Philosophical Anthropology 2.0. Reading Plessner in the Age of Converging Technologies
Jos de Mul. Philosophical Anthropology 2.0. In: Jos de Mul. (ed.), Plessner's Philosophical Anthropology. Perspectives and Prospects. Amsterdam/Chicago: Amsterdam University Press/Chicago University Press, 2014, 457-475.
Introduction
The aim of this chapter is to demonstrate the relevance of Helmuth Plessner’s philosophical anthropology in the twenty-first century. In the first part of this chapter, I will argue that the heydays of philosophical anthropology in the first half of the twentieth is closely connected with the (Darwinian) naturalization of the worldview. Whereas the debate on naturalization resulted in an unfruitful opposition between ‘greedy reductionism’ and a no less ‘greedy transcendentism,’ Plessner’s philosophical anthropology, presented in his magnum opus Die Stufen des Organischen undderMensch (1928), offered a promising ‘third way.’
论（生物）技术崇高 
One of the most striking developments in the history of the sciences over the past fifty years has been the gradual moving towards each other of biology and computer science and their increasing tendency to overlap. Two things may be held responsible for that. The first is the tempestuous development of molecular biology which followed the first adequate description, in 1953, of the structure of the double helix of the DNA, the carrier of hereditary information. Biologists therefore became increasingly interested in computer science, the science which focuses, among other things, on the question what information really is and how it is encoded and transferred. No less important was that it would have been impossible to sequence and decipher the human genome without the use of ever stronger computers. This resulted in a fundamental digitalization of biology. This phenomenon is particularly visible in molecular biology, where DNA-research increasingly moves from the analogical world of biology to the digital world of the computer.[1]
In Dilthey’s Lebensphilosopie, anthropology and history are closely connected. As Dilthey himself states in an often quoted remark: »Was der Mensch sei, sagt nur die Geschichte«.[1] However, for Dilthey history exclusively means cultural history. In order to develop a proper understanding of the historical condition of man, we should take natural history into account as well. After all, as a psycho-physical unity, Homo sapiens sapiens is the historical product of a complex interplay between both natural and cultural developments. Moreover, in the age of the life sciences, natural and cultural history seem to breach into one each other with an ever increasing tendency. Biotechnologies such as genetic modification, pathway engineering and genome transplantation transform organisms into cultural artifacts; and in the attempts to create artificial life (arguably the holy grail of synthetic biology), cultural artifacts increasingly display qualities that used to be restricted to organic life.
Immense est le domaine du jeu - Emile Benveniste
Fate. Sooner or later it knocks at everyone’s door. In many different ways. It can enter our lives gradually in the guise of an incurable disease or spring on us suddenly in the guise of an unexpected oncoming car in our lane. It can befall us from the outside like a devastating tsunami, or loom up from within like an all-consuming jealousy. Fate can happen unintentionally, or be done to us – or another person – on purpose. It comes in the horrible guise of war and the intoxicating appeal of an addiction. It is painful when it happens to us, and often even more painful when it befalls someone we love. Without wanting it our frail happiness is continuously interrupted by fatal events. And even when we are lucky enough to avoid grand catastrophes in our lives, in the end we inevitably lose our loved ones and we, ourselves die. While fate inescapably befalls us we find it hard to bear that thought. It is a burden that we cannot carry, but that we also cannot shed.
.png)
Als in een spiritualitijd van hier en nu de schijn heilig wordt verklaard, dan in ieder geval inzoverre afstand wordt genomen van een schijnheiligheid die het Andere slechts tolereert, omdat dit niets bedreigt. En als dit leven in de heiligheid van de schijn een affirmatie is van de kunst-matige kwaliteit van een bestaan aan de grenzen van de waarheid, dus daar waar de waarde van de waarheden wordt beproefd, dan opent die niet-plaats zich als een afgrond die het nu en later, het hier en dat wat zich aan gene zijde ervan uitstrekt met elkaar verbindt. Het is in deze nimmer af te sluiten ruimte, dat de val van de metafysica plaats vindt en de tuimeling, die leven heet, een weg moet vinden. 
.PNG)
Jos de Mul. De groteske reductie. Of: wat ik van Oudemans heb afgeleerd. In: H. van Kampen en T.E. Jaroszek (red.), Th.C.W. Oudemans. 60, Leiden: Instituut voor Wijsbegeerte, 2011, 155-161.
Vanwege de transitie naar Joomla 5 en de JA Teline V Magazine template is deze website voorlopig onder constructie. De meer dan duizend items die betrekking hebben op mijn publicaties, lezingen en media-optredens zijn weliswaar nog steeds allemaal te raadplegen, maar bij een deel (veelal oudere) items moeten tekst, afbeeldingen en/of audiovisuele clips opnieuw of alsnog worden toegevoegd. Klik voor details over de opbouw van deze website en het gebruik van de nieuwe database annex zoekmachine de LEES MEER button.
