… as humanism transforms itself into something that we must helplessly call posthumanism.
What is the imperative to draw from the ‘human’ and why are we helpless to call it otherwise?
Human was not the start of life nor will it probably be present at the very end – ‘posthumanism’ is re-establishing humility, a humbling of the human to a modest beginning of equal status; intrinsic equality as human had yet to construct and impose hierarchical relationships and develop an inflated sense of worth.
Surely, the transformation of humanism would more helpfully be called ‘regression of the ego’ or pre-egoism – removing the human focus altogether.
Is it not boarder-line ironic and limiting through recursion to define the whole by a single part, through the eyes of that single part. If concepts only gain meaning through application of meaning, whilst residing neutral beneath, then just as quickly as the feeling of helplessness took over, empowerment can replace.