Life and the Technical Transformation of Différance: Stiegler and the Noopolitics of Becoming Non-Inhuman

Abstract

Through a re-articulation of Derridean différance, Bernard Stiegler claims that the human is defined by an originary default that displaces all psychic and social life onto technical supplements. His philosophy of technics re-articulates the logic of the supplement as concerning both human reflexivity and its supports, and the history of the différance of life itself. This has been criticised for reducing Derrida's work to a metaphysics of presence, and for instituting a humanism of the relation to the inorganic. By refuting these claims, this article will show that Stiegler's doubling of différance enables him to articulate the human as constituted by both the individuation characteristic of ‘life’, and that of a technical, psychic, and collective individuation. Putting forward a reading of the logic of the trace in life, and emphasising the aspects of Leroi-Gourhan, Simondon, and Canguilhem that Stiegler uses in his reading of Derrida, I will demonstrate that the political stakes of adaption and adoption in his Noopolitics require this re-articulation of différance. Technics shapes the human future, arising from this differential mutation; marking the invention of the human as the site of the political.

Politicising the Epokhé: Bernard Stiegler and the Politics of Epochal Suspension

“…5 First, Derrida argues that the primacy of the impression and its shading into the past as primary retention is indistinguishable from secondary retention, as the large now of temporal experience is a re-constitution of an object which intrudes upon consciousness. Referring to 5 I have published a more extensive engagement with Stiegler's relationship to Derrida elsewhere (Turner 2016). For other important work on their relation, see Ben Roberts (2005) and Daniel Ross (2013).…”