Revue de Synthèse

, Volume 124, Issue 1, pp 139–171 | Cite as

La spatialité originaire du corps propre

Phénoménologie et neurosciences
Articles

Résumé

La tradition phénoménologique s'oppose aux sciences cognitives contemporaines en ceci que le corps propre n'est pas, pour elle, une simple chose du monde physique dont l'esprit-cerveau contiendrait une représentation mentale, mais qu'il est plutôt constitué en son sens d'être pour le sujet par son usage et son appropriation active par ce même sujet, en tant qu'être agissant. Or, il existe une affinité, encore non reconnue, entre cette conception et celle qui ressort de la littérature en cartographie cérébrale des vingt dernières années, d'une neurodynamique morphogénétique fonctionnelle in duite et modulée par l'expérience, en une relative autonomie par rapport aux structures anatomiques du corps comme aux frontières cytoarchitectoniques du cerveau. Tirant parti de cette affinité, nous prenons appui sur les données des neurosciences pour réhabiliter contre sa dévalorisation par les sciences cognitives la théorie de la constitution de Husserl, en revenant de ses adaptations ultérieures (Merleau-Ponty) à sa forme authentique, qui est celle de l'auto-constitution subjective (transcendantale) du corps propre sur la base de l'expérience pratico-kinesthésique du «je meus mon corps».

Mots-Clés

corps propre corps physique constitution neuroplasticité fonctionnelle 

Abstract

The phenomenological tradition stands opposed to contemp orary cognitive science in this, that so far from being a mere thing in the physical world, a thing whose mind would contain some mental representation, the lived body is constituted in its sense of being for the subject by being used and actively appropriated by this self-same subject, as agent. Though not already generally acknowledged, there are important similarities between this conception and one, which emerges from the literature of brain cartography over the last twenty years, that of a functional morphogenetic neurodynamics, induced and modulated by experience in a relatively autonomous way, in relation both to the anatomic structures of the body, as well as the cytoarchitectonic frontiers of brain tissue. Taking advantage of the latter similarities, neuroscientific data can be employed to confirm the Husserlian theory of constitution against the attempts on the part of cognitive science to discredit it, and this whether we are talking about its later modification at the hands of Merleau-Ponty or the original version, which is that of a subjective (transcendental) auto-constitution of the lived body on the basis of the practico-kinoesthetic experience of «I move my body».

Keywords

lived body physical body constitution functional neuroplasticity 

Zusammenfassung

Die phänomenologische Tradition unterscheidet sich von der gegenwärtigen Kognitionswissenschaft dadurch, daß der Leib für sie kein einfacher Gegenstand der körperlichen Welt ist, dessen im Gehirn angesiedelter Geist eine mentale Darstellung enthält, sondern daß seine Bedeutung vielmehr darin besteht, daß er für das handelnde Subjekt existiert, indem er von diesem benutzt und aktiv angeeignet wird. Folglich besteht eine noch nicht erkannte Affinität zwischen dieser Konzeption und derjenigen, die aus der in den letzten zwanzig Jahren entstandenen Literatur zur Kartierung des Gehirns hervorgeht. Bei dieser handelt es sich um eine funktionale morphogenetische Neurodynamik, die durch die Erfahrung herausgebildet wurde, wobei der Geist eine gewisse Autonomie hinsichtlich der anatomischen Struktur und der durch den Aufbau der Zellen bedingten Grenzen des Gehirns gewinnt. Ausgehend von dieser Affinität stützen wir uns auf die Ergebnisse der Neurowissenschaft, um die Konstitutionstheorie von Husserl gegen ihre Entwertung durch die Kognitionswissenschaften zu verteidigen. Wir führen sie von ihren später erfolgten Anpassungen (Merleau-Ponty) auf ihre authentische Form zurück, die eine subjektive (transzendentale) Selbstdarstellung des Leibes auf der Grundlage der Erfahrungsgrundlage der Kinästhesie («Ich bewege meinen Körper») darstellt.

Stichwörter

Leib physikalischer Körper Konstitution funktionale Neuroplastizität 

Riassunto

La tradizione fenomenologica si oppone alle scienze cognitive contemporanee in quanto dal suo punto di vista il corpo vivente non è una mera cosa all'interno del mondo fisico, una cosa il cui cervello contenga delle rappresentazioni mentali, ma è piuttosto costituito nel suo senso di «essere per il soggetto in base al suo uso« ed in base alla sua appropriazione attiva da parte dello stesso soggetto, in quanto agente. Esiste un'affinità, non ancora riconosciuta, tra questa concezione e quella che scaturisce dalla letteratura sulla cartografia cerebrale degli ultimi vent'anni, quella di una neurodinamica morfogenetica, indotta e modulata dall'esperienza in modo relativamente autonomo, in relazione sia alle strutture anatomiche del corpo, sia alle frontiere citoarchitettoniche del cervello. Prendendo spunto da questa affinità prendiamo in considerazione i dati delle neuroscienze per riabilitare, contro la svalutazione da parte delle scienze cognitive, la teoria della costituzione di Husserl, e ricostruiamo, indipendentemente dalle modificazioni successive (Merleau-Ponty), la versione originaria; questa è la teoria di una auto-costituzione soggettiva (trascendentale) del corpo vissuto sulla base dell' esperienza pratico-cinestetica del «io muovo il mio corpo».

Parole Chiave

corpo proprio corpo fisico costituzione neuroplasticità funzionale 

Liste Des Références

  1. Berti (Anna) etFrassinetti (Francesca), 2000, «When far becomes near. Remapping of space by tool use»,Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, vol. XII,3, p. 415–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Cohen (Leonardo G.),Bandinelli (Stefania),Findley (Thomas W.) etHallett (Mark), 1991, «Motor reorganization after upper limb amputation in man. A study with focal magnetic stimulation»,Brain, vol. CXIV, p. 615–627.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Edelman (Gerald), 1989,The Remembered Present. A biological theory of consciousness, New York, NY, Basic Books Inc. Publ.Google Scholar
  4. Elbert (Thomas),Pantev (Christo),Wienbruch (Christian),Rockstroh (Brigitte) etTaub (Edward), 1995, «Increased cortical representation of the fingers of the left hand in string players»,Science, vol. CCLXX, p. 305–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Gallagher (Shaun),Butterworth (George E.),Lew (Adina) etCole (Jonathan D.), 1998, «Hand-mouth coordination, congenital absence of limb, and evidence for innate body schemas»,Brain and Cognition, 38, p. 53–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Gallagher (Shaun) etMeltzoff (Andrew), 1996, «The earliest sense of self and others. Merleau-Ponty and recent developmental studies»,Philosophical Psychology, 9, p. 213–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Garraghty (Preston E.) etKaas (Jon H.), 1991, «Functional reorganization in adult monkey thalamus after peripheral nerve injury»,NeuroReport, vol. II,12, p. 747–750.Google Scholar
  8. Goldenberg (Georg), 2002, «Goldstein and Gelb's case Schn. A classic case in neuropsychology?»,in C. Cole, C. W. Wallesch, Y. Joanette etA. Roch-Lecours, éd.,Classic cases in neuropsychology, Hove, Psychology Press, vol. II, p. 281–299.Google Scholar
  9. Grafton (Scott T.),Mazziotta (John C.),Presty (Sharon),Friston (Karl J.),Frackowiak (Richard S. J.) etPhelps (Michael E.), 1992, «Functional anatomy of human procedural learning determined with regional cerebral blood flow and PET»,The Journal of Neuroscience, vol. XII,7, p. 2542–2548.Google Scholar
  10. Head (Henry) etHolmes (Gordon), 1911, «Sensory disturbances from cerebral lesions»,Brain, vol. XXXIV, p. 102–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hubel (David H.),Wiesel (Torsten N.) etLeVay (S.), 1977, «Plasticity of ocular dominance columns in monkey striate cortex»,Proceedings of the Royal Society of London (Biology), vol. XXLXXVIII, p. 377–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Husserl (Edmund), 1973,Ding und Raum. Vorlesungen 1907, in Claesges (Ulrich), éd.,Husserliana. Edmund Husserl, Gesammelte Werke, vol. XVI, La Haye, Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
  13. Husserl (E.), mss B III 9, 1931; D 10 I, III, 1932; D 12 III, 1931; D 13 I, 1921.Google Scholar
  14. Iriki (Atsushi),Tanaka (Michio) etIwamura (Yoshiaki), 1996, «Coding of modified body schema during tool use by macaque postcentral neurones»,NeuroReport, vol. VII,14, p. 2325–2330.Google Scholar
  15. Johnson-Laird (P.N.), 1983,Mental models. Towards a cognitive science of language, inference, and consciousness, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Karni (Avi),Meyer (Gundela),Jezzard (Peter),Adams (Michelle M.),Turner (Robert) etUngerleider (Leslie G.), 1995, «Functional MRI evidence for adult motor cortex plasticity during motor skill learning»,Nature, Vol. CCCLXXXVII, p. 155–158.Google Scholar
  17. Kennedy (Philip R.) etBakay (Roy A. E.), 1997, «Activity of single action potentials in monkey motor cortex during long-term task learning»,Brain Research, vol. DCCLX, p. 251–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kennedy (P.R.) etBakay (R. A. E.), 1998, «Restoration of neural output from a paralyzed patient by a direct brain connection»,NeuroReport, vol. IX,8, p. 1707–1711.Google Scholar
  19. Kennedy (Philip R.),Bakay (Roy A. E.) etSharpe (Steven M.), 1992a, «Behavioral correlates of action potentials recorded chronically inside the cone electrode»,NeuroReport, vol. III,7, p. 605–608.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kennedy (Philip R.),Mirra (Suzanne S.) etBakay (Roy A. E.), 1992b, «The cone electrode. Ultrastructural studies following long-term recording in rat and monkey cortex»,Neuroscience Letters, vol. CXLII, p. 89–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Merleau-Ponty (Maurice), 1945,Phénoménologie de la perception, Paris, Gallimard (NRF).Google Scholar
  22. Merzenich (Michæl M.) etDeCharms (R. C.), 1995, «Neural representations, experience, and change»,in Llinas (Rodolfo R.) etChurchland (Patricia), éd.,Mind and Brain, Cambridge, MA, Massachussets Institute of Technology Press, p. 61–81.Google Scholar
  23. Merzenich (Michæl M.),Nelson (Randall J.),Kaas (Jon H.),Stryker (Michæl P.),Jenkins (William M.),Zook (John M.),Cynader (Max S.) etSchoppmann (Axel), 1987, «Variability in hand surface representations in areas 3b and 1 in adult owl and squirrel monkeys»,The Journal of Comparative Neurology, vol. CCLVIII, p. 281–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Merzenich (Michæl M.),Nelson (Randall J.),Tryker (Michæl P.),Cynader (Max S.),Schoppmann (Axel) etZook (John M.), 1984, «Somatosensory cortical map changes following digit amputation in adult monkeys»,The Journal of Comparative Neurology, vol. CCXXIV, p. 591–605.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Mogilner (Alon),Grossman (John A. I.),Ribary (Urs),Joliot (Marc),Volksmann (Jens),Rapaport (David),Beasley (Robert W.) etLlinas (Rodolfo R.), 1993. «Somatosensory cortical plasticity in adult humans revealed by magnetoencephalography»,Proceedings of the National Academy of Science of the USA, vol. XC, p. 3593–3597.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Nudo (Randoff J.),Milliken (G. W.),Jenkins (William M.) etMerzenich (Michæl M.), 1996, «Use-dependent alterations of movement representations in primary motor cortex of adult squirrel monkeys»,The Journal of Neuroscience, vol. XVI,2, p. 785–807.Google Scholar
  27. Pallard (Jacques), 1999, «Body schema and body image. A double dissociation in deafferented patients», inGantchev (Gantcho N.),Mori (Shigemi) etMassion (Jean), éd.,Motor contro,, today and tomorrow, Sofia, Academic Publishing House «Prof. M. Drinov», p. 197–214.Google Scholar
  28. Pascual-Leone (Alvaro) etTorres (Fernando), 1993, «Plasticity of the sensorimotor cortex representation of the reading finger in Brailles readers»,Brain, vol. CXVI, p. 39–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Pascual-Leone (Alvaro),Grafman (Jordan) etHallett (Mark), 1994, «Modulation of cortical motor output maps during development of implicit and explicit knowledge»,Science, vol. CCLXIII, p. 1287–1289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Penfield (Wilder) etBoldrey (Edwin), 1937, «Somatic, motor, and sensory representation in the cerebral cortex of man, as studied by electrical stimulation»,Brain, vol. LX, p. 389–443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Petitot (Jean),Varela (Francisco),Pachoud (Bernard) etRoy (Jean-Michel), éd., 1999,Naturalizing phenomenology: Issues in contemporary phenomenology and cognitive science, Stanford, CA, Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  32. Recanzone (Gregg H.),Merzenich (Michæl M.)Jenkins (William M.),Grajski (Kamil A.) etDinse (Hubert R.), 1992, «Topographic reorganization of the hand representation in cortical area 3b of owl monkeys trained in a frequency-discrimination task»,Journal of Neurophysiology, vol. LXVII,5, p. 1031–1055.Google Scholar
  33. Schlaug (Gottfried),Knorr (Uwe) etSeitz (Rüdiger J.), 1994, «Inter-subject variability of cerebral activations in acquiring a motor skill. A study with positron emission tomography»,Experimental Brain Research, vol. XCVIII, p. 523–534.Google Scholar
  34. Sterr (Annette),Müller (Matthias M.),Elbert (Thomas),Rockstroh (Brigitte),Pantev (Christo) etTaub (E.), 1998, «Perceptual correlates of changes in cortical representation of fingers in blind multifinger Braille readers»,The Journal of Neuroscience, vol. XVIII,11, p. 4417–4423.Google Scholar
  35. Wall (John T.),Felleman (Daniel J.) etKaas (Jon H.), 1983, «Recovery of normal topography in the somatosensory cortex of monkeys after nerve crush and regenration»,Science, vol. CCXXI, p. 771–773.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Wall (John T.),Kaas (Jon H.),Sur (Mriganka),Nelson (Randall J.),Felleman (Daniel J.) etMerzenich (Michæl M.), 1986, «Functional reorganization in somatosensory cortical areas 3b and 1 of adult monkeys after median nerve repair. Possible relationship to sensory recovery in humans»,The Journal of Neuroscience, vol. VI,1, p. 218–233.Google Scholar
  37. Xerri (Christian),Merzenich (Michæl M.),Jenkins (William M.), etSantucci (Stephen), 1999, «Representational plasticity in cortical area 3b paralleling tactual-motor skill acquisition in adult monkeys»,Cerebral Cortex, vol. IX,3, p. 264–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Université Marc-Bloch Strasbourg IIStrasbourg Cedex

Personalised recommendations