FORUM On Nature and the Human (original) (raw)
Related papers
American Anthropologist, 2010
A major contribution of anthropological work has been to challenge a unitary theory of the human. In this American Anthropologist vital topics forum, a range of prominent anthropologists contribute to this challenge and provide musings on the human. The essays in this forum reflect diversity and unity of anthropological thought on human nature. Some note humans' connection to other primates, and others emphasize our distinction from ancestral patterns. Several reflect on cultural change, globally and locally, while others problematize what we might mean by, and who we include in, a "human" nature. The perception of humans constructing and being constructed by the world and the warning to be cognizant of our approaches to defining ourselves are central themes here. Our goal is to initiate a discussion that might reshape, or at least influence, academic and public debates.
VITAL TOPICS FORUM On Nature and the Human
A major contribution of anthropological work has been to challenge a unitary theory of the human. In this American Anthropologist vital topics forum, a range of prominent anthropologists contribute to this challenge and provide musings on the human. The essays in this forum reflect diversity and unity of anthropological thought on human nature. Some note humans' connection to other primates, and others emphasize our distinction from ancestral patterns. Several reflect on cultural change, globally and locally, while others problematize what we might mean by, and who we include in, a "human" nature. The perception of humans constructing and being constructed by the world and the warning to be cognizant of our approaches to defining ourselves are central themes here. Our goal is to initiate a discussion that might reshape, or at least influence, academic and public debates.
Human Nature, Anthropology, and the Problem of Variation
In this essay, I begin with an overview of a traditional account of natural kinds, and then consider David Hull’s (1986) critique of species as natural kinds and the associated notion of human nature. Second, I explore recent "liberal" accounts of human nature provided by Edouard Machery (2008) and Grant Ramsey (2013) and criticized by Tim Lewens (2012). They at- tempt to avoid the criticisms offered by Hull. After examining those views, I turn to Richard Boyd’s (1988; 1999) Homeostatic Property Cluster account of natural kinds which is flexible but detailed enough to avoid Hull’s criticisms but also those affecting the more recent views. We then consider what I call the "problem of variation." Fourth, I consider two case studies – the basic emotions and facial expressions and inbreeding avoidance and incest taboos. I argue that the former is a component of a Boydian human nature but the latter is not. The conclusion is that if there is a human nature, it must be argued for on a case-by-case basis. And, one of most discussed cases thought to be part of our nature is simply not.
Three Quests for Human Nature: Some Philosophical Reflections
The notion of ‘human nature’ has long since captured the interest and imagina- tion of philosophers, theologians, and scientists; as such, it appears that the study of human nature is one amenable to inter-disciplinary cross-fertilization. However, it is not obvious that there is a single coherent project being undertaken, neither between nor within disciplines. Rather, we argue that there are three main quests for human nature – the quest for universal human nature, the quest for human unique- ness, and the quest for innate human nature – and that different philosophical, theo- logical, and scientific enterprises emphasize (or, indeed, neglect) different quests. Furthermore, these different intellectual enterprises may differ more fundamen- tally, namely in their very object of enquiry, the definition of the theoretical term ‘human being.’ For scientists, the term ‘human being’ is often treated as being coter- minous with the term Homo sapiens; that is, ‘human being’ is a biological category, a species. This definition is now, rightly or wrongly, taken for granted by philosophers and theologians, but it is not necessarily the most appropriate. It remains an open question whether, for any given philosophical and/or theological project, the bio- logical concept Homo sapiens is the most appropriate way to understand the term ‘human being.’ This paper considers these issues by scrutinizing two cases – from evolutionary psychology and theological anthropology – in each case examining the adequacy of the biological concept Homo sapiens for its purpose, as well as the viability of each of the three quests for human nature.
Where did Anthropology go? or the Need for ‘Human Nature’
Essays on Cultural Transmission, 2020
Where did anthropology go? Or, The need for 'human nature' Bloch, M.E.F. 2004 document version Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record Link to publication in VU Research Portal citation for published version (APA) Bloch, M. E. F. (2004). Where did anthropology go? Or, The need for 'human nature'. VU Boekhandel/Uitgeverij. General rights Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. • Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research. • You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain • You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal ? Take down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim.
Humankind: An Introductory Reader for Cultural Anthropology
Humankind: An Introductory Reader for Cultural Anthropology introduces students to a broad array of theoretical and ethnographic essays and articles in the discipline. The editors selected papers that are engaging and relevant, yet accessible for undergraduates in introductory-level cultural anthropology courses. This text represents a diverse range of cultural contexts and includes papers that speak to important contemporary debates in anthropology. The section and chapter themes are consistent with those typically covered in Introductory Cultural Anthropology courses, including issues of anthropology's subject, religious and symbolic behaviors, language, social identity, kinship, family, and economics. This reader also includes a section exploring the future of culture, culture survival and change, and the ethical responsibilities of anthropologists to the people we study. Selections in Humankind are organized in five parts: The Subject of Anthropology Humans as Symbol-Makers Human Social Identities Humanity in Ecological and Economic Perspective The Future of Culture
2023
Human nature is a puzzling matter that must be analysed through a holistic lens. In this commentary, I foray into anthropology's biosocial dimensions to underscore that human relations span from microorganisms to global commodities. I argue that the future of social-cultural anthropology depends on the integration of evolutionary theory for its advancement. Ultimately, since the likelihood of novel zoonoses' emergence, digital ethnography could offer remarkable opportunities for ethical and responsible inquiries.
THE PAST, PRESENT AND FUTURE OF HUMAN NATURE
We live at a time of multiple revolutions in science, particularly in medical science and technology. Profound innovations are emerging that will not just change the problems we address or the ways we respond to problems, but which may transform the sorts of creatures that we are. Our species may be changed for better or worse by what is in prospect. The nature of the human species is therefore at stake. " The Past, Present and Future of Human Nature " might seem all encompassing, but it leaves almost everything out. For most of the time that living creatures have existed there have been no humans and thus no human nature. We are a recent and probably transient phenomenon; we are well advised to keep that humbling fact in mind. Still, as a member of this recent but disarmingly clever species, I have an interest in understanding what our nature is, what it might become, and how that might depend on the choices we make. It is distinctively human to engage in self-conscious reflection on our own nature. Doing so has gone on for all of recorded human history and must have been going on longer than that. Wonder is among the most salient distinguishing characteristics of humans: we are the self-reflective creature. Our intellectual history centers prominently on efforts to understand our own behavior and motivations, our relationship to nature, and our place in the universe or, on some views, beyond. We have devoted much thought to exploring whether we are by nature altruistic or selfish, warlike or peace-loving, monogamous or polygamous, shaped more by genetics or by experience and environment, driven by deterministic causes or free to make autonomous choices. We have sought answers to understand the human condition, and to know whether we are the result of purposive design or the chance product of natural processes. We have long wondered about the relationship among our minds, our brains, and the baffling phenomena of consciousness, personal identity, and self-awareness. These issues were historically addressed primarily by philosophers and theologians; now, they are also vigorously pursued by others such as sociobiologists, cognitive neuroscientists, computational linguists, and physicists. We have sought to discern what about ourselves is inherent in our nature and what is socially constructed. We find ourselves unendingly fascinating. On the traditional Judeo-Christian view, humans were the apex of God's intentional creation; distinct from the rest of the world, they exerted dominion over nature. Other views, such as those of some Native American cultures, saw humans as being at one with nature, properly seeking harmony with the larger whole. Science, even in its earliest iterations, is the human effort to understand what nature
The dilemma of human nature: The biological and cultural evolution of Mankind
2004
As human being we are part of nature; from one side, we are made by the same physical material as the natural world at large, from the other, we share with plants and animals the very biological matter and the same prodigious molecule: DNA. The great amount of biological information within humans determines much of their nature. The invention of written language allows Mankind to store information outside its corporal body: extra-biological information. This information have been accumulated and have make possible art, science, philosophy, religion, to sum up, culture. In such way Man became a symbolic animal and thus can transcend biological determinism, at least partially, since he continues to be a semi-domesticated animal. Key words: Human nature, human evolution, information, extra-biological information, language, culture, aggression, entropy.
AN ECOLOGICAL CONCEPTION OF HUMAN NATURE
Currently, there is significant divergence in scholarly opinion as to whether or not human nature exists. In my PhD thesis, I argue for the existence of human nature. In so doing, I critique rival views on human nature and orthodox entry points into the issue. I also offer a partial explanation as to why such a strong divergence of expert opinion may exist, and argue that accuracy on the issue is important with respect to individual and collective problem solving. The view of human nature I defend is what I call ‘ecological.’ This construct aligns with the fact that biological systems exist at multiple levels of organization and relative to varying ecologies, developmental stages, frames of reference, and viable systems of orientation. Given this, I contend human nature is not something that ‘inheres’ and projects out from the organism; rather, human nature is diffuse and exists at simultaneous levels of biological organization, and at the intersection of genetic and epigenetic factors, past and present, and scientific truth and pragmatism.