Recently social analysis has turned its attention to`the body'. In this paper the author considers the implications of such a turn for social analysis itself. The main discussion of the paper concerns the indeterminate or`elusory' nature of embodiment and its productive relation to`sense making' in everyday life and contemplative thought. The author examines how these aspects of embodiment have been marginalised within social analysis and the effects of this marginalisation in understandings of subjectification. Describing the processes of subjectification in terms of`habit' and style', the author suggests that the disclosive and performative in the everyday have been ignored in favour of a search for the foundations of the everyday and the subject. An argument is put forward for the groundlessness of being in terms of its potential to be otherwise. The above discussions are described in terms of the ability of collectives to make sense from the fleeting and ephemeral feelings and experiences of everyday ongoing comportment. Finally it is suggested that through a consideration of the performative, collective, and material nature of embodiment contemplations of everyday life should be understood in terms of enaction and immanence.

No abstract

This paper offers a sustained reflection on the nature of corporeal vulnerability as an inherent and noneliminable aspect of corporeal existence. One of the many remarkable things about the recent interest in embodiment, emotion, practice, and performance, in the body-in-action, in the social sciences is the general lack of thought that has been given to the fact of vulnerability. The paper suggests that thinking through the nature of vulnerability could have a considerable effect on how we think about embodiment as well as on wider processes of subjectification, signification, and sociality. However, because of the persistence of a primary role being given to intentional or auto-affective action in the theorisation of embodiment across a number of theoretical perspectives, vulnerability remains largely unthought of within much current work on the body within Anglo-American social science. Drawing on the writing of Emmanuel Levinas and reflecting on experiences of corporeal expropriation such as insomnia and exhaustion, I suggest how we may begin to think sensibility and the sensuous beyond their almost exclusive interpretation in terms of comprehension, purpose, or intention while retaining the irreducibility of corporeal life to a matter of social construction or contextual epiphenomenon. Thus, the paper develops an account of corporeal life as inherently susceptible, receptive, exposed, as inherently open beyond its capacities, and reflects on the implications of this realisation for thinking about the genesis of meaning and signification and the social relation.

No abstract

Shock, evisceration, and peritonitis warrant immediate LAP after AASW. Patients without these findings can be safely observed for signs or symptoms of bleeding or hollow viscus injury. To limit the number of hospital admissions, we propose a uniform strategy using LWE to ascertain the depth of penetration; the patient may be safely discharged in the absence of peritoneal violation. Peritoneal penetration, absent evidence of ongoing hemorrhage or hollow viscus injury, should not be considered an indication for LAP, but rather an indication for admission for SCAs. We suggest that a prospective multicenter trial be performed to document the safety and cost-effectiveness of such an approach.