조르주 캉귈렘(1904∼1995)의 생명 존재에 대한 이해

초록

Since the emergence of modern science, the French positivist philosophy has maintained a tradition requiring philosophers to begin with scientific researches on living beings (être vivant) and then to look for philosophical understandings of human beings and society. Inheriting this tradition, Georges Canguilhem (1904∼1995) pointed out that from the perspective of invariability and universality, physiological functions peculiar to living beings can only acquire the mere status of cases insufficiently conform to the laws of nature. Furthermore, the exceptional cases frequently seen in living beings, such as variations and deviations, are simply considered as impurities, failures, and degradations. Thus, a specialized field, namely life sciences, which regards living beings as a unique ‘stratum of beings (échelle des êtres)’, is needed and these life sciences should take into account the variability and individuality of living beings. In the last analysis, Canguilhem underlined that we are not supposing superfluous beings by acknowledging the autonomous existence of living beings for the reason that the living beings are sufficiently noticeable and qualitatively distinguishable from other beings to call for an ontologically independent concept. Resting on the preceding theoretical setting, this paper primarily aims to analyze how Canguilhem, mainly known as academic adviser of Michel Foucault (1926∼1984), demonstrated the ontological independence of living beings and how he established ‘the philosophy of individuality (philosophie de l’individualité)’ based on the history of philosophy and life sciences. To this end, I examine not only Canguilhem’s distinction and criticism of Aristotelian and Cartesian mechanism, but also the reason why Claude Bernard (1813∼1878)’s physicochemical reductionism was unable to overcome completely biomedical vitalism. Subsequently, I try to uncover and resolve common misunderstandings of vitalism, in which Canguilhem himself was still trapped, and review diverse concepts of organicism developed from vitalism. Thus, the following facts are ascertained: Canguilhem suggested ‘an individualist ontology (ontologie individualiste)’ respecting the particulars, individuals, exceptions, abnormalities, and minorities, while he refused an ontology pursuing the universals, laws, species, and classes. He promoted ‘a regionalist epistemology (épistémologie régionaliste)’ admitting significant implications and a privileged status of living beings and life sciences. In conclusion, it is argued that the ultimate goal of Canguilhem’s philosophy of life and health sciences (philosophie des sciences de la vie et de la santé) was to restore the true status as well as the just right of individuals and, in this sense, it can be defined as a kind of existentialism founded on the history of life sciences and medicine.

키워드