Philosophical Humanism: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(Created page with "Position held by numerous exponents of Existentialism (*) and by representatives of various historicist currents. Some confused ideologies have also emerged based on so-called...") |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Position held by numerous exponents of Existentialism | Position held by numerous exponents of [[Existentialism]] and by representatives of various historicist currents. Some confused ideologies have also emerged based on so-called “human nature.” In general, these naturalists accept the definition of the human being as a “rational animal,” and thus place him in the category of an evolved “animalitas,” with which they do not determine the structural differences between a human being and an animal; rather they note the differences in complexity that develop within one same structure. It is difficult to understand how these naturalists or neo-naturalists can consider themselves to be “humanists.” | ||
[[category: Dictionary of New Humanism]] | [[category: Dictionary of New Humanism]] | ||
Latest revision as of 10:42, 15 September 2017
Position held by numerous exponents of Existentialism and by representatives of various historicist currents. Some confused ideologies have also emerged based on so-called “human nature.” In general, these naturalists accept the definition of the human being as a “rational animal,” and thus place him in the category of an evolved “animalitas,” with which they do not determine the structural differences between a human being and an animal; rather they note the differences in complexity that develop within one same structure. It is difficult to understand how these naturalists or neo-naturalists can consider themselves to be “humanists.”