cultivation of humanity • gary e. davis • berkeley

	conversation of humanity as cultivation of humanity gary e. davis	August 17, 2017

	Plausibly, the entire history of philosophy could be regarded as “the” conversation of humanity—about “humanity” (a living conception) emergent over millennia by high culturality (continually reconceiving itself). Thereby, some “Conversation” is a historizing of inquiry; and is discourse into Our high modernity, a historizing which may—and sometimes does—have lasting influence. Anyway, being historical is an aspiration that prospecting may idealize. Actually, contributing to The Conversation—having lastingly enabled, advanced, and promoted “humanity” of humanity—belongs to time. [As the old Saturday Night Live character, the Church Lady, says “Now, isn’t that special!,” I reply: Yes in deed that some scientific artistry is idealized—yet (reflecting the joke here) with humility toward pretense.] “Humanism” can be an excellent beginning for cultivation of humanity, yet it’s preliminary for what minds can enable, advance, and promote. Nonetheless, a credible high humanism may deserve prevailing importance for understanding “humanity,” short of some scientific artistry itself gaining prevailing importance— as if the United Nations gained global efficacy comparable to national governments; and The University (globally comprehended) does lead policy for Good government. Beyond humanism, can some conception of wholly flourishive life entail a progressive conception of ecologically flourishing humanity? [“Ecologically flourishing humanity” is short of ecologically thriving humanity of wholly flourishive lives—an idealization whose scale is a function of the scale of wholly flourishive life in progress. Qualitative assessment can be criteriologically quantified, such that utilitarian thinking isn’t required to be economistic for public policy.] By now, regarding the globality of humanity as ecological is so common that we easily overlook the fact that humanity largely acts as if life isn’t ecological, as if Earth isn’t tiny, and as if that doesn’t imply singularity of humanity’s increasingly self-designing condition. Can there be conceived some organized flourishing of lives that provides lastingly appealing conceptions of progressive humanity? I’m prospecting that kind of question via the five main Areas of gedavis.com: being well enjoyably, loving conceptual inquiry, virtuously enabling good thinking, advancing community by causing excellence, adapting well to one’s times, and so on. I barely show through Habermasian interests the Project of Humanity, so called, that I plan to detail. In all events, that site furthers a more practical conception of Good than will be more conceptual here (Cycle 2 of cohering.net). A better conception doesn’t ultimately disclose itself as mere preference. The Conversation—cultivation of humanity—is concerted cultivation of inquiries and discourses. “The” Good of “The Order” (by community, region, etc.) is Our endless engagement with what’s to become of Our tiny planet, calling for at least an authentically aspiring sense of importances, imaginative pragmatism (and pragmatic imaginability), endless attentiveness to growing knowledge, and creative adaptability to Our times. Here, I want to draw that scalarity of healthy regioning into an appellant gravity beyond philosophy—toward some nameless play, I confess: a 21^st century conception of philology? In my little estate—my favored library of partner texts—concerted cultivation (traditionally philosophical) is to be drawn by conceptual adventuring into what draws that: “literary” (scientifically poetical conceptual) fun. So what? So, the ultimate point of the universe is art, sport, gardening, luscious pleasure—fun. Yet, that’s a high estate of Janus-faced ambition whose authentic midland engagement is generative appeals for better humanity relative to authentic importances for actual lives. Humanity is essentially aspirational; thus, one’s humanity—in ownmost intimacy with oneself—is essentially aspirational. The relevant scale of engagement can seem unfathomable: How may a generative psychology credibly lead to educational leadership which enables, advances, and promotes wholly flourishive lives that contribute to ecologically flourishive humanity? How do we make a mantra of “learning never ends” belong to every organization? How do we make Good politics prevailingly mean enablative government? The Good of humanity is an emergent and cumulative result of flourishive lives bricolagically cohering their idealizations of ecologically flourishive humanity— lastingly, one hopes. < previous -\|- Next: leading mind

Plausibly, the entire history of philosophy could be regarded as “the” conversation of humanity—about “humanity” (a living conception) emergent over millennia by high culturality (continually reconceiving itself).

Thereby, some “Conversation” is a historizing of inquiry; and is discourse into Our high modernity, a historizing which may—and sometimes does—have lasting influence.

Anyway, being historical is an aspiration that prospecting may idealize. Actually, contributing to The Conversation—having lastingly enabled, advanced, and promoted “humanity” of humanity—belongs to time. [As the old Saturday Night Live character, the Church Lady, says “Now, isn’t that special!,” I reply: Yes in deed that some scientific artistry is idealized—yet (reflecting the joke here) with humility toward pretense.]

“Humanism” can be an excellent beginning for cultivation of humanity, yet it’s preliminary for what minds can enable, advance, and promote. Nonetheless, a credible high humanism may deserve prevailing importance for understanding “humanity,” short of some scientific artistry itself gaining prevailing importance—
as if the United Nations gained global efficacy comparable to national governments; and The University (globally comprehended) does lead policy for Good government.

Beyond humanism, can some conception of wholly flourishive life entail a progressive conception of ecologically flourishing humanity?

[“Ecologically flourishing humanity” is short of ecologically thriving humanity of wholly flourishive lives—an idealization whose scale is a function of the scale of wholly flourishive life in progress. Qualitative assessment can be criteriologically quantified, such that utilitarian thinking isn’t required to be economistic for public policy.]

By now, regarding the globality of humanity as ecological is so common that we easily overlook the fact that humanity largely acts as if life isn’t ecological, as if Earth isn’t tiny, and as if that doesn’t imply singularity of humanity’s increasingly self-designing condition.

Can there be conceived some organized flourishing of lives that provides lastingly appealing conceptions of progressive humanity? I’m prospecting that kind of question via the five main Areas of gedavis.com: being well enjoyably, loving conceptual inquiry, virtuously enabling good thinking, advancing community by causing excellence, adapting well to one’s times, and so on. I barely show through Habermasian interests the Project of Humanity, so called, that I plan to detail.

In all events, that site furthers a more practical conception of Good than will be more conceptual here (Cycle 2 of cohering.net).

A better conception doesn’t ultimately disclose itself as mere preference. The Conversation—cultivation of humanity—is concerted cultivation of inquiries and discourses. “The” Good of “The Order” (by community, region, etc.) is Our endless engagement with what’s to become of Our tiny planet, calling for at least an authentically aspiring sense of importances, imaginative pragmatism (and pragmatic imaginability), endless attentiveness to growing knowledge, and creative adaptability to Our times.

Here, I want to draw that scalarity of healthy regioning into an appellant gravity beyond philosophy—toward some nameless play, I confess: a 21^st century conception of philology?

In my little estate—my favored library of partner texts—concerted cultivation (traditionally philosophical) is to be drawn by conceptual adventuring into what draws that: “literary” (scientifically poetical conceptual) fun.

So what? So, the ultimate point of the universe is art, sport, gardening, luscious pleasure—fun.

Yet, that’s a high estate of Janus-faced ambition whose authentic midland engagement is generative appeals for better humanity relative to authentic importances for actual lives. Humanity is essentially aspirational; thus, one’s humanity—in ownmost intimacy with oneself—is essentially aspirational.

The relevant scale of engagement can seem unfathomable: How may a generative psychology credibly lead to educational leadership which enables, advances, and promotes wholly flourishive lives that contribute to ecologically flourishive humanity? How do we make a mantra of “learning never ends” belong to every organization? How do we make Good politics prevailingly mean enablative government?

The Good of humanity is an emergent and cumulative result of flourishive lives bricolagically cohering their idealizations of ecologically flourishive humanity— lastingly, one hopes.

< previous -|- Next: leading mind