[-] Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorBien, Joseph, 1936-eng
dc.contributor.authorNovy, Ronald, 1965-eng
dc.date.issued2007eng
dc.date.submitted2007 Springeng
dc.descriptionThe entire dissertation/thesis text is included in the research.pdf file; the official abstract appears in the short.pdf file (which also appears in the research.pdf); a non-technical general description, or public abstract, appears in the public.pdf file.eng
dc.descriptionTitle from title screen of research.pdf file (viewed on March 24, 2009)eng
dc.descriptionVita.eng
dc.descriptionThesis (Ph. D.) University of Missouri-Columbia 2007.eng
dc.description.abstract[ACCESS RESTRICTED TO THE UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI AT REQUEST OF AUTHOR.] In this paper, I argue for the homo aestheticus thesis - the claim that our species nature is that of artistic producer and consumer; that this nature is a selected-for, biobehavioral trait; and that to be alienated is to be living apart from this basic nature. Marx regularly uses aesthetic language to distinguish human from animal labor; perversion of creative labor - the reduction of human to animal - is the root of alienation. I take Marx and Engels at their word when, they praise Origin of Species for containing - the basis in natural history for our views.This claim turns on Darwin's use of the term - struggle for existence. In the West, Darwin's theory of natural selection has been understood through a Malthusian lens; it need not be. This - Darwin without Malthus - position was developed primarily by naturalists working in the Russian East and explicated most famously in Kropotkin's Mutual Aid; such an understanding of natural selection I suggest is what Marx and Engels have in mind. The claim then is that evolution has produced in us a species nature to modify the natural world through creative labor. It is this which separates us from the other biological creatures: our humanization of the environment requires the development of characteristics and tools necessary to meet these newly created needs. As social and historical creatures both producing and produced by this dialectic of need and creativity, human nature is simply not the sort of thing that is either wholly fixed or wholly plastic.eng
dc.identifier.merlinb66672806eng
dc.identifier.oclc316875263eng
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.32469/10355/5946eng
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10355/5946
dc.languageEnglisheng
dc.publisherUniversity of Missouri--Columbiaeng
dc.relation.ispartofcommunityUniversity of Missouri--Columbia. Graduate School. Theses and Dissertationseng
dc.rightsAccess is limited to the campus of the University of Missouri--Columbia.eng
dc.subject.lcshLife -- Origineng
dc.subject.lcshPhilosophy of natureeng
dc.titleHome aestheticus : species being and the struggle for existenceeng
dc.typeThesiseng
thesis.degree.disciplinePhilosophy (MU)eng
thesis.degree.grantorUniversity of Missouri--Columbiaeng
thesis.degree.levelDoctoraleng
thesis.degree.namePh. D.eng


Files in this item

[PDF]
[PDF]
[PDF]

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

[-] Show simple item record