The Future Of Post Human Knowledge

This timely book examines the rise of posthumanism as both a material condition and a developing philosophical-ethical project in the age of cloning, gene engineering, organ transplants and implants. Nayar first maps the political and philosophical critiques of traditional humanism, revealing its exclusionary and ‘speciesist’ politics that position the human as a distinctive and dominant life form. He then contextualizes the posthumanist vision which, drawing upon biomedical, engineering and techno-scientific studies, concludes that human consciousness is shaped by its co-evolution with other life forms, and our human form inescapably influenced by tools and technology. Finally the book explores posthumanism’s roots in disability studies, animal studies and bioethics to underscore the constructed nature of ‘normalcy’ in bodies, and the singularity of species and life itself. As this book powerfully demonstrates, posthumanism marks a radical reassessment of the human as constituted by symbiosis, assimilation, difference and dependence upon and with other species. Mapping the terrain of these far-reaching debates, Posthumanism will be an invaluable companion to students of cultural studies and modern and contemporary literature.

Why should inquiry be possible, only if some knowledge is required to guide it, as conventionally understood? Contrary to the conventional wisdom held by many thinkers in all human history hitherto existing, there are some fundamental dialectic principles hidden behind any categories of understanding in knowing. And these principles impose some constraints, at both methodological and ontological levels, together with other levels in culture, society, nature, and the mind - on how reality is to be understood. Furthermore, the specific categories of understanding (as conventionally understood), even if valid at all (which are often not the case), are often not that important, when compared with these more fundamental dialectic principles hidden behind them. The focus on understanding the nature of knowledge has been much misplaced, in this sense, in the intellectual history hitherto existing, and much time and talent have been wasted for something less important. If true, this thesis will alter the way of how knowledge is to be understood across the board. Is written by a highly knowledgeable and well-respected scholar A new theory called The Holistic Theory of Knowledge A comprehensive analysis of knowledge in relation to methodology and ontology, from the perspectives of nature, the mind, society, and culture

The question of what defines the human, and of what is human about the humanities, have been shaken up by the radical critiques of humanism and the displacement of anthropomorphism that have gained currency in recent years, propelled in part by rapid advances in our knowledge of living systems and of their genetic and algorithmic codes coupled with the global expansion of a knowledge-intensive capitalism. In Posthuman Knowledge, Rosi Braidotti takes a closer look at the impact of these developments on three major areas: the constitution of our subjectivity, the general production of knowledge and the practice of the academic humanities. Drawing on feminist, postcolonial and anti-racist theory, she argues that the human was never a neutral category but one always linked to power and privilege. Hence we must move beyond the old dualities in which Man defined himself, beyond the sexualized and racialized others that were excluded from humanity. Posthuman knowledge, as Braidotti understands it, is not so much an alternative form of knowledge as a critical call: a call to build a multi-layered and multi-directional project that displaces anthropocentrism while pursuing the analysis of the discriminatory and violent aspects of human activity and interaction wherever they occur. Situated between the exhilaration of scientific and technological advances on the one hand and the threat of climate change devastation on the other, the posthuman convergence encourages us to think hard and creatively about what we are in the process of becoming.

The Posthuman offers both an introduction and major contribution to contemporary debates on the posthuman. Digital 'second life', genetically modified food, advanced prosthetics, robotics and reproductive technologies are familiar facets of our globally linked and technologically mediated societies. This has blurred the traditional distinction between the human and its others, exposing the non-naturalistic structure of the human. The Posthuman starts by exploring the extent to which a post-humanist move displaces the traditional humanistic unity of the subject. Rather than perceiving this situation as a loss of cognitive and moral self-mastery, Braidotti argues that the posthuman helps us make sense of our flexible and multiple identities. Braidotti then analyzes the escalating effects of post-anthropocentric thought, which encompass not only other species, but also the sustainability of our planet as a whole. Because contemporary market economies profit from the control and commodification of all that lives, they result in hybridization, erasing categorical distinctions between the human and other species, seeds, plants, animals and bacteria. These dislocations induced by globalized cultures and economies enable a critique of anthropocentrism, but how reliable are they as indicators of a sustainable future? The Posthuman concludes by considering the implications of these shifts for the institutional practice of the humanities. Braidotti outlines new forms of cosmopolitan neo-humanism that emerge from the spectrum of post-colonial and race studies, as well as gender analysis and environmentalism. The challenge of the posthuman condition consists in seizing the opportunities for new social bonding and community building, while pursuing sustainability and empowerment.

Contrary to the conventional wisdom held by many in much of human history, in this book Peter Baofu here proposes what he calls «the perspectival theory of space-time.» According to this theory, there are multiple perspectives of space and time in society, culture, the mind, and nature, all of which are subject to «the regression-progression principle» in «existential dialectics.» These perspectives exist in society, culture, the mind, and nature with good reasons, being subject to «the symmetry-asymmetry principle» in «existential dialectics» and with some being more successful and hegemonic (dominant) than others. Furthermore and more importantly in the long haul, space and time as humans have known them will end and will eventually be altered by post-humans in different forms, be they here in this universe or in multiverses, subject to «the change-constancy principle» in «existential dialectics.»

What exactly makes creative thinking so magical that, somehow, “everyone can be creative” and, by implication, creativity is a good thing to have—to the point that this popular view is fast becoming a fashionable nonsense in this day and age of ours? To put things in a historical perspective—this popular view contrasts sharply with the opposing view in the older days (e.g., during the Enlightenment and Romantic eras), when people used to think that creativity was primarily for the selected few with extraordinary abilities. Contrary to the respective conventional wisdom in each of the two opposing eras, neither of the two views is valid. Ours is no more so than theirs. This is not to imply, of course, that there are only a few instances of creativity in human history, or, in reverse, that creativity can be equally taught to everyone—and, for that matter, that there is absolutely nothing good about creativity. Obviously, extreme views like this are far from the truth. The point in this book, however, is to show an alternative (better) way to understand the nature of creative thinking, which goes beyond both convergent and divergent thinking, while learning from them. The current fashionable nonsense on creative thinking has tended to minimize its hidden downsides and exaggerate its overstated promises, as part of a new ideology in this age of ours. In addition, there is nothing intrinsically good (or bad) about “creative thinking”—just as there is nothing essentially good (or evil) about “God,” “the King,” “Motherland,” or the like, by analogy. They have all been used and misused in accordance to the interests and powers that be over the ages. If true, this seminal view will fundamentally change the way that we think about the nature of imagination and intuition, with its enormous implications for the future of invention and innovation, in a small sense, and what I originally called its “post-human” fate, in a large one.

Is the invention of accounting so useful that, as Charlie Munger once said, “you have to know accounting. It's the language of practical business life. It was a very useful thing to deliver to civilization. I've heard it came to civilization through Venice which of course was once the great commercial power in the Mediterranean”? (WOO 2013) This positive view on accounting can be contrasted with an opposing view by Paul Browne that “the recent [accounting] scandals have brought a new level of attention to the accounting profession as gatekeepers and custodians of social interest.” (DUM 2013) Contrary to these opposing views (and other ones as will be discussed in the book), accounting (in relation to addition and subtraction) are neither possible (or impossible) nor desirable (or undesirable) to the extent that the respective ideologues (on different sides) would like us to believe. Of course, this reexamination of different opposing views on accounting does not mean that the study of addition and subtraction is useless, or that those fields (related to accounting)—like bookkeeping, auditing, forensics, info management, finance, philosophy of accounting, accounting ethics, lean accounting, mental accounting, environmental audit, creative accounting, carbon accounting, social accounting, and so on—are unimportant. (WK 2013) In fact, neither of these extreme views is plausible. Rather, this book offers an alternative (better) way to understand the future of accounting in regard to the dialectic relationship between addition and subtraction—while learning from different approaches in the literature but without favoring any one of them (nor integrating them, since they are not necessarily compatible with each other). More specifically, this book offers a new theory (that is, the double-sided theory of accounting) to go beyond the existing approaches in a novel way and is organized in four chapters. This seminal project will fundamentally change the way that we think about accounting in relation to addition and subtraction from the combined perspectives of the mind, nature, society, and culture, with enormous implications for the human future and what I originally called its “post-human” fate.

Is chemistry really so valuable that, as Theodore L. Brown (2011) and his colleagues continue to claim in the twelfth edition of their work in 2011, chemistry is “the central science” in connecting the physical sciences with the life and applied sciences? (WK 2011 & 2011; C. Reinhardt 2001) This crowning of chemistry, however, can be contrasted with an opposing view, as Michael Polanyi once questioned the centrality of chemistry, when he wrote that “[n]o inanimate object is ever fully determined by the laws of . . . chemistry,” so other fields of study are just as important. (BQ 2011) Contrary to these conflicting views about chemistry (and other ones discussed in the book), chemistry, in relation to substances and their changes, is neither possible nor desirable to the extent that the respective ideologues on different sides would like us to believe. This challenge to the conflicting views about chemistry does not mean, however, that chemistry is useless, or that those fields of study related to chemistry like astronomy, physics, geology, mathematics, material science, biology, psychology, computer science, and so on should be ignored too. Of course, neither of these extreme views is reasonable. Instead, this book provides an alternative, better way of understanding the future of chemistry —especially in the dialectic context of substances and their changes—while learning from different approaches in literature but without favoring any one of them or integrating them, since they are not necessarily compatible with each other. This book offers a new theory (that is, the creational theory of chemistry) to go beyond the existing approaches to literature in an original way. If successful, this seminal project will fundamentally change the way that we think about chemistry, from the combined perspectives of the mind, nature, society, and culture, with enormous implications for the human future and what the author originally called its “post-human” fate.