The Imaginary of the Transplanted Organ

Transplant medicine seems to illustrate well the gulf between a Cartesian conception of the body (a machine made of spare parts) and a phenomenological one (the body is the "vehicle of our being in the world", the seat of our experiences, suffering and valuations, the support on which our identity is built). Can we leave it at that, with the body irrevocably "bifurcated" in transplant medicine? This article answers in the negative. It demonstrates that the conception of the organ underlying transplant medicine is not Cartesian, but Aristotelian in origin, the organ being seen not as a separate part of a machine, but as an instrument (organon). However, viewing the organ as an instrument does not necessarily imply subscribing to the conception of an organ as a tool. Based on a commentary on Heidegger and Agamben, the article argues that there is a need to distinguish two separate meanings of the Greek concept of “organon”. This distinction leads to a few practical suggestions for doctors, engineers and healthcare policy-makers.