Homo historicus coby plastický, nebo elastický autodomestikant?
                          Několik poznámek na okraj analogií mezi biologickou a kulturní evolucí











            ******************************************************************************************

            * Jan Horský
            ******************************************************************************************
            Homo historicus as a Plastic or Elastic Self-Domesticated Species? Several Notes on the An

            Biological and Cultural Evolution

            Abstrakt

            Biosemiotics (Barbieri, Markoš) is used in the discussions of analogies between biological
            (human) cultures. The theory of “frozen evolution” contends that biological species behave
            in their elastic stage of development as cultures do in their development (Flegr). In bios

            the narrative is attributed to life itself at all of its developmental stages (Markoš). Th
            clear ground for the humanities and social sciences, especially for the historical science

            discussions with biology and to apply their discoveries with regards to the character of c
            development (here, culture is understood as a semiotic system). Primarily, it is necessary
            between the interpretative analogies of species and cultures (which only have a noetic and

            function) and ontic analogies (which have a real congruence with the dynamic structures of
            “cultures”). Historical sciences enter this discussion using methods that are more open to
            and are semiotically more volatile (polysemic) than those of biology. The humanities prove

            interpretation of the gradual growth of the ability to control aggression, which rivals th
            of evolutionary anthropology and biology. Thus, the need to rethink in more detail what th
            counterpart to biological species is arises, especially if we wish to describe the elastic

            development using an analogy to the development of human cultures (the following pair seem
            mind: higher taxons – culture; in comparison to this first pair, there is also one that is
            lower, yet rather allows for comparison: species – selected configurations of cultural con

            variants). It also shows the need to analytically differentiate culture from human behavio
            influenced by culture so that it could truly be a comparison of the elasticity of a specie
            elasticity inside a certain circle of cultural contents (variants). At those places where 

            takes interest in the origins of human reflexive spirituality and of the experience of tra
            the last several millennia (Markoš), it can productively cross paths with the civilisation
            “axial transformation” (Arnason). However, there is always the issue of how to scientifica

            external signs with the internal experiences of the studied actors. The relationship betwe
            “behavior” (behavior, pratiques, Verhalten) and inner “mental representations” is always d
            the perspective of science only when using a certain degree of hypothesis. In constructing

            it shall always be affected by certain meta-physical, meta-biological, or meta-historical 
            stemming from, for example, the philosophical analysis of spirituality, transcendental con
            phenomena.


            Klíčová slova
            culture and nature; evolution; cultural evolution; evolutionary biology; biosemiotics; cul

            anthropology

            PDF ke stažení [ URL "LM-746-version1-lm_3_2016_horsky.pdf"]


            Jan Horský [ URL "LM-179.html "]