I theorized that the human person, or self, is an artifactual creature. A transform of a natural kind, kind, namely homo sapiens; that is we are members of a biological species, but prehistorically the hominid primate we know as homo sapiens, developed far enough biologically that it began to transform its form of primate communication over time into what we call the natural language. And the human species is the only species that we know that has been able to do this, so that the invention and mastery of true language is the same process as the transformation of the human primate into a human person, okay? And now, the point about that is that the human being has no determinate place in the world. That’s not my own idea, but that has come out of the study of Darwinism, that the Darwinian picture of evolution doesn’t fit the human case, because all animals with the exception of the human being, live in what has been called an Umwelt or an ecological niche, that is to say animal’s thrive in a certain kind of environmental setting, and if they’re deprived of that setting, they can’t survive.


Whereas the human being doesn’t have any such ecological niche, and instead transforms the world for whatever its purposes are. As it lives anywhere and everywhere just as it uses anything and everything in the world for its own purposes.1 So, it has no purpose in the world, and it has no place in the world, but it makes its own purpose and it makes its own place. And moral and political visions are simply the consequences of that peculiar and exclusive evolutionary history that is the history of the human being. Isn’t that an interesting idea?

  1. Out Of Balance []
Return to Index