This contribution explores the concept of Human in Simone Weil, starting from the perspective
given by the theme of the Animal. The distinction between Human and Animal initiates a
series of reflections. The first one deals with the necessity of leaving the aspect of appropriation,
which is proper to the need, and instead having access to the transcendent dimension of
the desire. A further detachment from the notion of Animal takes place through the assumption
of affliction (malheur). The possibility to consent to malheur is the key not only to the ethical
sphere of compassion, but also to the cognitive faculty of attention. These successive passages
are summarized, in Weil's last writings, as a movement that goes beyond the person and
the community, towards the impersonal (impersonnel), perhaps the most original outcome of
Weilian anthropology.This contribution explores the concept of Human in Simone Weil, starting from the perspective
given by the theme of the Animal. The distinction between Human and Animal initiates a
series of reflections. The first one deals with the necessity of leaving the aspect of appropriation,
which is proper to the need, and instead having access to the transcendent dimension of
the desire. A further detachment from the notion of Animal takes place through the assumption
of affliction (malheur). The possibility to consent to malheur is the key not only to the ethical
sphere of compassion, but also to the cognitive faculty of attention. These successive passages
are summarized, in Weil's last writings, as a movement that goes beyond the person and
the community, towards the impersonal (impersonnel), perhaps the most original outcome of
Weilian anthropology.
