<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rdf:RDF xmlns="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/"
 xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
 xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/"
 xmlns:cc="http://web.resource.org/cc/"
 xmlns:prism="http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/basic/2.0/"
 xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#">
    <channel rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/rss/journal/humanities">
		<title>Humanities</title>
		<link>http://www.mdpi.com/journal/humanities</link>
		<description>Latest open access articles published in Humanities at http://www.mdpi.com/journal/humanities</description>
								<items>
			<rdf:Seq>
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/2/2/209" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/2/2/193" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/2/2/176" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/2/2/160" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/2/2/147" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/2/2/128" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/2/2/119" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/2/1/99" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/2/1/72" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/2/1/56" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/2/1/20" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/2/1/1" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/1/3/229" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/1/3/205" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/1/3/192" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/1/3/178" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/1/3/166" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/1/3/145" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/1/3/117" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/1/2/104" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/1/1/80" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/1/1/72" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/1/1/64" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/1/1/62" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/1/1/54" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/1/1/1" />
                    	</rdf:Seq>
		</items>
				<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
	</channel>

        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/2/2/209">
	<title><![CDATA[Humanities, Vol. 2, Pages 209-252: The Speculative Neuroscience of the Future Human Brain]]></title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/2/2/209</link>
	<description>The hallmark of our species is our ability to hybridize symbolic thinking with behavioral output. We began with the symmetrical hand axe around 1.7 mya and have progressed, slowly at first, then with greater rapidity, to producing increasingly more complex hybridized products. We now live in the age where our drive to hybridize has pushed us to the brink of a neuroscientific revolution, where for the first time we are in a position to willfully alter the brain and hence, our behavior and evolution. Nootropics, transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), deep brain stimulation (DBS) and invasive brain mind interface (BMI) technology are allowing humans to treat previously inaccessible diseases as well as open up potential vistas for cognitive enhancement. In the future, the possibility exists for humans to hybridize with BMIs and mobile architectures. The notion of self is becoming increasingly extended. All of this to say: are we in control of our brains, or are they in control of us?</description>

	<prism:publicationName>Humanities</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2013-05-21</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>2</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>2</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
	<prism:doi>10.3390/h2020209</prism:doi>
	<prism:startingPage>209</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>252</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-0787</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title><![CDATA[The Speculative Neuroscience of the Future Human Brain]]></dc:title>
    <dc:date>2013-05-21</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/h2020209</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Robert Dielenberg</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/2/2/193">
	<title><![CDATA[Humanities, Vol. 2, Pages 193-208: Reconsidering Richard Rorty’s Private-Public Distinction]]></title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/2/2/193</link>
	<description>This article provides a new interpretation of Richard Rorty’s notion of the private-public distinction. The first section of the article provides a short theoretical overview of the origins of the public-private distinction in Rorty’s political thought and clarifies the Rortian terminology. The main portion of the article is dedicated to the critique of Rorty’s private-public distinction, divided into two thematic sections: (i) the private-public distinction as undesirable and (ii) the private-public distinction as unattainable. I argue that Rorty’s formulation provides plausible answers to the first kind of criticism, but not to the second. Finally, a reformulation of the private-public distinction will be suggested, which both mitigates the second line of criticism and better coheres with Rorty’s general theory.</description>

	<prism:publicationName>Humanities</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2013-05-13</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>2</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>2</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
	<prism:doi>10.3390/h2020193</prism:doi>
	<prism:startingPage>193</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>208</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-0787</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title><![CDATA[Reconsidering Richard Rorty’s Private-Public Distinction]]></dc:title>
    <dc:date>2013-05-13</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/h2020193</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Lior Erez</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/2/2/176">
	<title><![CDATA[Humanities, Vol. 2, Pages 176-192: The Art of Democracy—Art as a Tool for Developing Democratic Citizenship and Stimulating Public Debate:  A Rortyan-Deweyan Account]]></title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/2/2/176</link>
	<description>Richard Rorty holds that the novel is the characteristic genre of democracy, because it helps people to develop and to stabilize two crucial capabilities the ideal inhabitants of democratic societies should possess: a keen sense for anti-foundationalism and a disposition for solidarity. He believes that novels help develop these capabilities by educating our capacity for criticism and our capacity for attentive-empathetic perception. This article argues in favor of this Rortyan idea, showing how anti-foundationalism and solidarity can be seen as important instances of what I will call &#039;dispositions for democratic citizenship&#039; and that art (and not only novels) and its reception, are valuable tools for advancing these dispositions. However, as the Rortyan public-private dichotomy assigns art’s function of criticism only to the private sphere, Rorty ignores its potential for stimulating democratic public deliberation and he misses the fact that art’s functions of criticism and of attentive-empathetic perception partially depend on each other if they are effectively to lead to increased solidarity and change social realities. Thus this article argues—taking these objections into account—to slightly modify, but nevertheless value Rorty’s idea that art and its reception are crucial resources for democratic citizenship and for the process of democratic deliberation.</description>

	<prism:publicationName>Humanities</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2013-05-06</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>2</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>2</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
	<prism:doi>10.3390/h2020176</prism:doi>
	<prism:startingPage>176</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>192</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-0787</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title><![CDATA[The Art of Democracy—Art as a Tool for Developing Democratic Citizenship and Stimulating Public Debate:  A Rortyan-Deweyan Account]]></dc:title>
    <dc:date>2013-05-06</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/h2020176</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Michael Raeber</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/2/2/160">
	<title><![CDATA[Humanities, Vol. 2, Pages 160-175: Forced Execution of the Elderly: Old Law, Dystopia, and the Utilitarian Argument]]></title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/2/2/160</link>
	<description>This essay focuses on a play that Thomas Middleton co-authored on the topic of forced execution of the elderly, The Old Law (1618–1619). Here, the Duke of Epire has issued an edict requiring the execution of men when they reach age eighty and women when they reach age sixty—a decree that is justified on the basis that at these ages, they are a burden to themselves and their heirs, as well as useless to society. I argue that Old Law responds to an issue as old as Plato and as recent as twenty-first century dystopic fiction: should a society devote substantial resources to caring for the unproductive elderly? The conflict between Cleanthes and Simonides about the merits of the decree anticipates the debate between proponents of utilitarian economics and advocates of the bioethical philosophy that we today describe as the Ethics of Care.</description>

	<prism:publicationName>Humanities</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2013-04-29</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>2</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>2</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
	<prism:doi>10.3390/h2020160</prism:doi>
	<prism:startingPage>160</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>175</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-0787</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title><![CDATA[Forced Execution of the Elderly: Old Law, Dystopia, and the Utilitarian Argument]]></dc:title>
    <dc:date>2013-04-29</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/h2020160</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Sara Schotland</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/2/2/147">
	<title><![CDATA[Humanities, Vol. 2, Pages 147-159: Biodiversity, Extinction, and Humanity’s Future: The Ecological and Evolutionary Consequences of Human Population and Resource Use]]></title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/2/2/147</link>
	<description>Human actions have altered global environments and reduced biodiversity by causing extinctions and reducing the population sizes of surviving species. Increasing human population size and per capita resource use will continue to have direct and indirect ecological and evolutionary consequences. As a result, future generations will inhabit a planet with significantly less wildlife, reduced evolutionary potential, diminished ecosystem services, and an increased likelihood of contracting infectious disease. The magnitude of these effects will depend on the rate at which global human population and/or per capita resource use decline to sustainable levels and the degree to which population reductions result from increased death rates rather than decreased birth rates.</description>

	<prism:publicationName>Humanities</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2013-04-02</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>2</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>2</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
	<prism:doi>10.3390/h2020147</prism:doi>
	<prism:startingPage>147</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>159</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-0787</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title><![CDATA[Biodiversity, Extinction, and Humanity’s Future: The Ecological and Evolutionary Consequences of Human Population and Resource Use]]></dc:title>
    <dc:date>2013-04-02</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/h2020147</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Jeffrey Yule</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Robert Fournier</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Patrick Hindmarsh</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/2/2/128">
	<title><![CDATA[Humanities, Vol. 2, Pages 128-146: Can Scholarly Communication Be Multilingual? A Glance at Language Use in US Classical Archaeology]]></title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/2/2/128</link>
	<description>Classical archaeology is one of the few humanities in which several European languages, above all English, German, French and Italian, are used for specialized communication, in particular for scholarly publications. From previous research, it appears that non-English speaking archaeologists tend to feel a certain discomfort at the lack of impact of publications written in languages other than English. This article aims to analyze the attitudes of US classical archaeologists towards multilingualism and reception of  non-English research publications. A survey of US university archaeologists was conducted, which demonstrates that they are convinced that scholarly communication in the field must remain multilingual, thus showing an attitude similar to that of their European colleagues. As for reception of non-English archaeological literature, language barriers seem to be growing, both in teaching and research, due to current US language and library policies.</description>

	<prism:publicationName>Humanities</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2013-03-26</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>2</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>2</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
	<prism:doi>10.3390/h2020128</prism:doi>
	<prism:startingPage>128</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>146</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-0787</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title><![CDATA[Can Scholarly Communication Be Multilingual? A Glance at Language Use in US Classical Archaeology]]></dc:title>
    <dc:date>2013-03-26</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/h2020128</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Karl Hempel</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/2/2/119">
	<title><![CDATA[Humanities, Vol. 2, Pages 119-127: Sustainability—What Are the Odds? Envisioning the Future of Our Environment, Economy and Society]]></title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/2/2/119</link>
	<description>This article examines the concept of sustainability from a global perspective, describing how alternative futures might develop in the environmental, economic, and social dimensions. The alternatives to sustainability appear to be (a) a catastrophic failure of life support, economies, and societies, or (b) a radical technological revolution (singularity). The case is made that solutions may be found by developing a global vision of the future, estimating the probabilities of possible outcomes from multiple indicators, and looking holistically for the most likely paths to sustainability. Finally, an intuitive vision of these paths is offered as a starting point for discussion.</description>

	<prism:publicationName>Humanities</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2013-03-26</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>2</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>2</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
	<prism:doi>10.3390/h2020119</prism:doi>
	<prism:startingPage>119</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>127</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-0787</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title><![CDATA[Sustainability—What Are the Odds? Envisioning the Future of Our Environment, Economy and Society]]></dc:title>
    <dc:date>2013-03-26</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/h2020119</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Stephen Jordan</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/2/1/99">
	<title><![CDATA[Humanities, Vol. 2, Pages 99-118: Stories of Snow and Fire: The Importance of Narrative to a Critically Pluralistic Environmental Aesthetic]]></title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/2/1/99</link>
	<description>Written narratives enable humans to appreciate the natural world in aesthetic terms. Firstly, narratives can galvanize for the reader a sense for another person’s experience of nature through the aesthetic representation of that experience in language. Secondly, narratives can encode and document for the human appreciator as writer an experience of nature in aesthetic terms. Through different narrative lenses, the compelling qualities of environments can be crystallized for both the reader (who vicariously experiences nature through language) and the human appreciator (who directly experiences nature through the senses). However, according to philosopher Allen Carlson’s “natural environmental model” of landscape aesthetics, science provides the definitive narrative that represents nature on its own terms and catalyzes appropriate appreciation. In this article, I examine Carlson’s claim and argue for an environmental aesthetic philosophy of narrative multiplicity. Such a model would draw from scientific, indigenous, and journalistic narrative modes toward a critically pluralistic environmental aesthetic of the natural world. The ethical framework I propose—the function of which I characterize simply as narrative “cross-checking”—acknowledges the value of narrative heterogeneity in expressing and generating aesthetic experience of environments. This article’s thesis is forwarded through extensive treatment of these three narratives expressed within two examples, one of geographical place and one of environmental practice. As I will suggest, Denali, the prominent Alaskan mountain, can be aesthetically appreciated through the diverse narratives enumerated above. As a second case study, the traditional burning regimes of indigenous peoples reveal collectively how a critically pluralistic environmental aesthetic of narratives can be applied to—and identified to exist within—ecocultural practices, such as firing the landscape.</description>

	<prism:publicationName>Humanities</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2013-03-21</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>2</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>1</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
	<prism:doi>10.3390/h2010099</prism:doi>
	<prism:startingPage>99</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>118</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-0787</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title><![CDATA[Stories of Snow and Fire: The Importance of Narrative to a Critically Pluralistic Environmental Aesthetic]]></dc:title>
    <dc:date>2013-03-21</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/h2010099</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>John Ryan</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/2/1/72">
	<title><![CDATA[Humanities, Vol. 2, Pages 72-98: Creating/Curating Cultural Capital: Monuments and Museums for Post-Apartheid South Africa]]></title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/2/1/72</link>
	<description>Since the first democratic elections in 1994, South Africa has faced the challenge of creating new cultural capital to replace old racist paradigms, and monuments and museums have been deployed as part of this agenda of transformation. Monuments have been inscribed with new meanings, and acquisition and collecting policies have changed at existing museums to embrace a wider definition of culture. In addition, a series of new museums, often with a memorial purpose, has provided opportunities to acknowledge previously marginalized histories, and honor those who opposed apartheid, many of whom died in the Struggle. Lacking extensive collections, these museums have relied on innovative concepts, not only the use of audio-visual materials, but also the metaphoric deployment of sites and the architecture itself, to create affective audience experiences and recount South Africa’s tragic history under apartheid.</description>

	<prism:publicationName>Humanities</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2013-03-21</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>2</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>1</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
	<prism:doi>10.3390/h2010072</prism:doi>
	<prism:startingPage>72</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>98</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-0787</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title><![CDATA[Creating/Curating Cultural Capital: Monuments and Museums for Post-Apartheid South Africa]]></dc:title>
    <dc:date>2013-03-21</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/h2010072</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Elizabeth Rankin</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/2/1/56">
	<title><![CDATA[Humanities, Vol. 2, Pages 56-71: The Legal Translator’s Approach to Texts]]></title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/2/1/56</link>
	<description>Translation can be a basis for humanistic investigations when translation is seen as a personalized activity. The article describes, on the basis of hermeneutics, the specific perspective from which a translator may approach legal texts. Various aspects have to be considered in such texts, since the cultural and legal background is evident in linguistic aspects at the text level. Different text types are rooted in a specific legal system and fulfill their function within a special field of law. Comparative law does research on the differences in legal concepts, whereas translation uses this knowledge as a basis. Legal terminology presents various levels of abstraction and appears in texts besides general language words. Well-grounded understanding along with subject knowledge is necessary for legal translation. This should be combined with proficiency in writing in the legal style. The translator tries to make source cultural and legal aspects transparent for target readers, as translation is always a means of comprehension that furthers communication.</description>

	<prism:publicationName>Humanities</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2013-02-18</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>2</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>1</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
	<prism:doi>10.3390/h2010056</prism:doi>
	<prism:startingPage>56</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>71</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-0787</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title><![CDATA[The Legal Translator’s Approach to Texts]]></dc:title>
    <dc:date>2013-02-18</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/h2010056</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Radegundis Stolze</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/2/1/20">
	<title><![CDATA[Humanities, Vol. 2, Pages 20-55: From Human Past to Human Future]]></title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/2/1/20</link>
	<description>This paper begins with a refutation of the orthodox model of final  Pleistocene human evolution, presenting an alternative, better  supported account of this crucial phase. According to this version, the  transition from robust to gracile humans during that period is  attributable to selective breeding rather than natural selection,  rendered possible by the exponential rise of culturally guided  volitional choices. The rapid human neotenization coincides with the  development of numerous somatic and neural detriments and pathologies.  Uniformitarian reasoning based on ontogenic homology suggests that the  cognitive abilities of hominins are consistently underrated in the  unstable orthodoxies of Pleistocene archaeology. A scientifically guided  review establishes developmental trajectories defining recent changes  in the human genome and its expressions, which then form the basis of  attempts to extrapolate from them into the future. It is suggested that  continuing and perhaps accelerating unfavorable genetic changes to the  human species, rather than existential threats such as massive  disasters, pandemics, or astrophysical events, may become the ultimate  peril of humanity.</description>

	<prism:publicationName>Humanities</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2013-01-09</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>2</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>1</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
	<prism:doi>10.3390/h2010020</prism:doi>
	<prism:startingPage>20</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>55</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-0787</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title><![CDATA[From Human Past to Human Future]]></dc:title>
    <dc:date>2013-01-09</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/h2010020</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Robert Bednarik</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/2/1/1">
	<title><![CDATA[Humanities, Vol. 2, Pages 1-19: Surprise and Uncertainty—Framing Regional Geohazards in the Theory of Complexity]]></title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/2/1/1</link>
	<description>The paper analyzes the concepts of uncertainty and surprise as key variables of a socio-ecological system’s behavior in the context of the theory of complexity. Experiences from the past have shown that living with uncertainty is part of our daily life and surprises are only surprising because our perspective of system trajectories is basically linear and non-dynamic. The future of humanity is dependent on the understanding of the system’s behavior and needs a change in perspective of linearity to non-linearity and from the planning imperative to a management hedging uncertainty and surprise. In the context of humanity’s future, the theory of complexity offers a new perspective on system trajectories and their understanding of surprises and uncertainty. There is a need for a Gestaltwechsel—a change in perception—which helps to see things differently and fosters the search for new answers to emerging questions at the human-nature interface. Drawing on the case study of hazard management the paper will explain the necessity of analysis system’s behavior and the taking into account of multi-agent behavior on the micro level which led to emergent behavior on the macro-level of the system. Regional geohazards are explained as the regional impact of an uncontrolled risk based on a state of a natural feature that has a direct impact on a regional population being affected by the appearance of a hazard and its development into damage. By acting in space, time and connectivity, people construct hazardscapes and change risk into regional geohazards. This concept shows relevance for future mitigation and adaptation measures. The theory of complexity can help in engendering the necessary shift in perspective. What is non-linear dynamic thinking as suggested by the theory of complexity? Why is the consideration of the system’s behavior crucial and not just the number of system’s elements? What is the role of agents in these systems? In addition, there are practical implications too: What does this shift in perspective mean for future hazard management and the future of humanity?</description>

	<prism:publicationName>Humanities</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2013-01-04</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>2</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>1</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
	<prism:doi>10.3390/h2010001</prism:doi>
	<prism:startingPage>1</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>19</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-0787</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title><![CDATA[Surprise and Uncertainty—Framing Regional Geohazards in the Theory of Complexity]]></dc:title>
    <dc:date>2013-01-04</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/h2010001</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Beate Ratter</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/1/3/229">
	<title><![CDATA[Humanities, Vol. 1, Pages 229-245: On the Apparent Differences between Contemporary Pragmatists: Richard Rorty and the New Pragmatism]]></title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/1/3/229</link>
	<description>Throughout its history pragmatism has been criticised for failing to account for the roles truth and objectivity play in our lives and inquiries. Pragmatists have long sought to guard against this objection, but recently some proponents have identified a form of pragmatism which they think is deficient in the manner identified by its critics. This has led them to claim that pragmatism should be understood as falling into two distinct varieties, and to argue for the superiority of the one over the other. In this paper I argue that behind the apparent differences between contemporary pragmatists lies greater agreement than is commonly thought. Taking Richard Rorty to represent what some find unattractive in their philosophy, I claim that there is little if any substantive difference between pragmatists about the concepts of truth and objectivity. Further, Rorty’s work shows that it is misleading to distinguish pragmatists in terms of whether they highlight the constraints imposed by social practices or whether they seek to free us from such constraint; properly understood, freedom and constraint are a necessary condition of one another.</description>

	<prism:publicationName>Humanities</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2012-12-17</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>1</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>3</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
	<prism:doi>10.3390/h1030229</prism:doi>
	<prism:startingPage>229</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>245</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-0787</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title><![CDATA[On the Apparent Differences between Contemporary Pragmatists: Richard Rorty and the New Pragmatism]]></dc:title>
    <dc:date>2012-12-17</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/h1030229</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Michael Bacon</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/1/3/205">
	<title><![CDATA[Humanities, Vol. 1, Pages 205-228: The Consequences of Human Behavior ]]></title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/1/3/205</link>
	<description>Human behavior is founded on a complex interaction of influences that derive from sources both extraneous and intrinsic to the brain. It is the ways these various influences worked together in the past to fashion modern human cognition that can help elucidate the probable course of future human endeavor. A particular concern of this chapter is the way cognition has been shaped and continues to depend on prevailing environmental and ecological conditions. Whether the human predicament can be regarded simply as another response to such conditions similar to that of other organisms or something special will also be addressed. More specifically, it will be shown that, although the highly artificial niche in which most humans now live has had profound effects on ways of thinking, constraints deriving from a shared evolutionary heritage continue to have substantial effects on behavior. The way these exigencies interact will be explored in order to understand the implications for the future wellbeing of humanity. </description>

	<prism:publicationName>Humanities</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2012-12-10</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>1</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>3</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
	<prism:doi>10.3390/h1030205</prism:doi>
	<prism:startingPage>205</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>228</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-0787</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title><![CDATA[The Consequences of Human Behavior ]]></dc:title>
    <dc:date>2012-12-10</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/h1030205</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Derek Hodgson</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/1/3/192">
	<title><![CDATA[Humanities, Vol. 1, Pages 192-204: Plato’s and Aristotle’s Language Critique in Francisco Sanchez’s That Nothing Is Known]]></title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/1/3/192</link>
	<description>In That Nothing Is Known, Francisco Sanchez created a very interesting reflection on the analysis of language and on the epistemic consequences of the importance of language. He did so in a way that allowed some scholars to consider him a predecessor of analytic philosophy. The Spanish physician believed that language had a leading role within science, but he also thought that language was a weak foundation upon which to build any attempt of knowledge.</description>

	<prism:publicationName>Humanities</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2012-12-06</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>1</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>3</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
	<prism:doi>10.3390/h1030192</prism:doi>
	<prism:startingPage>192</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>204</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-0787</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title><![CDATA[Plato’s and Aristotle’s Language Critique in Francisco Sanchez’s That Nothing Is Known]]></dc:title>
    <dc:date>2012-12-06</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/h1030192</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Manuel Bermudez</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/1/3/178">
	<title><![CDATA[Humanities, Vol. 1, Pages 178-191: Alone in the Void: Getting Real about the Tenuous and Fragile Nature of Modern Civilization]]></title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/1/3/178</link>
	<description>It is estimated that roughly seventy billion human beings have lived out their lives on planet earth. It is very unlikely that any of the seven billion currently enjoying this planet will be living out the rest of their life any place else. Nonetheless, many of our movies and much of our literature envisions easy space travel that is scientifically unrealistic. On July 24th, 2012 Adam Frank, a professor of physics and astronomy, wrote an op-ed piece in the New York Times titled: Alone in the Void. This article posited that humanity (Homo sapiens) lives on a planet that is, for all intents and purposes, alone in a vast empty space. Reader comments to this editorial ranged from people who were very confident we were destined to colonize other galaxies to people who had little faith that humanity would even exist on the earth one hundred years from now. The reader’s responses mirror dominant and minority world views of economic theory. The dominant neo-classical economic paradigm is optimistic and growth oriented with faith in technological solutions to pressing social and environmental problems; whereas, the minority paradigm of ecological economics posits a need to move toward a steady state economy governed by the laws of thermodynamics as the preferred path for human progress. I side with ecological economics regarding what collective choices will result in a better future for humanity.</description>

	<prism:publicationName>Humanities</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2012-11-28</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>1</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>3</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
	<prism:doi>10.3390/h1030178</prism:doi>
	<prism:startingPage>178</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>191</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-0787</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title><![CDATA[Alone in the Void: Getting Real about the Tenuous and Fragile Nature of Modern Civilization]]></dc:title>
    <dc:date>2012-11-28</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/h1030178</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Paul Sutton</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/1/3/166">
	<title><![CDATA[Humanities, Vol. 1, Pages 166-177: Human Actions Illustrated in Zen’s Ox-Herding Pictures]]></title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/1/3/166</link>
	<description>The enlightenment from Zen’s perspective is the experiences of action that reveal a horizon of new consciousness. This event of enlightenment is the process of action rather than the outcome of action. Therefore, actions are not just the means to enlightenment but the very core of it. The actions of enlightenment from Zen’s perspective cannot be adequately described and explained in logical terms. Unlike most other Buddhist schools, Zen does not engage in extensive philosophical discourses; its classical literatures are mostly artistic in nature, consisting of collections of koans, poetry, and paintings, etc. The ten ox-herding pictures of Zen Buddhism are recognized as the classical illustration of Zen’s spiritual journey, as it vividly depicts the practice of Zen in a poetic and metaphorical way. They present a visual parable of the path to enlightenment in a narrative sequence of a boy’s searching, seeing, wrestling, riding, and transcending of the ox.</description>

	<prism:publicationName>Humanities</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2012-10-17</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>1</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>3</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
	<prism:doi>10.3390/h1030166</prism:doi>
	<prism:startingPage>166</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>177</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-0787</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title><![CDATA[Human Actions Illustrated in Zen’s Ox-Herding Pictures]]></dc:title>
    <dc:date>2012-10-17</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/h1030166</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Yong Zhi</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/1/3/145">
	<title><![CDATA[Humanities, Vol. 1, Pages 145-165: Illuminating Our World: An Essay on the Unraveling of the Species Problem, with Assistance from a Barnacle and a Goose]]></title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/1/3/145</link>
	<description>In order to plan for the future, we must understand the past. This paper investigates the manner in which both naturalists and the wider community view one of the most intriguing of all questions: what makes a species special? Consideration is given to the essentialist view—a rigid perspective and ancient, Aristotelian perspective—that all organisms are fixed in form and nature. In the middle of the 19th century, Charles Darwin changed this by showing that species are indeed mutable, even humans. Advances in genetics have reinforced the unbroken continuum between taxa, a feature long understood by palaeontologists; but irrespective of this, we have persisted in utilizing the ‘species concept’—a mechanism employed primarily to understand and to manipulate the world around us. The vehicles used to illustrate this journey in perception are the barnacle goose (a bird), and the goose barnacle (a crustacean). The journey of these two has been entwined since antiquity—in folklore, religion, diet and even science.</description>

	<prism:publicationName>Humanities</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2012-10-15</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>1</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>3</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
	<prism:doi>10.3390/h1030145</prism:doi>
	<prism:startingPage>145</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>165</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-0787</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title><![CDATA[Illuminating Our World: An Essay on the Unraveling of the Species Problem, with Assistance from a Barnacle and a Goose]]></dc:title>
    <dc:date>2012-10-15</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/h1030145</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>John Buckeridge</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Rob Watts</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/1/3/117">
	<title><![CDATA[Humanities, Vol. 1, Pages 117-144: Making Nothing Happen: Yeats, Heidegger, Pessoa, and the Emergence of Post-Romanticism]]></title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/1/3/117</link>
	<description>Through close readings of the work of two major poets of the twentieth century—W.B. Yeats and Fernando Pessoa—this paper identifies and attempts to make sense of an important shift in European modernism away from a broadly Romantic aesthetic toward what might be called “post-Romanticism.” Taking its cue from W.H. Auden’s “In Memory of W.B. Yeats,” where having stated that “poetry makes nothing happen” he asserts that it survives as “a way of happening,” and drawing on the philosophy of Heidegger and Jean-Luc Nancy, this paper argues that this shift from Romanticism to post-Romanticism hinges on a deep metaphysical reconceptualization of poetry understood as poiesis. In light of this reassessment of the aesthetics and philosophical affinities of poetic modernism, it is argued that post-Romanticism should be understood as offering a modest, salutary, phenomenological re-acquaintance with our involvement with the everyday world, in sharp contrast to the transcendental ambitions of the Romantic aesthetic that preceded it.</description>

	<prism:publicationName>Humanities</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2012-10-01</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>1</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>3</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
	<prism:doi>10.3390/h1030117</prism:doi>
	<prism:startingPage>117</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>144</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-0787</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title><![CDATA[Making Nothing Happen: Yeats, Heidegger, Pessoa, and the Emergence of Post-Romanticism]]></dc:title>
    <dc:date>2012-10-01</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/h1030117</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>James Corby</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/1/2/104">
	<title><![CDATA[Humanities, Vol. 1, Pages 104-116: Babel’s Dawn and the Primeval Language. Between Translation and Narrative, or the Syriac Version of an Old Jewish Tradition]]></title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/1/2/104</link>
	<description>The story of the Tower of Babel in Gn 11:1–9 gave rise to a rich literary tradition, in which the topos of the primeval language emerged. Whereas the interpretative tradition originating among the Jewish commentators upheld that the original language was Hebrew, in the heart of the Eastern Christian communities some authors supported this theory, but others stated it to be Aramaic. The aim of the present article is to show how a celebrated chronicler like Michael the Syrian (12th c. CE) composed his version of the account narrated in Gn 11:1–9 by echoing different textual sources, but at the same time by combining both translation and narrative techniques in composing his text.</description>

	<prism:publicationName>Humanities</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2012-06-26</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>1</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>2</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
	<prism:doi>10.3390/h1020104</prism:doi>
	<prism:startingPage>104</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>116</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-0787</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title><![CDATA[Babel’s Dawn and the Primeval Language. Between Translation and Narrative, or the Syriac Version of an Old Jewish Tradition]]></dc:title>
    <dc:date>2012-06-26</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/h1020104</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Juan Pedro Monferrer-Sala</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/1/1/80">
	<title><![CDATA[Humanities, Vol. 1, Pages 80-103: Humanity’s Bioregional Places: Linking Space, Aesthetics, and the Ethics of Reinhabitation]]></title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/1/1/80</link>
	<description>Originally theorized as a radical environmental movement, bioregionalism connects humanity to the specificities of a place. To establish greater cohesion between environments and cultures, bioregionalism endeavors to integrate societal activities and the nuances of natural spaces known as bioregions. The criticism of bioregionalism, however, pertains to the shortcomings of circumscribing culture within ecological boundaries. In light of its criticism, bioregionalism can strengthen its theoretical basis and its potential for cultural change by engaging critically with space, aesthetics, and ethics. This engagement first involves the recognition of bioregionalism as an ethical possibility based on the fundamental spatial unit of the watershed. A watershed comprises vital regional ecological processes, bearing discrete aesthetic properties and patterns. Through the sensuous possibilities of watersheds, a bioregional aesthetic can be integrated with an ethic of reinhabitation. The relation between space, aesthetics, and ethics gives form to and sustains the experience of place, which is intrinsically related to promoting the awareness of ecological sustainability.</description>

	<prism:publicationName>Humanities</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2012-05-09</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>1</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>1</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
	<prism:doi>10.3390/h1010080</prism:doi>
	<prism:startingPage>80</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>103</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-0787</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title><![CDATA[Humanity’s Bioregional Places: Linking Space, Aesthetics, and the Ethics of Reinhabitation]]></dc:title>
    <dc:date>2012-05-09</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/h1010080</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>John Charles Ryan</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/1/1/72">
	<title><![CDATA[Humanities, Vol. 1, Pages 72-79: Translation as the Catalyst of Cultural Transfer]]></title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/1/1/72</link>
	<description>This essay reflects on the many different strategies involved in translation, which is both a linguistic and a cultural-historical strategy. Examples from the Middle Ages and the Modern Age are adduced to illustrate the huge impact which translations have had on peoples and societies throughout time.</description>

	<prism:publicationName>Humanities</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2012-03-30</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>1</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>1</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Editorial</prism:section>
	<prism:doi>10.3390/h1010072</prism:doi>
	<prism:startingPage>72</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>79</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-0787</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title><![CDATA[Translation as the Catalyst of Cultural Transfer]]></dc:title>
    <dc:date>2012-03-30</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/h1010072</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Albrecht Classen</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/1/1/64">
	<title><![CDATA[Humanities, Vol. 1, Pages 64-71: Rendering Humanities Sustainable]]></title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/1/1/64</link>
	<description>Launching a journal intended to cover the entire humanities is certainly an audacious project, for two reasons at least. Firstly, this journal will be expected to cover much academic diversity, particularly by including the “social sciences.” However, in this time of rampant overspecialization, perhaps it is precisely such wholeness and breadth of vision that could become a journal’s strength. Secondly, since the viability of the humanities has been questioned from a number of perspectives it seems essential to meet these challenges by reinventing the discipline in response to issues raised—also a major task. It involves justifying the continuation of humanistic traditions. For this, humanists need to consider the nature of these challenges, understand and analyze them, and respond to them. It is therefore inevitable that a forward-looking, new journal in this discipline will deem it relevant to review these matters. [...]</description>

	<prism:publicationName>Humanities</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2011-10-19</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>1</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>1</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Editorial</prism:section>
	<prism:doi>10.3390/h1010064</prism:doi>
	<prism:startingPage>64</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>71</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-0787</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title><![CDATA[Rendering Humanities Sustainable]]></dc:title>
    <dc:date>2011-10-19</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/h1010064</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Robert G. Bednarik</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/1/1/62">
	<title><![CDATA[Humanities, Vol. 1, Pages 62-63: Humanity and Sustainability]]></title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/1/1/62</link>
	<description>So far our open access publishing company MDPI (Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute) has published mainly science, medicine and technology journals. To become a multidisciplinary publisher, we launched the journal Sustainability [1]. More recently, we started to run several social science journals, including Societies [2], Religions [3], Administrative Sciences [4] and Behavioral Sciences [5]. Today we published the first paper [6] of the inaugural issue of Humanities (ISSN 2076-0787). This will be an international open access journal, publishing scholarly papers of high quality across all humanities disciplines.
As a publisher, I would like to publish journals surrounding the topics of sustainability and I believe the humanities as a discipline of academic studies are very important. As a scientist, I believed science and technology will only benefit human beings. I was raised in a small village, living a very primitive life in a peasant family: no electricity, no machines, of course no TV and no refrigerator. Now, the life of my children is completely different. Even my own life has completely changed. I have witnessed very rapid changes: more and more machines are used to consume mineral resources and energy and to pollute the environment, in order to produce more and more powerful machines (we are also launching a journal titled Machines, in which the relationship between Man and machine should be an interesting topic.). Machines are more and more like human individuals consuming resources themselves (we are launching a journal titled Resources). [...]</description>

	<prism:publicationName>Humanities</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2011-09-16</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>1</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>1</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Editorial</prism:section>
	<prism:doi>10.3390/h1010062</prism:doi>
	<prism:startingPage>62</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>63</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-0787</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title><![CDATA[Humanity and Sustainability]]></dc:title>
    <dc:date>2011-09-16</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/h1010062</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Shu-Kun Lin</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/1/1/54">
	<title><![CDATA[Humanities, Vol. 1, Pages 54-61: Humanities — To Be or Not To Be, That Is the Question]]></title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/1/1/54</link>
	<description>Let us carry some proverbial owls to Athens or coals to Newcastle, that is, revisit issues that have been discussed and examined by so many different voices in the past and the present. However, those issues by themselves are so powerful and important, so urgent and difficult that we must never tire of examining them always anew because they pertain centrally to our own human existence and prove to be the defining factors for our survival as a species. Why do we need the humanities as an academic discipline in the university, or in our educational system at large? What role do the humanities play both inside and outside the academy? Most universities in this world somehow acknowledge the importance of languages, literatures, music, art history, philosophy, religion, and education. But when it comes to basic financial issues, the humanities tend to be the first victims of budget cuts, if we disregard specifically liberal arts colleges that focus on the humanities above all or exclusively. [...]</description>

	<prism:publicationName>Humanities</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2011-09-16</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>1</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>1</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Editorial</prism:section>
	<prism:doi>10.3390/h1010054</prism:doi>
	<prism:startingPage>54</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>61</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-0787</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title><![CDATA[Humanities — To Be or Not To Be, That Is the Question]]></dc:title>
    <dc:date>2011-09-16</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/h1010054</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Albrecht Classen</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/1/1/1">
	<title><![CDATA[Humanities, Vol. 1, Pages 1-53: The Origins of Human Modernity]]></title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/1/1/1</link>
	<description>This paper addresses the development of the human species during a relatively short period in its evolutionary history, the last forty millennia of the Pleistocene. The hitherto dominant hypotheses of “modern” human origins, the replacement and various other “out of Africa” models, have recently been refuted by the findings of several disciplines, and by a more comprehensive review of the archaeological evidence. The complexity of the subject is reconsidered in the light of several relevant frames of reference, such as those provided by niche construction and gene-culture co-evolutionary theories, and particularly by the domestication hypothesis. The current cultural, genetic and paleoanthropological evidence is reviewed, as well as other germane factors, such as the role of neurodegenerative pathologies, the neotenization of humans in their most recent evolutionary history, and the question of cultural selection-based self-domestication. This comprehensive reassessment leads to a paradigmatic shift in the way recent human evolution needs to be viewed. This article explains fully how humans became what they are today.</description>

	<prism:publicationName>Humanities</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2011-09-02</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>1</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>1</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
	<prism:doi>10.3390/h1010001</prism:doi>
	<prism:startingPage>1</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>53</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-0787</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title><![CDATA[The Origins of Human Modernity]]></dc:title>
    <dc:date>2011-09-02</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/h1010001</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Robert G. Bednarik</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
    
<cc:License rdf:about="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/">
	<cc:permits rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/ns#Reproduction" />
	<cc:permits rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/ns#Distribution" />
	<cc:permits rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/ns#DerivativeWorks" />
</cc:License>

</rdf:RDF>
