Two kinds of immanence

I will return to what I had suspected all along, that Georges Bataille and Simone de Beauvoir use the same term, "immanence", in an entirely different fashion.

We can understand this in terms of Paul MacLean's notion of the triune brain. Of course, both de Beauvoir and Bataille actually facilitate the interpretation I am about to make, since Beauvoir makes it very clear that she is talking about "the body" and emotions. Bataille, however, makes it clear that by immanence he refers to a sense of the Sacred and some kind of primeval consciousness that he cannot put into words.

By referring to Paul MacLean's model of the mind, we can locate these philosopher's terms as referring to two different types of "immanance" -- One (Beauvoir's) necessarily oppressive and the other's (Bataille's) as shamanistic (referring to a sense of "out of body" experience).

But first, some basic information on the triune brain:

The primate forebrain has evolved in hierarchic fashion
along the lines of three basic patterns that, in the diagram, are labeled “reptilian,” “paleomammalian,” and “neomammalian.” We possess, as it were, three different brains welded into one-a triune brain.’ Despite some progress in our knowledge of the anatomy and chemistry of the three basic formations, we know remarkably little about how they are integrated and how they function together.

[Image and quote taken from the journal article: CEREBRAL EVOLUTION AND EMOTIONAL PROCESSES: NEW FINDINGS ON THE STRIATAL COMPLEX
Paul D. MacLean, Laboratory of Brain Evolution and Behavior,
National Institute of Mental Health
Bethesda, Maryland 20014]

As a result of my studies, it becomes clear that only the paleomammalian brain keeps us grounded in the body -- in the here and now (and with relational emotionality).

Here Paul MacLean in another article: "There are clinical and experimental indications that without the structures comprising the limbic system we could be like disembodied spirits." [MacLean 1958]. The limbic system, therefore, is responsible for keeping us "in the body" as ite were. both the Neomammalian brain and the limbic system alone would tend to operate in such a way as to give us a feeling of bodily detachment -- hence "shamanism".

Now, the way that Bataille talks in terms of his concept of "immanence" gives us the indication that he is descending one level below that indicated by de Beauvoir's same term. He is enjoying a disembodied experience --indeed, a fantastical one -- that has been facilitated by 'lizard brain'.

By contrast, de Beauvoir, in The Second Sex, complains of being locked up in the body, in the immanence of the here and now. This is clearly not a shamanistic immanence, but a state of confinement. (Exactly the opposite, in fact, to Bataille's "immancence" -- as hers is determined by the limbic system and therefore by bodily states.)

Let us not confuse these two types of "immanance" -- although the terminology is the same, what is being referred to is in fact very different!