Abstract

Despite all attempts at restoring it, the great humanist tradition could not resist the double trauma of Auschwitz and Hiroshima in which the very idea of humanity had been swallowed up by its opposite. Yet, beyond the critique of humanism carried out by twentieth-century philosophers such as Heidegger, the ancient profile of man as essentially humanus delineates itself again. On the other hand, as soon as the Nietzschean anthropo-technical – or biopolitical – vector of artificial intervention into the characteristics of human nature enters into synergy with the Darwinian presupposition about the contiguity with the animal world, the social consequences can be devastating. But is this the only – destructive and self-destructive – face of post-humanism? Is it necessary for it to turn into a form of patent anti-humanism? In opposition to both Heidegger’s foreclosure of biology and the animal as well as the biopolitical misuse of an immunitarian semantics that has led to the most brutal forms of homicidal eugenics, in this article I claim that the overbearing entrance of biological life into socio-political dynamics is not necessarily a danger from which we have to defend ourselves in the name of a self-centred purity of the individual and the species. It might also be regarded as the future of man, a threshold from which he could be stimulated in view of a more complex and open elaboration of his humanitas.