Contemporary Anthropocentrism: On Science and Traditional Cultures

Leonardo, Vol. 13, pp. 223-228. Pergamon Press, 1980. Printed in Great Britain. CONTEMPORARY ANTHROPOCENTRISM: ON SCIENCE AND TRADITIONAL CULTURES* Pierre Auger* * I. Anthropocentrism is of human origin, and certain early tribes or ethnic groups considered themselves as the center of the world, and all the rest, including other ethnic groups, as part of a more or less hostile environment . The concept of the unity of the human species later led to a more general anthropocentrism in which the creation of the universe was believed to be directly related to the species, if not indeed at its service. This point of view was codified in ideological traditions, and its application was either restricted to a single chosen people or extended to all humans, who were considered as issuing from a divinity. This is the source of the obstinate resistance of those who oppose Darwin's theory of evolution, expecially when it is claimed to include humans. This anthropocentrism can be connected in some 'natural' way to the behavior of all animals. The immediate actions of living creatures are directed toward each individual's survival, and, although these actions have a strictly physiological origin in the lower orders of animals, in the higher orders are added more elaborate instinctive reactions involving a central nervous system. From the earliest stages of evolution, actions of a genetic type, which contribute to the continued existence of a species, have been added to those of 'individual interest', especially in reproduction and assistance to offspring. Furthermore, the survival of individuals in a group of social animals completes itself in the survival of the group-the anthill, the beehive, human societies. There are, thus, three 'centrisms ' for explaining actions of individual animalsegocentrism , speciocentrism and sociocentrism. In the case of humans, is the justification of the survival of the species, asserting itself through speciocentrism , a necessary stage for future evolution? Those who have pondered this question (with the exception of Nietzsche) have seen the justification not in the expectation of a 'super' human but in the building of a society and culture. Would humans thus 'This abridgement is based on a translation by Jeanne Ferguson of the article Un Antropocentrisme moderne that appeared in Diogene, p. 29 (No. 103, July-Sept. 1978). "Physicist, 12 rue Emile Faguet, 75014 Paris, France. 223 be led into a situation where the culture of a society would be equivalent to the instincts and conditioning of social animals such as ants and bees? In the course of history, human cultures have survived for centuries almost without change. Philosophers and religious leaders have not been lacking to uphold the doctrine of 'survival' of a particular ideology or form of society, the presence on Earth of individuals being justified by their contribution to this survival. Since the origin of Homo sapiens, there has been cultural evolution. 'Invention-mutations' appeared and were adopted when they were advantageous either for survival or in competitive situations. The justification for being members of a group and as participants in a tradition had to be reestablished each time an important 'invention-mutation' appeared by integrating it into the tradition on a new cultural level. The high frequency of 'invention-mutations' at the present time, whether they be ideological, religious or partisan, has rendered successive justifications more and more difficult to sustain. Selection still plays a role, however it is becoming more and more ineffective because of the possibility of a rapid transfer of traditions from group to group. In the last few decades one has witnessed the introduction -in certain cases the decline--of strong sociocultural systems, each with its own set of justifications. Selection through the struggle for survival between supporters of such systems is exemplified at present by the new terms 'cold war' and 'peaceful coexistence'. If one objects that it is an opposition of social systems rather than of cultures, a respondent can refer to terms adopted as qualifiers by the opponents themselves, such as the term 'cultural revolution' and Kulturkampf. Some thinkers-among them Julian Huxley-saw a parallel between biological evolution and the evolution of human socio-cultural structures. They announced that human thought follows the course of organic life in an immense general evolution...