Humanities

Research

294 KiB

Open AccessArticle

The Culture of Endings

by Livio Dobrez

Humanities 2014, 3(4), 711-739; https://doi.org/10.3390/h3040711 - 17 Dec 2014

Cited by 1 | Viewed by 5658

This article analyses the cultural state of mind characteristic of historical periods at some kind of endpoint: the end of a world or even of the world or, most hypothetically, of the universe. This is the idea of Last Days. In order to [...] Read more.

This article analyses the cultural state of mind characteristic of historical periods at some kind of endpoint: the end of a world or even of the world or, most hypothetically, of the universe. This is the idea of Last Days. In order to contextualize it, it is necessary to consider varying conceptions of temporality: a hunter-gatherer model, models of cyclical time and of linear time. At least in the West, this last may be understood as a product of Judaeo-Christian thinking, of which the article gives an account focussed on the motifs of eschatology, apocalypse and messianism. Finally the article proposes that the present moment in history, characterized as “Post-Modernity”, may readily be read as a time of endings, perhaps even of a conclusive end. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Humanity’s Future)

414 KiB

Open AccessArticle

The Progress of Science—Past, Present and Future

by Arthur Rörsch

Humanities 2014, 3(4), 442-516; https://doi.org/10.3390/h3040442 - 2 Oct 2014

Cited by 6 | Viewed by 17010

Abstract

Scientific orthodoxy based on the acquired authority of some scientists has seriously hampered the progress of the natural sciences in the past and continues to do so today because of new societal influences, such as directive funding and political interference in the setting [...] Read more.

Scientific orthodoxy based on the acquired authority of some scientists has seriously hampered the progress of the natural sciences in the past and continues to do so today because of new societal influences, such as directive funding and political interference in the setting of research objectives. Enhancing the progress of science must continue to be an important priority in order to meet the future needs of mankind. Yet priority setting between different branches of research is currently controversial because of the limited availability of funds and the political interference. For sound priority setting, an adequate level of scientific literacy is required among policy makers, a subject that will attract attention throughout this paper. The “introduction” gives an overview of the issues at stake. Prevailing pessimistic views of the future of our complex society are viewed as being similar to a medieval doomsday syndrome. Pathways to a new renaissance and age of reason are suggested. Three major recommendations are made: (i) Freedom of inquiry must be protected; (ii) The political misuse of potential environmental scares needs to be investigated before doomsday predictions alarm public perceptions and hence shape policies; (iii) The search for excellence in the leadership of science should be emphasized because it should not be based largely on acquired authority. The current controversy over possible impacts of rising levels of CO₂ in the atmosphere on climate is analyzed as a case study. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Humanity’s Future)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

191 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Evolutionary Medicine and Future of Humanity: Will Evolution Have the Final Word?

by Arthur Saniotis and Maciej Henneberg

Humanities 2013, 2(2), 278-291; https://doi.org/10.3390/h2020278 - 5 Jun 2013

Cited by 9 | Viewed by 9098

Abstract

Evolutionary medicine in its classical form assumes that since cultural evolution is faster than biological evolution, ailments of modern people are a result of mismatch between adaptations to the past environments and current situations. A core principle is that we, humans, having evolved [...] Read more.

Evolutionary medicine in its classical form assumes that since cultural evolution is faster than biological evolution, ailments of modern people are a result of mismatch between adaptations to the past environments and current situations. A core principle is that we, humans, having evolved for millions of years in a specific natural environment (environment of evolutionary adaptation EEA) are biologically adapted to this past environment and the ancient lifestyle. This adaptation to the past produces major mismatch of our bodies with the present, highly anthropic and thus “artificial” living conditions. This article provides two areas of possible future evolution, diet and physical activity levels which have been dramatically altered in industrialised societies. Consequently, micro-evolution is an on-going process. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Humanity’s Future)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

247 KiB

Open AccessArticle

The Speculative Neuroscience of the Future Human Brain

by Robert A. Dielenberg

Humanities 2013, 2(2), 209-252; https://doi.org/10.3390/h2020209 - 21 May 2013

Cited by 2 | Viewed by 11511

Abstract

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 [...] Read more.

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? Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Humanity’s Future)

66 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Biodiversity, Extinction, and Humanity’s Future: The Ecological and Evolutionary Consequences of Human Population and Resource Use

by Jeffrey V. Yule, Robert J. Fournier and Patrick L. Hindmarsh

Humanities 2013, 2(2), 147-159; https://doi.org/10.3390/h2020147 - 2 Apr 2013

Cited by 6 | Viewed by 13173

Abstract

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, [...] Read more.

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. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Humanity’s Future)

258 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Sustainability—What Are the Odds? Envisioning the Future of Our Environment, Economy and Society

by Stephen J. Jordan

Humanities 2013, 2(2), 119-127; https://doi.org/10.3390/h2020119 - 26 Mar 2013

Cited by 2 | Viewed by 5675

Abstract

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) [...] Read more.

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. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Humanity’s Future)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

604 KiB

Open AccessArticle

From Human Past to Human Future

by Robert G. Bednarik

Humanities 2013, 2(1), 20-55; https://doi.org/10.3390/h2010020 - 9 Jan 2013

Cited by 1 | Viewed by 7807

Abstract

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 [...] Read more.

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. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Humanity’s Future)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

593 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Surprise and Uncertainty—Framing Regional Geohazards in the Theory of Complexity

by Beate M. W. Ratter

Humanities 2013, 2(1), 1-19; https://doi.org/10.3390/h2010001 - 4 Jan 2013

Cited by 9 | Viewed by 8171

Abstract

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 [...] Read more.

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? Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Humanity’s Future)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

473 KiB

Open AccessArticle

The Consequences of Human Behavior

by Derek Hodgson

Humanities 2012, 1(3), 205-228; https://doi.org/10.3390/h1030205 - 10 Dec 2012

Cited by 1 | Viewed by 10300

Abstract

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 [...] Read more.

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. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Humanity’s Future)

466 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Alone in the Void: Getting Real about the Tenuous and Fragile Nature of Modern Civilization

by Paul C. Sutton

Humanities 2012, 1(3), 178-191; https://doi.org/10.3390/h1030178 - 28 Nov 2012

Cited by 2 | Viewed by 6203

Abstract

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. [...] Read more.

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. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Humanity’s Future)

► Show Figures

Graphical abstract

524 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Illuminating Our World: An Essay on the Unraveling of the Species Problem, with Assistance from a Barnacle and a Goose

by John Buckeridge and Rob Watts

Humanities 2012, 1(3), 145-165; https://doi.org/10.3390/h1030145 - 15 Oct 2012

Cited by 1 | Viewed by 8338

Abstract

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 [...] Read more.

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. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Humanity’s Future)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

Journal Menu

Journal Browser

Humanity’s Future

Share This Special Issue

Special Issue Editor

Special Issue Information

Keywords

Benefits of Publishing in a Special Issue

Published Papers (11 papers)

Research

Further Information

Guidelines

MDPI Initiatives

Follow MDPI