Civilisational crisis and post-human society

In a world where hostile sectarianism and apathy to hunger and ecological crisis are grossly surpassed by new-fangled technological innovations, humans have to learn to accept responsibility for themselves and the world, and face the concrete and undetected threats that lie therein.

Unrestrained course: With its destructive capacity, Covid-19 might arouse introspection on the death of reason as well as drawbacks and progress of science.

Shelley Walia

Professor Emeritus & fellow, English and cultural studies, Panjab university

At his best, man is the noblest of all animals; separated from law and justice, he is the worst. — Aristotle, Politics

In times of a global pandemic nightmare, it is imperative to ask in the words of the French artist Paul Gaugin, “Where did we come from? What are we? Where are we going?” From the time of classical humanism, has the world progressed on matters of freedom and justice, or are we stalled — or even moving backward? Are we now in the stage of the ‘post-human’overtaken by the superhuman potential of controlling human behviour as well as using innovative medical technology and bioscience to extend life beyond unimaginable limits?

This question puts the traditional boundaries between the human, the animal, and the technological, under interrogation. Civilisations over the last century have conspicuously moved away from the temper of renaissance humanism that began in the 15th century, striking a note of the inherently privileged status of the homo sapiens. Human potential became the Faustian worldview that represented the undying quest of humanity towards freedom and progress, even if it was at the cost of ecological disasters and unbridled human, animal and environmental exploitation.

However, in two ways, humanism went against the ethical interpretation of life. First, the emphasis was wholly on the human-centred or what is called the ‘anthropocentric’status of its cosmography, underpinned by the Eurocentric self-centred notion of its civilisational supremacy, that triggered the colonial scramble for the third world.

Secondly, technological development in the long 19th century enabled the European nations to make forays into Africa, the Americas and Asia, giving rise to the ideologically contested terrain of empire. Underneath the facade of free trade, peace and democracy, there existed a permanent state of war, manipulation and authoritarianism. Understandably, it could rightly be surmised that though there was a surfeit of academic lecturing and debate on the subject of liberalism in the centres of higher learning, the passion for overseas exploitation remained unquenchable to date, particularly in the case of a theoretical Pax Britannica followed by Pax Americana that paradoxically held out the promise of world peace through adopting the role of a global hegemon.

Humanism or the enlightenment project that steered the industrial age was destined to flounder right from the start. Obsessed as it was with the progress of the humans, the developed world callously went ahead with its violent politics aimed not only at the colonised, but nature and the animal world too. No wonder, we now have a world-wide crisis with the lethal virus emerging from the ‘wet markets’ of our meat-eating humans. The question of the ethics of animal rights foregrounds not only the value of animals, but also what it is to be human. Our collaboration with violence and killing is apparent and more so is our unthinking submission to predatory market hypnosis.

During the course of a holiday in the Swiss Alps, Vaclav Havel, the former President of Czechoslovakia and an outstanding playwright, sees a lonely man on a street clutching his cell phone deceiving himself into believing that he is communicating with his dear ones. Havel asks: “But does it enable people to know one another any better? Do they like each other more? I do not think so.” Placing the central emphasis on the human realm, we have finally ended in becoming victims of science.

In short, humanism called for a new order that ended up in this quagmire of violence, disease and human suffering. Rational thought on free will, human motivation and individual growth propounded by humanism, culminated in the irrationality of the culture industry and the powers that control the very mind of the public. It is the post-human world of big corporations, unregulated banks and insurance companies that make key decisions not only on governing society, but also on the categories of inclusion and exclusion.

Such politics sponsors an ideology that contests any policy intended to mitigate human suffering or promote social progress. It is amazing that the unemployment of millions does not outrage the ruling elite. Operating through deceit and deception, the world of overwhelming consumerism, appeals only to common sense values with the motive of discouraging any scepticism or interrogation of the systems or the powers that be.

Moreover, the obsession with power through data has destroyed the inviolability of the individual. The modern techno-savvy age brings in its wake not just the blitz of information with no measurable increase in knowledge or wisdom but systems that aim at behaviour control threatening human nature with serious consequences.

Would we then like to create a society we actually want to live in? Are we prepared to go back to Huxley’s ‘designer’babies with varying intellectual and physical competence. As machines take over human time and consciousness, are we not leaving ourselves behind? It is clear that the free self-contained child of the Enlightenment seems all but dead. The human stands erased with its very foundations of reason and observation challenged. We become unrecognisable as humans. How then can we advance the task of renewing a common world in these dark times?

It is hoped that the humanist worldview would finally redeem the human race by holding on to its institutions of liberalism and justice. Understandably, medicine and technological engineering have made tangible advances. But it must be kept in mind that the understanding of the human progress is neither linear nor stable, it is fraught with complexity and disruption. Change is inevitable and has to be managed and channelled towards maximum benefit to humanity. The amalgamation of the human and the mechanical can be acceptable to the extent that the arrogant anti-narcissistic sentiment of triumphalism over nature and the living forms gives way to the re-evaluation of the non-human world. We are, indeed, not at the centre of the universe.

In a world where hostile sectarianism and apathy to hunger and the ecological crisis are grossly surpassed by new-fangled technological innovations, humans have to learn to accept responsibility for themselves and the world, and face the concrete and undetected threats that lie therein. The irresponsible, unrestrained course of civilisation, in which, to some extent, we all are complicit, is one of the contributory causes of the malaise of violence and oppression. Covid-19, with its contemptuous destructive supremacy might arouse humanity to a little introspection on the death of reason as well as on drawbacks and progress of science.