The paper aims to show the centrality of homo faber in the configuration of the human within the scope of Hans Jonas’s philosophy of life, that is, in his philosophical anthropology. Although Jonas presents a substantive critique of homo faber in the context of intensely technological contemporary societies, diagnosing that modern technique has become a determinant of human life as a whole and, therefore, despite the enormous benefits that it has brought with it, the deleterious impacts it causes not only for humans, but for life on the entire planet, it is not a technophobic perspective, of denial of technique, but of asking about which technique we want. In this sense, homo faber would remain central in his philosophical anthropology and his critique of modern technique as a main point of his ethics of responsibility.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Helder Buenos Aires de Carvalho (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: