by the means of a human science and pragmatics of philosophy (under the name “non-philosophy”).
To sum this up: philosophy attempts to alienate man, believing that it succeeds but it fails; by contrast, there are true alienations, including this philosophical belief itself; and finally, a science of man is a science of these alienations, but it is a science that is not itself alienating. The humanist decision must come to where man is and be thus made human.
en-demic 