Philosophy of animality: a biophilosophical response

In my paper I intend first of all to draw attention to the merits of Felice Cimatti's volume, which considers two issues often treated separately - the issue of " human animality" and that of " the animals" - as inextricably linked. Filosofia dell'animalit sheds light on the implications of animality and helps us to focus on the (bio) political consequences of this topic. In Cimatti's view, the rethinking of human animality is based fundamentally on the recognition of what Deleuze called " absolute immanence". In the second part of my essay I submit to criticism exactly this latter concept, or more specifically the statement that identifies human animality with absolute immanence, that is to say with an embodiment that is not defined through language. In particular, I raise the two following complementary objections: (a) Transcendence is a dimension of the human body regardless of language (b) Animality is not the place of the absolute immanence, but it is rather a continuous dialectics of immanence and transcendence. In conclusion, I point out that Cimatti's claim, similarly to those of Heidegger and Derrida, rules out continuity of humans and animals in the attempt to avoid the problems and dangers inherent to anthropomorphism.