Com/passion as the bodily extension: a theological critique of the interpretations of plasticity by Andy Clark and Catherine Malabou

Andy Clark’s theory of the extended mind seems to subvert the Cartesian dualism of mind and body. This extension-ability of the brain derives from the concept of neuroplasticity, which is based upon Paul Bach-y-Rita’s study on sensory substitution. However, Harari points out that the extended mind of Homo Deus or superhumans may end up with upgrading inequality. It is no wonder that plasticity has been interpreted as elasticity, flexibility, and adaptability, which are the attitude part-time workers, immigrant laborers, deliveries and so on should have for their job ethics. Thus, it may be on the verge of being appropriated into our contemporary semiocapitalistic social structure, in which plasticity turns into elasticity and flexibility. Thus, Catherine Malabou pays her attention to its unnoticed aspect of destructive plasticity. Plasticity may be a name for changing difference. It is not to recover the old form of life but to constitute a new form of life. Nonetheless, one needs to know that it is only workers with citizenship who can say ‘no’ to unfair structure under the protection of human rights. In this sense, Malabou’s notion of destructive plasticity needs something more. This paper suggests com/passion, which refers not to the mind’s extendibility but to the embodiment of the mind or the spirit or the Word. The divine love is not to save people’s souls from the evil materialistic world but to be with people in the flesh on the earth. Thus, com/passion extends courageous passion to be with the suffering of ‘those who are not’ (ta me onta, 1Cor. 1: 28).