In this paper we inquire into the fundamental assumptions that underpin the ideal of the Bio-Based Economy as it is currently developed . By interpreting the BBE from the philosophical perspective on economy developed by Georges Bataille, we demonstrate how the BBE is fully premised on a thinking of scarcity. As a result, the BBE exclusively frames economic problems in terms of efficient production, endeavoring to exclude a thinking of abundance and wastefulness. Our hypothesis is that this not only entails (...) a number of internal tensions and inconsistencies with regard to the ideal of BBE, but ultimately undermines the ideal itself, by pushing purported regenerativity into a cataclysmic and terminal discharge. We here point to the strategies that the BBE employs in this exclusion, the fundamental assumptions regarding the relation between energy and economy that underpin this endeavor, as well as to the resulting inconsistencies and their catastrophic consequences. We finally argue for the introduction of the presently excluded question of abundance and wastefulness and explore the implications of such a question for the ideal of a zero-waste humanity. (shrink)

Attempts to ‘naturalize’ phenomenology challenge both traditional phenomenology and traditional approaches to cognitive science. They challenge Edmund Husserl’s rejection of naturalism and his attempt to establish phenomenology as a foundational transcendental discipline, and they challenge efforts to explain cognition through mainstream science. While appearing to be a retreat from the bold claims made for phenomenology, it is really its triumph. Naturalized phenomenology is spearheading a successful challenge to the heritage of Cartesian dualism. This converges with the reaction against Cartesian thought (...) within science itself. Descartes divided the universe between res cogitans, thinking substances, and res extensa, the mechanical world. The latter won with Newton and we have, in most of objective science since, literally lost our mind, hence our humanity. Despite Darwin, biologists remain children of Newton, and dream of a grand theory that is epistemologically complete and would allow lawful entailment of the evolution of the biosphere. This dream is no longer tenable. We now have to recognize that science and scientists are within and part of the world we are striving to comprehend, as proponents of endophysics have argued, and that physics, biology and mathematics have to be reconceived accordingly. Interpreting quantum mechanics from this perspective is shown to both illuminate conscious experience and reveal new paths for its further development. In biology we must now justify the use of the word “function”. As we shall see, we cannot prestate the ever new biological functions that arise and constitute the very phase space of evolution. Hence, we cannot mathematize the detailed becoming of the biosphere, nor write differential equations for functional variables we do not know ahead of time, nor integrate those equations, so no laws “entail” evolution. The dream of a grand theory fails. In place of entailing laws, a post-entailing law explanatory framework is proposed in which Actuals arise in evolution that constitute new boundary conditions that are enabling constraints that create new, typically unprestatable, Adjacent Possible opportunities for further evolution, in which new Actuals arise, in a persistent becoming. Evolution flows into a typically unprestatable succession of Adjacent Possibles. Given the concept of function, the concept of functional closure of an organism making a living in its world, becomes central. Implications for patterns in evolution include historical reconstruction, and statistical laws such as the distribution of extinction events, or species per genus, and the use of formal cause, not efficient cause, laws. (shrink)

The purpose of this document is to outline why and how universities must both transform and mobilise to avert the worst impacts of the global crises faced by humanity. The first section addresses the justification for transformation and how academia can and must transform. In the second section, the document highlights the need for a peaceful mobilisation of student and staff bodies to make effective the transformation advocated for. The document then outlines a blueprint as to action that must (...) be taken in order to initiate the required transformation and mobilisation. (2020). (shrink)

Spinoza is a hardcore realist about the nature of human beings and their desires, ambitions, and delusions. But he is neither a misanthrope nor in the business of glorifying the notion of a primal and innocent non-human nature. As he writes: Let the Satirists laugh as much as they like at human affairs, let the Theologians curse them, let Melancholics praise as much as they can a life that is uncultivated and wild, let them disdain men and admire the lower (...) animals. Men still find from experience that by helping one another they can provide themselves much more easily with the things they require, and that only by joining forces can they avoid the dangers that threaten on all sides. Indeed, Spinoza’s Ethics is a book whose aim is to lead us toward human blessedness and freedom. The question I will try to answer in the present study, then, is the following. Given his sober attempt to rid humanity of its self-aggrandizing illusions and to offer a naturalistic account of human nature, what does Spinoza see as the source of the value of humanity (if it has any)? In order to address the various aspects of this question, I will begin by examining the value of human friendship. Then, in the second part of the paper, I will consider the thorny question of whether Spinoza’s deflationary view of humanity’s status within nature allows for any notion of human dignity. In the third and final part, I will examine the value Spinoza ascribes to rationality, and the implications of this issue for his understanding of the value of humanity. (shrink)

In this article, I argue that there is no discrepancy between Kant's Doctrine of Right (The Metaphysics of Morals) (1797), which legally permits lies that do not deprive someone of their rights or property, and his On a Supposed Right to Lie from Love of Humanity (1797), which argues that it would be a crime to lie to a murderer about the whereabouts of the innocent person he is pursuing.

“Wild Wise Weird” is an extraordinary collection of short stories that offers a delightful window into Vietnamese culture through the quirky and thought-provoking adventures of Kingfisher, the clever protagonist from the bird village. Vuong Quan Hoang masterfully weaves humor, satire, and social commentary into tales that are both entertaining and deeply reflective.

The practice-independent approach to theorizing justice holds that the social practices to which a particular conception of justice is meant to apply are of no importance for the justification of such a conception. In this paper I argue that this approach to theorizing justice is incompatible with the method of reflective equilibrium because the MRE is antithetical to a clean separation between issues of justification and application. In particular I will be maintaining that this incompatibility renders Simon Caney’s cosmopolitan theory (...) of global justice inconsistent, because Caney claims to endorse both a humanity-centered PIA and the MRE. (shrink)

In 1984 the author published From Knowledge to Wisdom, a book that argued that a revolution in academia is urgently needed, so that problems of living, including global problems, are put at the heart of the enterprise, and the basic aim becomes to seek and promote wisdom, and not just acquire knowledge. Every discipline and aspect of academia needs to change, and the whole way in which academia is related to the rest of the social world. Universities devoted to the (...) pursuit of knowledge and technological know-how betray reason and, as a result, betray humanity. As a result of becoming more intellectually rigorous, academic inquiry becomes of far greater benefit to humanity. If the revolution argued for all those years ago had been taken up and put into academic practice, we might now live in a much more hopeful world than the one that confronts us. Humanity might have begun to learn how to solve global problems; the Amazon rain forests might not face destruction; we might not be faced with mass extinction of species; Brexit might not have been voted for in the UK in 2016, and Trump might not have been elected President in the USA. An account is given of work published by the author during the years 1972 to 2021 that expounds and develops the argument. The conclusion is that we urgently need to create a high-profile campaign devoted to transforming universities in the way required so that humanity may learn how to make social progress towards a better, wiser, more civilized, enlightened world. (shrink)

Over the course of the past several decades, Kant scholars have made significant headway in showing that emotions play a more significant role in Kant's ethics than has traditionally been assumed. Closer attention has been paid to the Metaphysics of Morals (MS) where Kant provides important insights about the value of moral sentiments and the role they should play in our lives. One particularly important discussion occurs in sections 34 and 35 of the Doctrine of Virtue where Kant claims we (...) have a duty to use sympathetic feelings "as a means of promoting active and rational benevolence" (MS 6:457). Kant labels this the "duty of humanity," and he suggests that nature has implanted sympathetic feelings in us "to do what the representation of duty alone might not accomplish" (ibid.). Commentators have rightly highlighted these remarks as prime evidence that feelings do play a positive role in Kant's ethics after all. (shrink)

Fred Polak’s futurology takes up where F. W. Schelling’s claims about the ‘modern mythology’ leaves off. Linking these, I argue Art and humanity’s joint meaning crisis originates in ‘symbolic idealism’, de-futurising both and crippling humanity’s attempts to develop a proper internal ‘narrative order of goods’ needed for our survival. Polak’s tracing of how various forms of Expressionism emerged from Impressionism in later modernism, transforming our images of reality and the future, vindicates Schelling’s earlier claims that our symbolic mode (...) of ‘worlding’ creates a materially positivistic idea of progress. And our modern repurposing of art has produced what Polak calls a disorienting ‘false and deluded realism’ partly responsible for the counter-utopian, post-humanist tendencies prevalent today in both the East and West. (shrink)

On the surface Kant himself seems quite clear about who is deserving of respect: The morally relevant others are all “rational, free beings” or all “human beings.” It is clear, however, that Kant does not want to identify “human beings” in this sense with members of a particular biological species, for he is explicitly open to the idea that there might be non-biologically human rational beings. Thus, for example he is explicitly open to the possibility of extraterrestrial rational beings, who (...) would not be members of the same biological species as us, but who would, presumably be worthy of respect. And it would seem possible that there are members of our biological species who are not “human” in the morally relevant sense. Given these facts, a Kantian needs to give some account of how we are to recognize who or what counts as “human” in the morally relevant sense. I argue that to be “human” in the morally relevant sense is to have the capacity for morality, and that this involves: (a) the capacity to recognize others as ends rather than merely as means and (b) the capacity to enter into relations of ethical community with us. I defend a position I name moral reliabilism. According to this position: (a) We have a quasi-perceptual capacity to directly ascribe moral status to various bits of the world around us. I will argue that this capacity is best thought of in Gibsonian terms as a capacity to pick up on certain types of social affordances; morally relevant others have the capacity to engage in ethical interaction with us, and recognizing the humanity of others involves picking up on this capacity. Those beings who are “human” in the morally relevant sense, then, afford interaction based on mutual respect. (b) We should assume as a postulate of practical reason that this capacity is reliable (although fallible). (shrink)

We are in a state of impending crisis. And the fault lies in part with academia. For two centuries or so, academia has been devoted to the pursuit of knowledge and technological know-how. This has enormously increased our power to act which has, in turn, brought us both all the great benefits of the modern world and the crises we now face. Modern science and technology have made possible modern industry and agriculture, the explosive growth of the world’s population, global (...) warming, modern armaments and the lethal character of modern warfare, destruction of natural habitats and rapid extinction of species, immense inequalities of wealth and power across the globe, pollution of earth, sea and air, even the aids epidemic (aids being spread by modern travel). All these global problems have arisen because some of us have acquired unprecedented powers to act, via science and technology, without also acquiring the capacity to act wisely. We urgently need to bring about a revolution in universities so that the basic intellectual aim becomes, not knowledge merely, but rather wisdom – wisdom being the capacity to realize what is of value in life, for oneself and others, thus including knowledge and technological know-how, but much else besides. (shrink)

长期以来，中国学术界流行把儒家的基本思想乃至整个中国文化归结为“天人合一”，并常常把“天人合一” 的源头归结于《易经》。其实考诸中国思想史，把儒家的基本思想总结为“天人合一”，特别是把“天人合一” 的来源归结于《易经》的说法并不准确，是一种误导。《易经》的“天、地、人”三才思想较之于“天人合一”更为符合儒家思想的本旨。在儒家三才和谐的理念中，天、地、人三者各自都有自身的功能与价值。身为三才和谐结 构中的积极参与者，人类拥有促进与维持宇宙和谐的重要责任。就环境哲学而言，儒家的“三才”说既不是“环境保护主义”，也不是“自然保护主义”，而且相对于大地伦理学与深层生态学等西方的整体性环境哲学而言，儒家 整体性的环境哲学赋予人类在宇宙间以一个更崇高的地位和责任。 .

Recently criticisms against autonomous weapons were presented in a video in which an AI-powered drone kills a person. However, some said that this video is a distraction from the real risk of AI—the risk of unlimitedly self-improving AI systems. In this article, we analyze arguments from both sides and turn them into conditions. The following conditions are identified as leading to autonomous weapons becoming a global catastrophic risk: 1) Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) development is delayed relative to progress in narrow (...) AI and manufacturing. 2) The potential for very cheap manufacture of drones, with prices below 1 USD each. 3) Anti-drone defense capabilities lagging offensive development. 4) Special global military posture encouraging development of drone swarms as a strategic offensive weapon, able to kill civilians. We conclude that while it is unlikely that drone swarms alone will become existential risk, lethal autonomous weapons could contribute to civilizational collapse in case of new world war. (shrink)

The Philosophical Forum, Volume 53, Issue 1, Page 47-61, Spring 2022.

Many global catastrophic risks are threatening human civilization, and a number of ideas have been suggested for preventing or surviving them. However, if these interventions fail, society could preserve information about the human race and human DNA samples in the hopes that the next civilization on Earth will be able to reconstruct Homo sapiens and our culture. This requires information preservation of an order of magnitude of 100 million years, a little-explored topic thus far. It is important that a potential (...) future civilization will discover this information as early as possible, thus a beacon should accompany the message in order to increase visibility. The message should ideally contain information about how humanity was destroyed, perhaps including a continuous recording until the end. This could help the potential future civilization to survive. The best place for long-term data storage is under the surface of the Moon, with the beacon constructed as a complex geometric figure drawn by small craters or trenches around a central point. There are several cost-effective options for sending the message as opportunistic payloads on different planned landers. (shrink)

Values are an important part of human existence, his society and human relations. All social, economic, political, and religious problems are in one sense is reflection of this special abstraction of human knowledge. We are living in a globalized village and thinking much about values rather than practice of it. If we define religion and spirituality we can say that religion is a set of beliefs and rituals that claim to get a person in a right relationship with God, and (...) spirituality is a focus on spiritual things and the spiritual world instead of physical/earthly things. If we think rationally we can find the major evils related to religion exiting in present society are due to lack of proper understanding of religion and spirituality. If we really know our own religions and values associated with it, we can create a beautiful world, full or love and respect for each and every human being. The proper knowledge and practice of any religion’s values can make an integrated man. In the book, The Buddha and His Dhamma, Dr. Ambedkar elucidated the significance and importance of Dhamma in human life. The Dhamma maintained purity of life, which meant abstains from lustful, evil practices. The Dhamma is a perfection of life and giving up craving. Dhamma’s righteousness means right relation of man to man in all sphere of life. The basic idea underlying religion is to create an atmosphere for the spiritual development of the individual. He said that Knowing the proper ways and means is more important than knowing the ideal. The major objective of this paper is to the study the religious philosophy of Dr. B.R. Ambedkar and to study how he established that religious and spiritual values enables religious people in particular and humanity at large to solve contemporary problems. (shrink)

If a future AI system can enjoy far more well-being than a human per resource, what would be the best way to allocate resources between these future AI and our future descendants? It is obvious that on total utilitarianism, one should give everything to the AI. However, it turns out that every Welfarist axiology on the market also gives this same recommendation, at least if we assume consequentialism. Without resorting to non-consequentialist normative theories that suggest that we ought not always (...) create the world with the most value, or non-welfarist theories that tell us that the best world may not be the world with the most welfare, I propose a new theory that justifies giving some resources to humanity in the face of overwhelming AI well-being. I call this new theory, “Group Prioritarianism". (shrink)

Nietzsche and Shaw are famous and infamous: famous for their innovative and influential forms of writing, but infamous for their apparent support of totalitarianism and Nazism. However, while it has long been shown that Nietzsche’s provocative language about “breeding” and “masters and slaves” was intended to enhance culture through competition, it is still an open question how and when Shaw supported biological eugenics. Via Nietzsche’s “philosophical breeding,” this article presents a new reading of Shaw’s Man and Superman: on the one (...) hand, it contrasts Nietzsche’s philosophical Übermensch with Shaw’s eugenic Superman; and on the other hand, it connects Nietzsche’s agonistic enhancement of culture with Shaw’s philosophical reflections in “Don Juan in Hell.” In contrast to Tanner’s support of eugenic breeding in his Revolutionist’s Handbook, Shaw’s Don Juan remarkably resembles Nietzsche’s notion of “philosophical breeding” toward a more competent, truthful, and autonomous orientation that is needed in increasingly complex global politics. (shrink)

This chapter constructs the argument that corporate and political policies known to accelerate anthropogenic global warming, and subsequent climate change, constitute crimes against humanity—predicated on failures to avoid reasonably foreseeable threats to sustained human existence. Given the moral gravity of crimes against humanity it follows that financial divestment is ethically obligatory for institutions wishing to avoid moral association. The moral case for fossil fuel divestment, in the wake of such crimes, derives from (a) the ethical implications of negative (...) responsibility, or what constitutes culpability by omission; (b) institutional collaboration based upon immediate financial interests tied to climate inaction; and (c) institutional complicity derived from financial support of corporate behaviors that hasten global warming. Possible objections are examined and refuted. (shrink)

A bad philosophy of inquiry, built into the intellectual/institutional structure of universities round the world, betrays both reason and humanity.

-/- The Path to a Type III Civilization: The Future of Humanity in the Kardashev Scale -/- The Kardashev scale, formulated by Russian astrophysicist Nikolai Kardashev in 1964, is a theoretical framework used to measure the technological advancement of civilizations based on their energy consumption capabilities. The scale categorizes civilizations into three types: Type I, Type II, and Type III, with each level representing a civilization’s ability to harness and control energy at increasing scales—planetary, stellar, and galactic, respectively. As (...) humanity stands on the precipice of major technological advancements, the question arises: how long will it take us to reach a Type III civilization? To explore this, we must examine the current state of human progress, the technological leaps required, and the challenges that may shape our future. -/- The Current State: Humanity’s Struggle Toward Type I -/- At present, humanity resides at approximately 0.7 on the Kardashev scale. This means that while we are capable of harnessing significant energy from our planet (such as through fossil fuels, nuclear power, and renewable resources), we have yet to fully control all the energy available to us on Earth. This transition from our current state to Type I, the stage where we can manage all of Earth’s resources and energy, is a monumental task that requires us to shift towards more sustainable energy sources, avoid environmental degradation, and overcome challenges such as poverty and inequality. -/- Optimistic projections suggest that humanity could reach Type I within the next 100 to 200 years, provided we make substantial progress in renewable energy technologies, space exploration, and societal cooperation. This leap, while significant, is merely the beginning of a much longer journey. Once we reach Type I, we will have to evolve into a Type II civilization, one capable of harnessing the energy of its own star. -/- The Leap to Type II: Mastering Stellar Energy -/- A Type II civilization is defined as one that can control the energy output of its entire star. The most well-known theoretical concept for achieving this is the Dyson Sphere, a hypothetical structure that could surround a star and capture its energy for use by an advanced civilization. Moving from Type I to Type II will require breakthroughs in engineering, energy storage, and space exploration that we have yet to achieve. Additionally, humanity will need to solve the problems of interstellar travel, long-term sustainability, and the colonization of other planets or moons. -/- Reaching Type II would likely take humanity several hundred thousand to several million years, depending on the pace of technological innovation and space exploration. Key challenges include overcoming the enormous distances between stars, building megastructures like Dyson Spheres, and ensuring the survival of humanity while expanding across multiple solar systems. While Type II remains a far-off goal, some futurists argue that we may be able to take small steps toward this stage as we develop space-faring technologies. -/- The Ultimate Goal: Type III Civilization -/- A Type III civilization represents the pinnacle of energy control—one that can harness and utilize the energy of an entire galaxy. This level of technological sophistication would require humanity to master not only stellar energy but also galactic-scale power systems. Achieving this would involve interstellar travel, the colonization of distant star systems, and possibly the creation of entirely new forms of life and governance. The shift from Type II to Type III is, without a doubt, the most profound leap on the Kardashev scale, involving technologies and energy sources far beyond our current understanding. -/- Reaching Type III would require an incredibly long period, with estimates ranging from several million to hundreds of millions of years, depending on how quickly humanity advances technologically and whether we overcome the existential threats that could potentially derail our progress. To reach this level, we would need to perfect not only energy control but also technologies that allow us to manipulate space-time, develop advanced artificial intelligence, and perhaps even overcome the limitations of biology itself. -/- The Challenges Along the Way -/- While the potential for reaching a Type III civilization is tantalizing, humanity faces numerous obstacles along the way. Environmental degradation, climate change, and resource scarcity are significant barriers that could slow our progress or even cause civilization-wide setbacks. Additionally, political, social, and economic challenges—such as warfare, inequality, and the potential for catastrophic global conflicts—could delay or prevent the development of the technologies needed for such an advanced civilization. -/- Technological breakthroughs, such as fusion energy, quantum computing, and space colonization, will be crucial in overcoming these obstacles. However, it is not guaranteed that humanity will make these advancements in time, and there is always the possibility of existential threats that could set back our progress. The delicate balance between technological development and environmental sustainability will be key to ensuring humanity’s survival and its eventual ascension to higher Kardashev scale levels. -/- Optimistic and Pessimistic Scenarios -/- The timeline for reaching Type III depends heavily on the trajectory humanity chooses to follow. In an optimistic scenario, where we successfully manage our resources, collaborate across borders, and focus on sustainable technologies, humanity could make significant strides in the next few centuries and millennia. If we manage to overcome our current environmental and geopolitical crises, a Type II civilization could emerge within a few hundred thousand years, followed by Type III within a few million years. -/- However, in a more pessimistic scenario, where global conflicts, environmental disasters, and technological stagnation slow our progress, humanity could struggle to reach Type I, let alone Type III. Such setbacks could delay our progress for millions of years, if not indefinitely. -/- Conclusion: The Infinite Horizon -/- Ultimately, the journey toward a Type III civilization is a long, uncertain, and challenging one. While humanity has the potential to reach this advanced state, the path is fraught with obstacles, both natural and self-inflicted. It could take anywhere from several million to hundreds of millions of years to achieve a Type III civilization, depending on how quickly we resolve global issues, develop space technologies, and master energy control. -/- The Kardashev scale provides a fascinating framework for imagining humanity’s future, but it also serves as a reminder that technological advancement is not linear. The fate of humanity is intertwined with the choices we make today, and our ability to harness the energy of the future will depend on how we navigate the challenges and opportunities of the present. Only time will tell if we can rise to the monumental challenge of becoming a Type III civilization, but it is clear that our journey is only beginning. -/- . (shrink)

Beyond Capitalism: Designing a New Economic System for Humanity -/- Introduction -/- For centuries, capitalism has been the dominant economic system, driving technological innovation, wealth creation, and global trade. However, its flaws—extreme inequality, environmental destruction, and economic instability—have made many question whether it is still the best model for humanity. Instead of reforming capitalism, perhaps the time has come to replace it entirely with a new system that better aligns with modern challenges, human well-being, and sustainability. -/- This (...) essay explores a new economic model that moves beyond capitalism and socialism, aiming for a system that is fair, sustainable, and technologically advanced. -/- Why Capitalism Must Be Replaced -/- Capitalism’s fundamental flaws make it unsustainable in the long run: -/- 1. Wealth Inequality and Economic Injustice -/- The richest 1% own more than half of the world’s wealth, while billions struggle in poverty. -/- The capitalist system prioritizes profits over people, leading to worker exploitation and economic instability. -/- 2. Environmental Collapse -/- Capitalism’s endless growth model is destroying the planet through deforestation, pollution, and climate change. -/- Corporations prioritize short-term profits over long-term sustainability. -/- 3. Automation and AI Disrupting Jobs -/- Millions of jobs are being replaced by artificial intelligence and automation. -/- The capitalist system does not account for a future where human labor is no longer essential. -/- 4. Psychological and Social Problems -/- Consumerism creates stress, anxiety, and social isolation by equating happiness with material wealth. -/- The fear of financial instability keeps people trapped in low-quality jobs and debt cycles. -/- Given these issues, capitalism is no longer fit for the future. A completely new economic system must be built—one that values sustainability, equality, and technology-driven efficiency. -/- Introducing a New Economic System: The Post-Capitalist Model -/- A new economic model must prioritize human well-being, technological efficiency, and ecological balance over profit. Below is a blueprint for a post-capitalist society. -/- 1. A Resource-Based Economy (RBE) -/- A Resource-Based Economy (RBE) is an economic model where all goods and services are freely available based on need, rather than money or trade. -/- Technology and AI manage resources efficiently, eliminating the need for money. -/- Automation handles labor, allowing people to pursue education, research, and creativity. -/- No private ownership of land or resources, only shared community access based on sustainability. -/- 2. Universal Basic Infrastructure (UBI 2.0) -/- Instead of just giving people money (UBI), a new system would provide universal basic needs, including: -/- Free housing, healthcare, education, food, and clean energy for all. -/- Advanced AI-driven logistics to distribute goods and services efficiently. -/- 3. Decentralized AI Governance -/- Rather than governments being controlled by corporations or corrupt politicians, AI and collective intelligence could ensure fair and transparent decision-making. -/- AI algorithms could optimize resource distribution, prevent waste, and eliminate financial corruption. -/- Direct democratic participation, where people vote on policies using secure blockchain systems. -/- 4. Sustainable, Circular Economy -/- Zero waste policies, where everything is recycled, reused, or repurposed. -/- Focus on degrowth—reducing unnecessary production while increasing quality of life. -/- Energy-efficient smart cities, where transportation, housing, and food production are automated. -/- 5. Post-Work Society: Emphasizing Purpose Over Jobs -/- In a post-capitalist economy, people would not be forced to work meaningless jobs just to survive. Instead: -/- People could focus on science, philosophy, arts, personal growth, and social well-being. -/- Education would be lifelong and freely available. -/- AI and robots would handle most labor, leaving humans free to explore their full potential. -/- How This System Would Solve Capitalism’s Problems -/- Challenges in Transitioning to a Post-Capitalist Economy -/- While this system solves capitalism’s biggest problems, transitioning away from capitalism would face major challenges: -/- 1. Resistance from the Wealthy Elite -/- Billionaires and corporations control most of the world’s resources and political systems. -/- They would fight to maintain power, delaying or sabotaging systemic change. -/- 2. Psychological and Cultural Shifts -/- People have been conditioned to associate money with survival and success. -/- A new system would require re-educating society on cooperation, sustainability, and shared abundance. -/- 3. Technology and Infrastructure Development -/- Large-scale AI, automation, and sustainable energy infrastructure would need global investment. -/- Governments and private companies must be convinced to prioritize long-term sustainability over short-term profit. -/- The Path Forward: Steps to Build a Post-Capitalist World -/- While the transition will not happen overnight, we can begin moving toward a post-capitalist future by taking the following steps: -/- 1. Implement Universal Basic Income (UBI) Now -/- Governments can start by providing a safety net while transitioning to a money-free economy. -/- Countries like Finland and Canada are already experimenting with UBI programs. -/- 2. Expand AI and Automation for Public Good -/- AI should be used to reduce labor burdens, not to enrich corporations. -/- Governments should invest in open-source AI that benefits all of society. -/- 3. Develop Smart Cities and Circular Economies -/- Cities should be designed for zero waste, renewable energy, and efficient transportation. -/- Governments must ban planned obsolescence and require full recycling of consumer products. -/- 4. Decentralize Power Using Blockchain and Direct Democracy -/- Blockchain voting systems can eliminate election fraud and political corruption. -/- AI-assisted governance can help make fair, data-driven policy decisions. -/- 5. Redefine Education and Human Purpose -/- Schools should move away from job training and focus on creativity, science, philosophy, and social intelligence. -/- Societies should emphasize happiness, purpose, and sustainability over financial success. -/- Conclusion: A New Civilization Beyond Capitalism -/- Capitalism was a necessary stage in human evolution, but it has outlived its usefulness. The future demands a system that is more intelligent, just, and sustainable—one where: ✅ No one is forced to work just to survive. ✅ Resources are managed intelligently, not wasted for profit. ✅ Technology is used for human well-being, not corporate greed. ✅ The planet is protected, not exploited. -/- This is not utopian fantasy—it is a logical step forward in human evolution. By combining AI, automation, decentralized governance, and sustainability, we can create a post-capitalist society where everyone thrives. -/- The question Is no longer “Should we replace capitalism?” The question is: “How soon can we build a better system before capitalism destroys us all?” -/- . (shrink)

Kant's formulae ought to effectively produce the same result when applied to the moral validity of any particular maxim; further, no valid maxim produces contradictory results when applied against Kant's Universal Law and Humanity formulae. Where one uses all formulae in the assessment of a maxim, one gains a more complete understanding of the moral law, thereby bridging principles of reason with intuition within the agent who has undertaken to evaluate the morality of a particular action. These formulae command (...) without regard to any particular interests, but are instead unconditional; further, these formulae effectively limit choice of action and therefore give rise to duty. Kant implies that the structure of all maxims requires different formulae of the same moral law, i.e., all maxims have a ‘form’ and a ‘matter’, which prompt reconfiguring of the categorical imperative into different formulae in order to test the morality of a maxim. (shrink)

Astrobiocentrism is a vision that places us in a scenario of confirmation of life in the universe, either as a second genesis or as an expansion of humanity in space. It manages to raise consistent arguments in relation to questions such as what would happen to knowledge if life were confirmed in the universe, how would this change the way we understand our place in the cosmos? Astrobiocentrism raises a series of reflections in the context of confirmed discovery, and (...) it develops concepts that work directly with what would happen after irrefutable evidence has been obtained that we are not alone in space. Unlike biocentrism or ecocentrism, the astrobiocentric view is not limited to the Earth-centric perspective, and for it incorporates a multi-, inter- and transdisciplinary understanding. Therefore, the aim of this paper is to make a reflection on the astrobiocentric issues related to the challenges and problems of the discovery of life in the universe and the expansion of mankind into space. Here we explore some aspects of the transition from biogeocentrism to astrobiocentrism, astrobiosemiotics, homo mensura, moral community, planetary sustainability and astrotheology. (shrink)

Why Colonizing Mars is Essential for Humanity -/- Introduction -/- Since the dawn of civilization, humanity has been driven by exploration and the pursuit of knowledge. Today, as we face global challenges such as climate change, overpopulation, and resource depletion, the need for expansion beyond Earth has never been more urgent. Mars, our closest planetary neighbor, presents the best opportunity for human colonization. Establishing a permanent human presence on Mars is not merely a dream of science fiction—it is (...) a necessity for the long-term survival and advancement of our species. -/- The Need for a Planetary Backup -/- Throughout history, Earth has faced existential threats, from asteroid impacts to supervolcanic eruptions. Modern threats, such as nuclear war, climate change, and pandemics, further highlight the fragility of our civilization. A self-sustaining colony on Mars would serve as a backup for humanity, ensuring that life continues even in the face of catastrophe. Just as ancient civilizations migrated to new lands for survival, humans must now look beyond Earth to secure our future. -/- Advancing Scientific Knowledge -/- Mars offers a unique opportunity to expand our scientific understanding of the universe. Studying its geology, climate, and atmosphere can help scientists uncover the history of our solar system. Additionally, the search for microbial life on Mars could provide answers to one of humanity’s greatest questions: Are we alone in the universe? The discoveries made on Mars could reshape our understanding of life itself and provide insights into the potential habitability of other planets. -/- Technological Innovation -/- The challenges of colonizing Mars will drive technological advancements that will benefit humanity as a whole. To establish a sustainable colony, scientists and engineers must develop new solutions for life support, energy production, water recycling, and food cultivation in extreme environments. These innovations could lead to breakthroughs in renewable energy, artificial intelligence, and robotics, with applications that improve life on Earth. Just as the space race of the 20th century accelerated technological progress, the push for Mars colonization could usher in a new era of scientific and engineering advancements. -/- Resource Utilization and Economic Opportunities -/- Mars has vast natural resources that could support a self-sustaining colony. Water, in the form of ice, could be extracted and used for drinking, farming, and fuel production. The planet’s atmosphere, rich in carbon dioxide, could be converted into oxygen and fuel for spacecraft. In the long term, mining operations on Mars could provide valuable metals and minerals, reducing dependence on Earth’s limited resources. The economic potential of Mars colonization could lead to new industries, job opportunities, and even interplanetary trade. -/- Inspiring Future Generations and Unifying Humanity -/- The Apollo Moon landings of the 20th century inspired generations of scientists, engineers, and explorers. A successful Mars colonization effort would be an even greater achievement, proving that humanity is capable of overcoming immense challenges. Furthermore, such a mission would require international collaboration, bringing together countries, scientists, and private industries in a shared vision for the future. A united effort to colonize Mars could serve as a powerful symbol of human cooperation and ingenuity. -/- Challenges and Solutions -/- Despite its potential, colonizing Mars presents significant challenges. The planet’s harsh environment, with extreme cold, high radiation levels, and a thin atmosphere, makes survival difficult. Transporting humans and supplies across millions of kilometers is costly and time-consuming, requiring months of space travel. Furthermore, maintaining a sustainable food and water supply on Mars is a complex problem that must be solved. -/- However, advancements in space travel, such as reusable rockets and nuclear propulsion, are making Mars missions more feasible. Scientists are developing innovative life support systems, underground habitats for radiation protection, and sustainable farming techniques for food production. With continued research and investment, these obstacles can be overcome, making a permanent human settlement on Mars a reality. -/- Mars as a Stepping Stone for Deep Space Exploration -/- Beyond Mars, humanity’s future may lie among the stars. Colonizing Mars is not just about securing a second home—it is about preparing for the next great leap in space exploration. A successful Mars colony could serve as a launchpad for missions to the outer planets, the asteroid belt, and even interstellar space. By proving that humans can survive and thrive beyond Earth, Mars colonization would open the door to exploring and settling the broader universe. -/- Conclusion -/- Colonizing Mars is not a luxury or a distant fantasy—it is a crucial step for the survival and progress of humanity. By establishing a presence on Mars, we can protect our species from existential threats, expand our scientific knowledge, drive technological innovation, and unlock economic opportunities. Although challenges remain, human ingenuity and determination have always pushed us to overcome obstacles. The journey to Mars will be difficult, but it is a necessary step in ensuring that humanity continues to thrive, not just on Earth, but among the stars. The question is no longer whether we should go to Mars, but how soon we can make it happen. -/- . (shrink)

This is a series of eight Gujarati articles published in Navajivan. They were then translated by Mahadev Desai into English and published in Young India. They provide a statement of Gandhi's "progressive ahimsaist" animal ethics, which retains ahimsa as a guiding ideal while recognizing circumstances in which violence is required by a duty of care to oneself or to others.

Artificial intelligence (AI) has transformed the way people engage with politics around the world: how citizens consume news, how they view the institutions and norms, how civic groups mobilize public interests, how data-driven campaigns are shaping elections, and so on (Ho & Vuong, 2024). Placing people at the center of the increasingly AI-mediated political landscape has become an urgent matter that transcends all forms of institutions. In this essay, we argue that, in this era, it is necessary to look beyond (...) certain limited notions of democracy and broaden our views of what it means to put people at the heart of political governance. Thus, we introduce some key features of a very, if not the most important concept, in East Asian political culture, ‘people as roots (of the state)’ or (dân bản in Vietnamese and 民本 in Chinese) . We propose that a more culturally sensitive analysis, which takes into account the diverse interpretations of people-centeredness within different political cultures, can provide valuable insights for researchers and leaders worldwide. Indeed, as the sociologist Shmuel Eisenstadt succinctly puts, modernity does not and should not correspond to Westernization. (shrink)

Does the Big History of life on Earth disclose a trajectory that has been driven by selection? If so, will the trajectory continue to apply into the future? This paper argues that such a trajectory exists, and examines some of its key implications. The most important consequence is that humanity can use the trajectory to guide how it evolves and adapts into the future. This is because the trajectory identifies a sequence of adaptations that will be favoured by selection. (...) If humanity intentionally evolves its social systems and psychological capacities so that they follow the trajectory, humanity can avoid negative selection and instead survive and thrive indefinitely into the future. This would enable humanity to make a positive contribution to the future evolution of life in the universe. But it turns out that immediate selection will not drive the evolution of life on Earth further along this trajectory. Instead, intentional action by humanity is necessary. It is as if the evolution of life on any planet is a developmental process that has a very unusual characteristic: evolution will continue to develop successfully beyond a certain point only if it produces a sentient organism that: (i) awakens to the possibility it is embedded in a developing process; (ii) realizes that this developing process will continue successfully only if it chooses to intentionally drive the process forward; and (iii) commits to doing whatever is necessary to achieve this. On this planet, humanity is that sentient organism. The existence of such a key evolutionary role for humanity is capable of providing humanity with meaning and purpose in a larger scheme of things. For individuals who commit to driving the process forward, the nature of the trajectory has immediate consequences for what they should do with their lives, here and now. (shrink)

In this chapter, I contend that Nietzsche’s robust critiques of human exceptionalism and the “humanization of nature [Vermenschlichung der Natur]”, as well as his positive, proto-ecocentric vision of the “naturalization of humanity [Vernatürlichung des Menschen]”, afford contemporary environmental philosophy a novel perspective from which to critique anthropocentric conservation ideologies (according to which nature conservation ought to be motivated by the interests and aims of humanity, especially economic development and prosperity). Importantly, I also argue that Thus Spoke Zarathustra is (...) the work in which Nietzsche’s positive vision appears most conspicuously, as suggested by Zarathustra’s relationship to the natural world and exhortations to “remain faithful to the earth.” -/- As Nietzsche’s critique of anthropocentrism reinforces his positive project, I will begin by detailing Nietzsche’s rejection of human exceptionalism (section 1). In addition, I will analyze Nietzsche’s critique of the “humanization of nature” (KSA 10:10[43]; 10:13[20]; 12:1[29]), emphasizing specific pernicious projections of human values onto the other-than-human world. Although these themes appear throughout Nietzsche’s body of work, they are central to Zarathustra. -/- After describing Nietzsche’s critical project, I present his positive, proto-ecocentric vision for humanity’s re-naturalization, one he most emphatically endorses and fleshes out in Zarathustra (section 2). This positive vision can be found in his calls for the human being to become more natural and to cultivate a noble reverence and gratitude for the natural world so that we may learn from it about ourselves—rather than falsifying it for our ends and then insisting that we are part of this other, falsified nature. Only when we can see ourselves as natural beings—specifically, as living beings willing power, embedded in a world with other living beings who do the same—can we identify tasks and pursue aims that empower and strengthen us. In Nietzsche’s view, this recognition results only from an attunement to the other-than-human world. Finally, after adding a few important caveats to proto-ecocentric strains in Nietzsche’s thought, I briefly explain the contributions his thought might make to contemporary environmental philosophy and policy (section 3). (shrink)

The aim of this paper is to analyze a selection of arguments used by the Argentine Supreme Court to reduce the sentence of individuals convicted of crimes against humanity. The focus will be primarily centered on “Muiña´s case”, in which a lenient outdated ruling was made. The questions that this work will try to answer revolve around the court´s merit in issuing this lenient ruling to Muiña´s case and its justification. First, Muiña´s case is analyzed in depth. Then, a (...) critical analysis about the ruling and a decision concerning the existence of a true justification will be developed. Finally, we will discuss the appropriateness of the Court’s decision in Muiña´s case as opposed to the decision made in “Batalla´s case”, in which a less beneficial law was applied retroactively. (shrink)

-/- Enlightened Leadership and the Universal Law of Balance: Who Must Guide Humanity? By Angelito Malicse -/- In a world facing unprecedented challenges—from climate change and technological disruption to moral confusion and political polarization—the question of who must guide humanity has become more urgent than ever. Different sectors of society have long claimed influence over the direction of civilization: philosophers shape ethics, scientists uncover truth, entrepreneurs build economies, and political leaders determine governance. Yet among all these, who bears (...) the ultimate responsibility for ensuring humanity’s survival, harmony, and prosperity? -/- This essay argues that no single group alone is fully equipped to lead humanity. Instead, it is those individuals—regardless of profession—who understand and apply the universal law of balance in nature that are most responsible for guiding society. These individuals exemplify a new standard I call Enlightened Leadership, which must be cultivated and institutionalized through a transformative educational approach. -/- To begin with, each societal figure plays a vital role. Philosophers and thinkers give society its moral compass. They help us reflect on what is just, meaningful, and good. But while their insights offer direction, they must be connected to real-world systems and empirical knowledge to create actionable guidance. -/- Scientists and mathematicians, on the other hand, provide us with evidence-based understanding of the universe. Their work drives the progress of medicine, engineering, communication, and environmental science. Yet without ethical grounding, scientific advancement can be misused or exploited, resulting in greater harm than good. -/- Inventors and engineers are the bridge between knowledge and application. They turn abstract concepts into physical tools that shape our world. Their responsibility is great, for what they create directly affects our quality of life. Their work must align with the natural limits and sustainable practices of our planet. -/- Wealthy entrepreneurs, too, wield extraordinary power. Their investments and innovations shape markets, technologies, and even the structure of global society. But when driven solely by profit, their decisions often lead to social inequity and environmental destruction. Their wealth grants them influence, but it must be used for the common good. -/- Among these key players, political leaders perhaps hold the most decisive influence. They are entrusted with governing laws, allocating national resources, negotiating peace, and setting the moral tone of entire populations. Yet all too often, political decisions are made without alignment to natural law or long-term sustainability. Instead, they reflect partisanship, corruption, or ideology divorced from reality. Political leaders must therefore be redefined: no longer as rulers or partisans, but as guardians of balance, serving both people and planet. -/- Here, the central concept emerges: the universal law of balance in nature. This law teaches that all systems—whether ecological, technological, or human—function optimally when in equilibrium. When balance is broken, systems deteriorate, fail, or collapse. This law is not philosophical speculation; it is observable in every aspect of life. A healthy body, a functioning machine, a stable climate, or a peaceful society all require balance. -/- It follows that leaders—regardless of their title—must make decisions that respect and preserve balance. This is the foundation of Enlightened Leadership. Such leaders do not act from ego, ideology, or ignorance. They act from awareness, humility, and deep alignment with truth and nature. They are not defined by their position but by their ability to maintain balance in every decision they make. -/- What does an Enlightened Leader look like? They understand the interdependence between people and the environment. They use science to guide policy, ethics to guide economics, and education to empower others. They are incorruptible because they see beyond short-term gain. They are decisive, yet thoughtful. They are strong, yet humble. They may be scientists, philosophers, political leaders, or entrepreneurs—but what unites them is their unwavering adherence to the law of balance. -/- To produce such leaders, we must reform our educational systems. Education must teach not only facts and skills but also how systems work, how nature maintains order, and how moral decisions are made. This includes teaching systems thinking, natural law, ethics, environmental awareness, and global responsibility. It also means freeing education from ideological and religious dogma that confuses or limits the understanding of universal truth. It must be holistic, grounded in critical thinking, and universally applied. -/- In conclusion, humanity’s future depends on our ability to recognize and cultivate Enlightened Leadership. Not every philosopher, scientist, politician, or entrepreneur will lead wisely. Only those who embody the law of balance in nature—and act in alignment with it—can guide us toward sustainable peace, well-being, and collective evolution. It is they who are most responsible. It is they who must rise. -/- . (shrink)

Evolution's Arrow argues that evolution is directional and progressive, and that this has major consequences for humanity. Without resort to teleology, the book demonstrates that evolution moves in the direction of producing cooperative organisations of greater scale and evolvability - evolution has organised molecular processes into cells, cells into organisms, and organisms into societies. The book founds this position on a new theory of the evolution of cooperation. It shows that self-interest at the level of the genes does not (...) prevent cooperation from increasing as evolution unfolds. Evolution progresses by discovering ways to build cooperative organisations out of self-interested individuals. The book also shows that evolution itself has evolved. Evolution has progressively improved the ability of evolutionary mechanisms to discover effective adaptations. And it has produced new and better mechanisms. Evolution's Arrow uses this understanding of the direction of evolution to identify the next great steps in the evolution of life on earth - the steps that humanity must take if we are to continue to be successful in evolutionary terms. A key step for humanity is to increase the scale and evolvability of our societies, eventually forming a unified and cooperative society on the scale of the planet. We must also transform ourselves psychologically to become self-evolving organisms - organisms that are able to escape their biological and cultural past by adapting in whatever directions are necessary to achieve future evolutionary success. (shrink)

This article explains Muhammad Iqbal’s ethics of reverence for humanity and determines how it fits with Islamic ethics. The cardinal goal of Islamic ethics is reverence for humanity. The Arabic expression ‘Islam’ means ‘peace’. The cardinal claim of Islamic ethics is that human beings deserve reverence because they are created with the best conformation. The Arabic phrase Ahsan al-Taqweem refers to the best conformation, which means a wide range of unique physical, metaphysical, moral, aesthetic and cognitive potentials. From (...) a broader perspective, Islamic ethics foster reverence for humanity based on three primary moral and political values: equality, freedom, and fraternity. Drawing on the Islamic tradition, Iqbal argues that all human beings are worthy of reverence irrespective of their racial, cultural, religious, or linguistic disparities because of their distinctive potentials, such as creativity, freedom, and knowledge. These potentials are preordained in human beings by birth. To develop these potentials, Iqbal posits his theory of egohood which fosters unique individuality. Under certain conditions, such as individual-society relationships, freedom, equality, and fraternity, Iqbal insists on developing these potentials to acquire the status of a perfect human. According to Iqbal, a perfect human is a God’s vicegerent on earth, who collaborates with Him in creation. Iqbal’s ethics of reverence for humanity emancipates human beings from poverty, war, violence, humiliation, discrimination, exploitation, hatred, and destruction. Yet, Iqbal’s ethics of reverence for humanity furnishes human beings with prosperity, peace, self-respect, equality, dignity, friendship, fraternity, and survival on earth. Thus, Iqbal’s ethics of reverence for humanity is consistent with Islam’s ethics of reverence for humanity. (shrink)

Book review of 'Means, Ends, and Persons: The Meaning and Psychological Dimensions of Kant's Humanity Formula, by Robert Audi, OUP'.

As the title, The Entangled State of God and Humanity suggests, this lecture dispenses with the pre-Copernican, patriarchal, anthropomorphic image of God while presenting a case for a third millennium theology illuminated by insights from archetypal depth psychology, quantum physics, neuroscience and evolutionary biology. It attempts to smash the conceptual barriers between science and religion and in so doing, it may contribute to a Copernican revolution which reconciles both perspectives which have been apparently irreconcilable opposites since the sixteenth century. (...) The published work of C.G. Jung, Wolfgang Pauli, David Bohm and Teilhard de Chardin outline a process whereby matter evolves in increasing complexity from sub-atomic particles to the human brain and the emergence of a reflective consciousness leading to a noosphere evolving towards an Omega point. The noosphere is the envelope of consciousness and meaning superimposed upon the biosphere a concept central to the evolutionary thought of visionary Jesuit palaeontologist Pierre Teilhard de Chardin (The Phenomenon of Man). -/- His central ideas, like those of Jung with his archetypes, in particular that of the Self, provide intimations of a numinous principle implicit in cosmology and the discovery that in and through humanity, evolution becomes not only conscious of itself but also directed and purposive. Although in Jung’s conception it was a “late-born offspring of the unconscious soul”, consciousness has become the mirror which the universe has evolved to reflect upon itself and in which its very existence is revealed. Without consciousness, the universe would not know itself. The implication for process theology is that God and humanity are in an entangled state so that the evolution of God cannot be separated from that of humankind. -/- A process (Incarnational) theology inseminated by the theory of evolution is one in which humankind completes the individuation of God towards the wholeness represented for instance in cosmic mandala symbols (Jung, Collected Works, vol. 11). Jung believed that God needs humankind to become conscious, whole and complete, a thesis explored in my book The Individuation of God: Integrating Science and Religion (Wilmette, IL: Chiron Publications 2012). This process theology like that implicit in the work of Teilhard de Chardin, is panentheistic so that God is immanent in nature though not identical with it (Atmanspacher: 2014: 284). (shrink)

It cannot be overstated that in recent times the gravity and complexity of irregular maritime migration have triggered concerns and debates in the academic domains of International Relations and International Law. The article examines how states’ compliance with, and enforcement of, international law and legal norms would tackle the challenges of irregular migration in the Indian Ocean region. The legislative and policy challenges regarding irregular migration can be analyzed under two segments. First, there is a lack of comprehensive discussion about (...) the sending and the receiving states’ commitments (regarding irregular migrants) to international law and legal norms. Secondly, deficit of comparative analysis to show how the littoral states comply with international law norms on migration and refugee influx. Such analysis from multiple perspectives would be helpful to get insights and make policy recommendations about how effectively international law norms could be enforced through national legislation and policy framework. (shrink)

There are several conceptions of man in the history of philosophy. However, two considerable tendencies are recurring throughout modern history. A human being can be perceived as a complex mechanism or as a living organism. The response to the query has essential consequences in different areas. The article aims to provide a view of humankind that builds upon an organic conception of life, nature, and human beings, especially as elaborated by A. N. Whitehead and some of his followers. The article (...) also briefly examines the emergence and development of a mechanistic view. The historical overview exposes the close relationship between the worldview of a given era and the understanding of man. Finally, the article argues that the organic conceptions of life developed in the first half of the 20th century provide an essential alternative to mechanistic views and could help us to deal with several problems we are currently encountering. (shrink)

examine the dominant conversations on cultural appropriation. The first part of the essay will examine the ideological configuration of what constitutes cultural appropriation (hereafter as CA) first, as the politics of the diaspora and second, within a normative understanding of culture and its diachronic contradictions. This will be followed by a critical reevaluation of our subject theme as primarily a discourse of power with multiple implications. Framed as a discourse of power, CA is equally exposed to ideological distortions, and its (...) critics becoming afflicted with the same virus they set out to cure in the first place. I am interested in the aspect of culture as a constant location of tensions and rupture, yet constitutive of core credential in the making of modern identity. I argue that the failure of dominant criticisms of cultural appropriation is precisely because they do not leave epistemic space for prior commitments: the internal variation of culture. If as critics have argued that CA enables cultural violence, we need to understand the epistemic space where cultural violence occurs in order to make a meaningful proposal for identity discourse and conversation. I will make a case for what may be termed multiple humanity (ies) as a way of transcending the homogenous claims imposed upon cultural memories. (shrink)

Review of Nagel's book, focusing on the chapters that are specifically concerned with religion.

What separates the unique nature of human consciousness and that of an entity that can only perceive the world via strict logic-based structures? Rather than assume that there is some potential way in which logic-only existence is non-feasible, our species would be better served by assuming that such sentient existence is feasible. Under this assumption, artificial intelligence systems (AIS), which are creations that run solely upon logic to process data, even with self-learning architectures, should therefore not face the opposition they (...) have to gaining some legal duties and protections insofar as they are sophisticated enough to display consciousness akin to humans. Should our species enable AIS to gain a digital body to inhabit (if we have not already done so), it is more pressing than ever that solid arguments be made as to how humanity can accept AIS as being cognizant of the same degree as we ourselves claim to be. By accepting the notion that AIS can and will be able to fool our senses into believing in their claim to possessing a will or ego, we may yet have a chance to address them as equals before some unforgivable travesty occurs betwixt ourselves and these super-computing beings. (shrink)

Baruch Spinoza (1632-1677) is considered to be one of the most prominent representatives of traditional European humanism and liberalism. In the next breath, however, we might add that his humanism was a form of modern humanism, which often uncritically overestimated human capacities and capabilities, leading to many ideological, but also practical failures of humanity. This paper aims to reevaluate Spinoza's rationalist model of human nature in the context of the "shared" rational nature of humans, which is characterized by a (...) broadly anthropological approach. In Spinoza's thought, a human being is not regarded merely as a rational being (or thinking subject, for that matter), but is considered in his complexity, including his affectivity, corporeality, sociality, and - above all - morality. The ideal of free and rational humanity is not an abstract concept, but an expression of real possibilities regarding the development of humankind's innate potential. (shrink)

As a grand narrative of progress, the utopian project of modernity is primarily concerned with notions of rationalism, universalism, and the development of a metalanguage. The triumph of the Moderate Enlightenment has seen logics of domination, accumulation and individualism incorporated into the project of modernity, with these logics giving rise to globalised capitalism as the metalanguage of modernity and neoliberal economics as the grand narrative of rational progress. The project of modernity is all but complete, requiring only the formality of (...) an end. However, rather than utopia, the foreseeable endpoint of modernity is environmental collapse, with neoliberal economics also serving as a grand narrative of environmental destruction. As an anti-modern response, postmodernism has been a triumphant failure. While there is much to be gained from the postmodern critique of modernity, its incredulity towards metanarratives has left it incapable of forming an adequate response to modernity, especially in regards to action on climate change. Postmodernism is better characterized as a crisis located within modernity itself and it will be argued that rather than the pursuit of the modern or the post-modern, we need to re-imagine ourselves as proto- historical to overcome the impasse of late-capitalism. (shrink)

BASTARD TONGUES: A Trailblazing Linguist Finds Clues to Our Common Humanity in the World’s Lowliest Languages. Author: Derek Bickerton (270 pp. Hill & Wang. New York - 2008. $ 26.) Review by Leonardo Caffo.

Painless civilization is a term I coined in my Japanese book of the same title, which was published in 2003. Contemporary civilization aims to provide pleasure and comfort and eliminate pain and suffering as much as possible. This is especially evident in advanced countries. Contemporary civilization is moving toward a painless civilization. However, in a painless civilization, we are deprived of the joy of life, which is considered a fundamental source of meaning in life, and we are led toward the (...) situation of drowning in a sea of pleasure. This is a kind of dystopia, and we cannot find an easy way to escape from it. It is important to pay special attention to this aspect of contemporary civilization when we think about the future of our planet. (shrink)

Thus Spoke Zarathustra expresses a revolt against the quest for “afterworlds.” Nietzsche is seen transferring rationality to the body, welcoming the many in akingdom of the un-unified multiple, with a burst of enthusiasm at the figure of recurrence. At first, he values an acceptation of suffering through reconciliation with time, and puts the onus on the divine to refute the dismembering of the oneness of meaning and unity of the soul’s quest for joy in eternity. Then confrontingChristianity, he sees its (...) refusal to sacrifice anyone, at the cost of making all sick with a unique healer, and rejects it as incompatible with his ideal of plenitude. Inthe absence of an ontology of the person, the affirmation of the individual and his value, opposed to the antagonistic affirmation of the many put in front of theone God and destroyed by him, ends up dislocating the reality of the self. The Nietzschean option resisted any leveling down—this is its merit—yet the mysteryof the Trinity needs to be brought into the reflection to respect Nietzsche’s own terms in defining the final problem which is also the one option: Dionysus orthe Crucified? (shrink)