This book examines new concept of evolutionary ontology based on the idea of radically different “ontic orders” – natural and cultural being. It explains how culture evolved out of nature and how it became “anti-natural”. The remedy is seen in the global biophilous reconstruction of culture. The value of the “live planet” Earth and the “subject” capable of creative activity and evolution are given fundamental philosophical interpretation.

The author notes that European spiritual culture has provided the world with two great myths: the myth of Jesus Christ and the Promethean myth. These two myths were an early indication of the rise of the hidden predatory spiritual paradigm. As a result of this paradigm (setting), later culture hypertrophically strengthened the human genetic predisposition towards an aggressive adaptive strategy. It is therefore necessary, according to the author, to expose and criticize this predatory paradigm and eventually transform it into a (...) biophilic paradigm. If we want to understand this requirement, we need a higher-order theory, an evolutionary ontological theory of culture. One of the ways of achieving this objective is to weaken and criticize the myth in which the defiant Prometheus acts as an honored civilization hero. In the second part the author briefly introduces his evolutionary-ontological concept of culture. He defends the claim that culture is an artificial system with its own internal information and that two types of order have come into existence within culture in harmony with this information (spiritual culture): 1. strictly information-prescribed structures (specifically the material culture and technology), 2. Spontaneously (through succession) originating structures (especially institutions). If we want to change the orientation of the cultural system, we have to change not only its current information but also its former spiritual setting (paradigm). (shrink)

The traditional conception of ontology as a theory of being included an unexpressed belief of that time, namely that an ontologically oriented philosophy has to be concerned either with the nonhuman being of nature, or with the human one conceived experientially. The critical ontology of Nicolai Hartmann came close to the evolutionary ontological conception in that it has incorporated the person in the reality and underlined the meanings of the course of events, time and multidimensionality of being. However, the subject (...) in all traditional ontologies has been reduced, i.e. its structure has been conceived inadequately. They have ignored the different ontic kind of reality, namely the human cultural being, which followed the birth of human beings on the planet Earth. (shrink)

The author beginns with a brief commentary on three philosophically remarcable concepts: F. A. Hayek's concept of endogenous and exogenous orders, D. Bohm's concept of implicative and explicative orders and K. R. Popper's concept of the three worlds. On Hayek he appreciates particularly his emphasizing the endogenous order, on Bohm on the other hand his distinguishing between the explicative and implcative orders. He, however criticises Bohm´s conception for its not offe_ring a possibility of definig the ontic opposition of culture against (...) nature. Popper´s conception of the three worlds he criticises for its mostly gnoseological nature: according to Popper it is the world II, which makes the effect of the world III on the world I possible. Partially following D. Bohm the author sees two orders - an explicative and an implicative ones - in nature as well as in culure. The order embodies not only the intrinsic constitutive processes and the rules of the natural and cutural construology, i. e. the explicative order, but also the external outcome of the ontic creative process with its phenotypic forms, i. e. the explicative order. Additionally to this dualism of orders he argues, that there are two different kinds of evolution - the natural and the cultural ones. His suggestion to recognize two world orders aims at a more proper pihlosophical understanding of the ontic opposition of culture against nature including the determination of the presuppositions of their long-term possible coevolution and compatibility. (shrink)