Human Condition - Universalmuseum Joanneum

19 Ibid., p. 188.
20 Julia Kristeva,
Hannah Arendt, New York:
Columbia University Press,
2001, p. 174.
21 Ibid., p. 173.
22 Rifkin, The Empathic
Civilization, p. 3.
23 Ibid., p. 43.
24 Ibid., p. 24.
25 Ibid., pp. 24-26.
26 Ibid., p. 148.
27 Ibid., p. 153.
28 Ibid., p. 161.
29 Ibid., p. 168.
30 Ibid., p. 173.
Julia Kristeva praises Arendt for the actualization of “who” while writing about the
philosopher’s acts of thinking, willing and judging that guide her through the space of
the question “who are we?” as opposed to “what are we?” Disclosed only in the action
to which it is attached, the “who” appears as a dynamic actuality, an energeia that
transcends its own doings and activities and that is opposed to any effort towards
reification or objectification. As such, it is a “source” of creativity, though, as Kristeva
observes, the “one that remains outside the actual work process and that is “independent
of what (artists) may achieve.”20 Kristeva too diagnoses a troublesome relationship
of the “who” towards it-self: “who” is the separate being, the Greek daimon,
that “appears so clearly and unmistakably to others” but that “remins hidden from the
person himself.”.The “who” is a hidden self, but it is hidden more from the person than
from the memory of other people. The “who” as “someone’s life” thus appears to be
essential, but only in the narrow sense of the word: as an essence that is actualized
within the time of the plurality specific to other people.21
Complementing Hannah Arendt’s “who are we?” with “what are we made of,” economist
and activist, Jeremy Rifkin announces an epic shift into a “climax” global economy and
a fundamental respositioning of human life on the planet. According to him, in the
light of the Third Industrial Revolution, in a new era of “distributed capitalism” and at
the beginning of biosphere consciousness, the Age of Reason is being eclipsed by the
Age of Empathy. Rifkin opens his book, Empathic Civilization with a worrying question:
“Can we reach global empathy in time to avoid the collapse of civilization and save the
Earth?”22 The discovery of Homo empathicus is crucial for Rifkin’s radical new view
of human nature that has been slowly emerging and gaining momentum, with revolutionary
implications for the way we understand and organize our economic, social
and environmental relations in the centuries to come.23 Brought on by the awakening
sense of selfhood, empathy acts as an engine of civilization understood as “the detribalization
of blood ties and the resocialization of distinct individuals based on associational
ties.”24 Rifkin assigns the empathic extension the role of a psychological mechanism
that makes the conversion and transition possible: “When we say to civilize, we
mean to empathize (…) The underlying dialectic of human history is the continuous
feedback loop between expanding empathy and increasing entropy.”25 Such civilization
is built of a society of communal identity and consciousness (“there is no simple
autonomous ‘I,’ but only a unique constellation of numerous ‘we’”26) developed as a
unique experience with countless others, considering empathy – at the heart of the
human story – as a generator of a great transformation from “I think, therefore I am” to
“I participate, therefore I am.”27 Woven of awe, trust and transcendence, the empathic
consciousness is a delicate balancing act, which requires both intimate engagement
and a detachment. It is a soul of democracy28, as Rifkin emphasizes, a celebration of
life29, a fragile construct, which depends upon “a porous boundary between I and thou
that allows the identity of two beings to mingle in a shared mental space.”30 It appears
as an all encompassing experience, capable of negotiating grand narratives of humanity
towards a new and better, unifying sense of life: “By reimagining faith and reason
as intimate aspects of empathic consciousness, we create a new historical synthesis
that incorporates many of the most powerful and compelling features of the Age of
Faith and the Age of Reason, while leaving behind the disembodied story lines that
shake the celebration out of life.”31 However, as euphoric as this vision may sound, the
introductory alarming question remains open: “Can we reach global empathy in time to
avoid the collapse of civilization and save the Earth?”
Writing about the post-emancipatory concept of emancipation, Boris Buden criticizes
the contemporary experience of engagement, mapping out the contemporary