Les incertitudes du soi et la question du bon modèle théorique en immunologie

Abstract

L’immunologie a pris une importance croissante et décisive au cours du XXe siècle, non seulement au sein de la biologie, mais également dans l’ensemble de la société. Derrière les défis les plus pressants de l’immunologie, au premier rang desquels le sida ou le traitement des cancers, se profilent tous les enjeux médicaux d’aujourd’hui et de demain. Dans ces conditions, il peut paraître essentiel de disposer, en immunologie, de fondements théoriques solides, susceptibles d’orienter les recherches vers d’importantes et très attendues découvertes. Cependant, l’immunologie est aujourd’hui dans une situation d’interrogation sur elle-même : le modèle du soi, qui peut être considéré comme le fondement conceptuel de la discipline, est très critiqué, sans qu’aucune autre théorie n’ait réussi à cristalliser autour d’elle un consensus. Dès lors, plusieurs questions se posent : quels sont les principes et les origines du modèle du soi ? Ce modèle a-t-il échoué dans son objectif d’expliquer les observations disponibles en immunologie ? Une science aussi indispensable à nos sociétés peutelle se développer sans perspectives ni horizon théoriques ?

Theoretical immunology constitutes a critical basis of all medical discoveries. Immunology has been dominated since the 1940s by the self/nonself model. Here we try to shed light on the origins of this theoretical model and to show how and why this model has been called into question during the last thirty years. This paper has three aims. Firstly, we explore the sources of the immune self, going upstream from immunology to ecology-biology, psychology and eventually philosophy. Here the key questions : is the immune self really analogous with the philosophical and psychological selves in which it originates ? What is the signification and adequacy of such a conceptual borrowing ? We suggest that the « self » vocabulary in immunology is not clear and precise. Secondly, we present the experimental inadequacies of the self/nonself model. We show then how both the vagueness of the term « self » and these experimental flaws casted doubt on theories of immunology. Among the several models that have been proposed recently, none has attracted a consensus. Some immunologists have even suggested that immunology should rid itself of theorical concerns and concentrate on molecular aspects. This suggestion, however, is unacceptable; hence it is still necessary to find a theoretical framework for immunology. Finally, we try to suggest a way to escape this uncomfortable situation of doubt. The immune « self » and the immune « system » (« network ») are rooted in strong metaphysical conceptions of identity, the main characteristic of which is to consider the organism as an enclosed and self-constructing entity. By contrast, based on experimental data about immune tolerance and host-pathogen interactions, we propose to consider organisms as open entities. To what theory does this conception lead ? What would be the consequences of such a theory with regard to medical aspects ?