“If I am urged to say why I loved her, I feel that this can only be expressed by answering “Because it was her; because it was me” (Montaigne 1989, chapter 28 (1580, 1595), author’s translation).
NOTE.– As is to be discussed in greater detail later in the book, it is the “corps-trace” to “corps-trace” interaction (Galinon-Mélénec 2017) that establishes the nature of the interpersonal relationship, itself being: (a) at the basis of the greater or lesser reception of the content of the syntactically constructed message; and (b) considered as a system of signes-traces whose property is to evolve continuously because it puts living beings in relation with each other, subject to permanent human-milieu exchanges.
I.14. Permanent evolution of the corps-trace
The interrelationship between the corps-trace and the “milieu” (Watsuji 2011), in which it is integrated, is permanent. The interactions are multi-scale and they integrate all the relationships of the corps-trace with the living as with inanimate matter. These interactions are dependent on the organic system in which the trace is integrated, from the level of the cell to the entire organism. In this, the corps-traces are inscribed not only with the conséquences-traces of its socio-individual45 history, but also with the collective traces of evolution. The corps-trace thus appears to us as being at the origin of the semiotic process between a human being and the Real46.
This highlighting of the body’s role as an operator of the semiotic function is not unique. The body’s role has been recognized by other authors, like Fontanille (2011)47 and Greimas (1993)48. However, despite their analyses of the body in the semiotic process, many authors consider the body as a whole after the analysis of thought and speech, thus constituting an ever-active remnant of Descartes’ cogito ergo sum. Conversely, the terminology corps-trace (with a hyphen) aims to draw attention to how the whole body is affected by its interactions with the human or non-human milieu/environment, the senses becoming a prerequisite for the perception of the trace, as a part of the Real, and for its possible enunciation.
Figure I.5 illustrates the idea that each individual’s corps-trace not only carries the conséquence-trace of interactions with his or her milieu (Watsuji 2011)49, from birth, but also the conséquences-traces of those who preceded him or her in his or her genealogy50.
Figure I.5. Permanent evolution of the corps-trace
Today’s human being is the result of a succession of consequences where we find “the first particles, the atoms, the molecules, the stars, the cells, the organisms, the living beings, to these curious animals that we are [...]. All succeeding one another in the same chain, all are driven by the same movement [...]”. Moreover, our bodies are composed of the elements “that once founded the universe” (Reeves et al. 1996, p. 9, author’s translation).
I.15. Homme-trace, a universal anthropological paradigm
At the end of this Introduction, we propose the anthropological definition of a human being interpreted as “Homme-trace” (“Ichnos-Anthropos”). This angle of approach, which constitutes the backdrop of The Trace Odyssey 1, needs to be integrated by the reader otherwise the reader may take “white for black” (Du Bellay 1568)51 and vice versa.
DEFINITION.– The Homme-trace52 and corps-trace. The term Homme-trace refers to an approach to the human condition as an individual living in a set of multi-scale interactions that make them not only a producer of traces (their actions produce conséquences-traces on the milieu/environment)53 but also a construct of traces. He/she does not have a body. They “are” their body – understood as a body not cut off from the mind. This body – called the “corps-trace” – integrates the conséquences-traces of their interactions with the milieu54, these interactions functioning in feedback loops that combine with each other.
This definition applies to all humans (see Figure I.6).
Figure I.6. The anthropological dimension of the Homme-trace paradigm applicable to every individual in the world
In the conclusion of the book L’Homme-trace : perspectives anthropologiques des traces contemporaines (Galinon-Mélénec 2011)55, we also proposed to study more specifically certain traces that humans leave in their milieu/environment. These are:
– the “primary traces”, conséquences-traces of the only vital presence in a milieu. In the continuation of The Trace Odyssey 1, we give several examples of the analysis of these primary traces, particularly in the chapter devoted to police investigation;
– the “secondary traces”, conséquences-traces of an individual’s progress in the creation of tools, with a view to improving responses to their needs and wants. This type of trace corresponds to the evolution of technology. We will see in the continuation of The Trace Odyssey how technological progress is the result of progress in the evolution of the “Homme-trace”, but also how, conversely, it produces changes in a person’s corps-trace, because of its uses. This is illustrated in the chapter devoted to the implementation of the digital society; and
– the “tertiary traces”, the conséquences-traces of the way in which an individual construes their relations with the world, at the root of the regulatory texts and laws produced by organizations and institutions. This is discussed when we recall (see Figure I.7) that the rules of the game of digital society are, in principle, derived from the need to protect humans endangered by the actions of other humans. This refers, for example, to international negotiations on the protection of personal data, endangered by the poorly controlled flow of pieces of information, for which an unregulated Internet is inappropriate and even dangerous.
I.16. Towards a progressive figuration of the “ecosystem-trace” apparatus
The Trace Odyssey puts forward a representation of the “ecosystem-trace”56 that aims to guide the reader on familiar ground. By drawing the reader’s attention to a specific feature of the trace in context, it can help the reader to understand the ecosystem. This book shows that beyond its obvious appearance, the concept of trace is complex. This complexity must be taken into account to avoid getting lost in inappropriate interpretations.
During the explorations, in the journey through the book, concepts are discovered and the use of “tools” is learned, along with the methods associated with them. Actions, judgments and practices are situated in relation to belonging to the anthropological categorization of Homme-trace. The human being discovers that their body is continuously in contact with reality57 and that he/she carries out at each moment an individuation of reality via signes-traces. These signs that attract a person’s attention, and the ensuing judgment, comes from a dynamic relationship between their corps-trace and the reality-trace. This is why, in the course of The Trace Odyssey , whenever we want to remind the reader of the role of traces in the emergence of the sign, the term signe-trace is preferred.
Gradually,
