Human matrix

To be born human is it enough being generated in the womb of a woman? Nature generates each living being according to its species in a specific matrix. But is the 'natural' matrix of mankind enough to generate authentically this 'child of elsewhere' which is called man? The 'biological' matrix is certainly an indispensable condition. Is it a sufficient one? For example, what becomes of a human kid left alone in nature? What is left properly 'human' in a kid brought up by wolves? He is neither man nor completely wolf. A monster rather!

When leaving his natural matrix, man does nothing but babble his humanity. The biological matrix generates yet only the precondition. To give rise to authentic humanity, another matrix is essential. How can we characterize this 'different' matrix? But didn't we already indicate it when speaking about human space? It is a vital space you can just as easily call 'cultural space' in which the human animal continues its onto-genesis on the side of the 'other' one. Authentic maternity and authentic paternity are thus less procreative than educational, in the strongest meaning of the word and the nearest to etymology. Ex-ducere. To lead out of… Very far 'out of' and never stopping going out.

The relevant difference of humanity, its specific difference from the remainder of living creatures, the difference which identifies man, this is the logos, the verb metaphor which carries infinitely beyond. By it the human reality is exposed 'out of' and involved in an never finishing adventure. What would be the world if it remained prisoner of silence? To speak is initially to break the eternal silence of the world. The emergence of man means this rupture. With the speaking of man every thing starts speaking. The whole surrounding world becomes 'speaking'.

The speech… Is there one possibility which does not imply it? Without it, what would remain from thought, from imagination, from perception, from feeling? Without the speech… You can try to imagine ultimately an eternal and absolute silence. But it is still, it is always, a speaking silence! And what about if it were kept absolutely and eternally silent? Thus remains absolutely nothing… nothing… nothing… This conditional is heavy of absurdity. But without the speech absurdity itself would not make sense. Nothing would make sense. Nothing would exist. What would be the being immersed in an impenetrable silence? Nothing would be, even not 'nothing' since 'nothing' itself still needs to be said. Already is the speech. Always, already, is the speech. You cannot circumvent its not-being. Speech is there when being arises. Originally is the Word.

Man is a speaking being. He is saying and says himself through this saying. The human condition is a creation of the verb. At the same time the verb is human creation. The circle is vicious only in monologue. On the other hand it gets infinitely fertile in the dialogue. Here the criterion is still between 'closed' and 'open'. The human being is child of difference. It does not cease generating differences, thanks primarily to the speech. Humanity does not existe without this speech by which man signifies himself by signifying his culture. This differential speech, this cultural speech decides man because man decides to utter the verb which gives sense and meaning to his world and by the way giving sense and meaning to himself.

goto