Anthropologies, whether local or fundamental, suffer from problems of fragmentation or foundation that make it difficult for them to propose answers concerning the origins of technique and semiotics, even though both are essential markers of the differences between Homo and all other animals. In an attempt to provide answers, this article proposes to adopt an anthropogenic approach on the « long time » and to look at the way in which Homo has been constituted, darwinianally, as a techno-semiotic animal, over the last two million years. The choice of the « long time » of course calls for referentials that allow us to free ourselves from particular periods, civilisations and situations. Thus, for example, in this article, we have been interested in the geometry (topology) of Homo's body which, unlike that of other animals, is particularly segmenting, tranversalizing and panoplic. These three topological characteristics of Homo's body would have made him particularly apt to become a technical animal, at least if we consider that technique begins with instruments, already known to animals, but that later Homo would have articulated them into panoplies and protocols, unknown to animals. Now organised in 'toolboxes', these instruments would have become 'tools' and the starting point of technique. In a similar way, the segmentarising body of Homo would also have been conducive to the emergence of the sign, defined anthropogenically as a segment of the Universe which, through various links, thematises other segments of the Universe, in a pure manner, without operational charges. A finger, a thematizing segment, pointing to an object, a thematized segment, is already a sign. Such an anthropogenic approach, over the long time, apparently makes it possible to propose common origins for technique and semiotics, here for example on the basis of notions such as the segment, the panoply, and the protocol, which are valid over several million years. But, beyond the conclusions of this article, it is probably the choice of referentials independent of periods, civilisations and particular situations that is most likely to stimulate all researchers interested in the human sciences and Homo's achievements in all fields. Most of this article is inspired by the book ANTHROPOGENY, by the philosopher Henri VAN LIER (1921 - 2009), and almost all of his texts on general anthropogeny and local anthropogenies are available on the website http://www.anthropogenie.com/
기타언어
Les anthropologies, qu’elles soient locales ou fondamentales, souffrent de problèmes de morcellement ou de fondements qui leur rend difficile de formuler des réponses concernant les origines de la technique et de la sémiotique alors que l’une comme l’autre sont des marqueurs essentiels des différences entre Homo et l’ensemble des autres animaux. Pour tenter d’apporter des réponses, cet article propose d’adopter une approche anthropogénique sur le temps long et de s’intéresser à la manière dont Homo s’est constitué, darwiniennement, en tant qu’animal techno-sémiotique, au cours des deux derniers millions d’années. Le choix du temps long appelle bien sûr des référentiels qui permettent de s’affranchir des époques, des civilisations et des situations particulières. Ainsi, par exemple, dans le cadre de cet article, nous sommes-nous intéressés à la géométrie (topologie) du corps d’Homo qui, à la différence de celui des autres animaux, est particulièrement segmentarisant, transversalisant et panoplisant. Ces trois caractéristiques topologiques du corps d’Homo l’auraient rendu particulièrement apte à devenir un animal technique, du moins si l’on considère que la technique commence par des instruments, déjà connus des animaux, mais qu’ensuite Homo les aurait articulés en panoplies et en protocoles, inconnus des animaux. Désormais organisés en « boîtes à outils », ces instruments seraient devenus des « outils » et le point de départ de la technique. De manière similaire le corps segmentarisant d’Homo aurait également été propice à l’émergence du signe, défini anthropogéniquement comme un segment d’Univers qui par des liens divers thématise d’autres segments d’Univers, de manière pure, sans charges opérationnelles. Un doigt, segment thématiseur, qui pointe un objet, segment thématisé, est déjà un signe. Une telle approche anthropogénique, sur le temps long, permet visiblement de proposer des origines communes à la technique et à la sémiotique, ici par exemple à partir de notions comme le segment, la panoplie, et le protocole, valables sur plusieurs millions d’années. Mais, au-delà des conclusions de cet article, c’est probablement le choix de référentiels indépendants des époques, des civilisations et des situations particulières qui sera le plus susceptible de stimuler tous les chercheurs intéressés par les sciences humaines et les accomplissements d’Homo dans tous les domaines. L’essentiel de cet article est inspiré du livre ANTHROPOGENIE, du philosophe Henri VAN LIER (1921 – 2009), et la quasi-totalité de ses textes d’anthropogénie générale et d’anthropogénies locales sont disponibles sur le site http://www.anthropogenie.com/
목차
1. Introduction 2. L’oeuf, la poule et le temps long. L’anthropogénie 3. Le choix de référentiels observables, descriptibles, mesurables 4. Le corps très particulier d’homo 5. La r-encontre versus l’encontre 6. Un animal technicien 7. La thématisation technique 8. La thématisation sémiotique. Le signe. 9. Qui est premier : la technique ou la sémiotique ? 10. Une union bio-techno-sémiotique singulière 11. Homo possibilisateur 12. Anthropologie, sémiotique, autres sciences humaines 13. Historicité darwinienne d’homo 14. Ouverture de nombreux champs de recherche 15. Conclusion [Bibliographie sommaire, et commentaires] [Résumé] [Abstract]
키워드
Fundamental anthropologyPhilosophy of technologyOrigin of signAnthropologie fondamentalePhilosophie de la techniqueOrigine du signe.
저자
Marc Van Lier [ Fondation Anthropogénie – Henri VAN LIER Après avoir obtenu un diplôme d’ingénieur, et exercé un métier de consultant-formateur, Marc VAN LIER est, ]
고려대학교 응용문화연구소 [Center for Applied Cultural Sciences]
설립연도
2005
분야
인문학>기타인문학
소개
비트와 컴퓨터에 기초한 현대 테크놀로지와 미디어는 문화, 사회, 경제, 정치, 교육 등 전 방면에 걸쳐서 급격한 문명사적 변형을 동반하고 있다. 고려대학교 응용 문화 연구소는 이 같은 문화적 흐름에 부응하기 위해서 인문학, 과학, 예술, 테크놀로지 등을 아우르면서 새로운 대학 교육과 연구의 전범을 마련하고자 한다.
본 연구소는 미디어, 예술, 현대 문화, 디지털 영상문화등과 관련된 다양한 이론, 비평, 역사에 대한 연구를 진행시킴은 물론, 단순한 학술적 논의와 사변적 연구 차원에서 머무르지 않고, 작게는 고대의 문화 기획을 도와주면서 더 넓게는 다양한 예술 문화 기획 전시, 미디어 비평 및 교육 등에 대한 기획 등을 추진하고 있다.
아울러 본 연구소의 중요한 기능은 한국의 문화 지형도를 읽기 위한 연속적 노력의 경주이며, 그 같은 노력의 일환으로 미디어, 문화, 예술 분야에서 두각을 나타내는 전공자 또는 석학 등을 초빙하여 학내 구성원들에게 그 분들의 생각을 전달하는 기회를 마련, 타교 또는 외국의 연구소와 공동 연구 등을 수행하고 있다.
요컨대 응용 문화 연구소는 인문학, 사회과학, 컴퓨터 과학, 정보 테크놀로지, 경영학, 정치학 전공자들이 다 함께 참여하여 지적 향연을 벌일 수 있는 상생적 문화의 장을 마련하고자 한다.