Welcome, Guest

• Forgot your password?
• Apply for membership

1. •  
     CommentAuthorDanieru
   • CommentTimeJul 10th 2006

    permalink

   Certain disciplines of science—having endured the skeptical and even debunking attention of philosophy, history, gender studies, cultural studies and literary studies, not to mention "science studies"—have for some time been engaging in a quiet counteroffensive by making a series of little raids, each one limited in its scope and aspirations but potentially immense in the aggregate, on the one question above all that has been ruled off limits for them—the question of the human.
   
   This question is so large that it has not been approached directly even in the humanities disciplines, which have presumed rather than interrogated it. Each of the fundamental categories of humanistic research—history, philosophy and criticism of the arts—investigates a basic or elemental feature of human being. Philosophy is particularly interested in the limits of human autonomy, of the capacity for self-determination, self-awareness and self-regulation that is central to our conceptions of free will, reason, the capacity for self-regulation and moral accountability.
   
   [...]
   
   Aspects of the question of autonomy are being taken up not just by philosophers but by investigators in cognitive science, genomics, biochemistry and the technology of bioinformatics. In all these fields, the presumed autonomy of the free human subject is being interrogated and complicated. The presumption of singularity that informs history is also being pressed hard by those working in computational science, animal intelligence, genetic engineering and evolutionary biology, all of which are making it harder to speak in traditional ways about the splendid self-sufficiency of the human species.
   
   And creativity—the most splendid of all properties of human being, according to the humanities—is now being itself redefined by linguistics, cognitive science, neuroscience and even software development, which are assigning new meanings to this term, meanings that do not necessarily funnel back to the individual human being in a state of inspired frenzy.
   
   Autonomy, singularity, creativity—each of these terms names both a long-standing concern of the humanities and a set of contemporary projects being undertaken in the sciences.
   
   Many such projects—from the relatively familiar such as stem-cell research and the Human Genome Project to the more exotic, such as attempts to upload the component parts of consciousness into a computer, bioinformatics, and advanced nanotechnology—appear to have serious implications for our basic understanding of human being. These projects may well force us to modify our understanding of traditional moral and philosophical questions, including the definition of and value attached to such presumptively nonhuman concepts as "the animal" and "the machine."
   
   [...]
   
   We stand today at a critical juncture not just in the history of disciplines but of human self-understanding, one that presents remarkable and unprecedented opportunities for thinkers of all descriptions. A rich, deep and extended conversation between humanists and scientists on the question of the human could have implications well beyond the academy. It could result in the rejuvenation of many disciplines, and even in a reconfiguration of disciplines themselves—in short, a new golden age. - American Scientist

2. •  
     CommentAuthoridoru345
   • CommentTimeJul 10th 2006

    permalink
   Ah, this is very exciting.
   
   Over at another blog I've been participating in a lively debate about religion and spirituality. My position, which doesn't appear to be convincing anyone, is that our religous yearnings are a function of our biology and not a reliable echo of the nature of reality.
   
   Perhaps this investigation into the "question of the human" is the first step towards mapping how that might work.
3. •  
     CommentAuthorDanieru
   • CommentTimeJul 10th 2006

    permalink
   That is a fascinating question. Are all 'intelligent' species destined to believe in some sort of spiritual realm? or are human religious leanings merely indocative of our innate pattern finding mechanisms?
   
   I reckon that if humanity continues evolving our religious inclinations will become our main point of divergence. Imagine a future species of man which had no spiritual inner life, i.e. the world could be maintained as an awesome, meaningful entity without the invocation of any kind of God.
   
   I suppose this brings into question what the inner spiritual realm is composed of, a question your link seems to be in the process of addressing.