Ha senso studiare la natura umana?

The title’s question is affirmatively answered in the essay. Despite the principled objections that have submerged the varied attempts to develop a philosophical anthropology during the twentieth century, it makes sense to study a hyperobject such as human nature, all the more so in the intellectual context set up by modern philosophical orthodoxy. In particular, it makes sense to challenge the narrow self-understanding of modern philosophical naturalism, without, however, regressing to an essentialist view of our biological species. From this point of view, the inquiry into human nature fades into a radical, albeit not skeptical, self-reflection on our form of life that relies on the notion of ‘strong’ evaluation – that is, the experience of a value that cannot be reduced to the projective simulacrum of a subjective preference – as a phenomenon to be saved at all costs, lest the loss of self and world. From this point of view, the study of human nature appears as a humanistic bulwark against the nihilistic denial of the transformative potential of such self-reflection. While in theory it may seem a minimal gain, in fact it is the precondition for being able to continue to believe that the world is true or exists.

Parole chiave:Human nature, naturalism, value, strong evaluation, philosophical anthropology, hyperobjects, biological species, neodarwinism

Paolo Costa, Ha senso studiare la natura umana? in "SOCIETÀ DEGLI INDIVIDUI (LA)" 82/2025, pp 15-32, DOI: 10.3280/LAS2025-082002