Spelling suggestions: "subject:"humanity"" "subject:"inhuman""
1 |
Frankenstein’s obductionJohnson, Alexandra 07 April 2010 (has links)
Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein is a prelude to the Anatomy Act of 1832, which indulged the anatomists’ scientific ambition, granting a legitimate and sufficient source of cadavers to dissect legally. When read in concert with the history of anatomy and the historical record of body snatching, including case law and anatomy legislation, Frankenstein exemplifies the issues in medico-legal history at the turn of the nineteenth century, for Victor Frankenstein and the Creature’s stories are set amid the context of anatomical study, grave-robbery, crime, punishment and the illicit relationship between medicine and murder. This thesis accordingly addresses the medico-legal history of anatomy, the anatomist’s ambition and complex inhumanity, and the mingled identity of the anatomical subject as illegitimate and criminal. This analysis demonstrates that Frankenstein sheds light upon the anatomist’s ambition, the identity of the human cadaver, and the bioethical consequences of meddling with nature.
|
2 |
Frankenstein’s obductionJohnson, Alexandra 07 April 2010 (has links)
Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein is a prelude to the Anatomy Act of 1832, which indulged the anatomists’ scientific ambition, granting a legitimate and sufficient source of cadavers to dissect legally. When read in concert with the history of anatomy and the historical record of body snatching, including case law and anatomy legislation, Frankenstein exemplifies the issues in medico-legal history at the turn of the nineteenth century, for Victor Frankenstein and the Creature’s stories are set amid the context of anatomical study, grave-robbery, crime, punishment and the illicit relationship between medicine and murder. This thesis accordingly addresses the medico-legal history of anatomy, the anatomist’s ambition and complex inhumanity, and the mingled identity of the anatomical subject as illegitimate and criminal. This analysis demonstrates that Frankenstein sheds light upon the anatomist’s ambition, the identity of the human cadaver, and the bioethical consequences of meddling with nature.
|
3 |
Technik und Bildung in der verwissenschaftlichten LebensweltLumila, Minna 02 June 2023 (has links)
Die Studie versucht, Husserls Modell einer nicht-wissenschaftlichen Lebenswelt für pädagogische Untersuchungen zum Verhältnis von Technik und Bildung in der verwissenschaftlichen Welt zu öffnen. Sie diskutiert Entwicklungsprobleme der Spätmoderne unter pluralen Fragestellungen und führt Ansätze und Traditionen zusammen, die unterschiedliche Wege zur Weiterentwicklung der modernen Bildungstheorie beschritten haben. Im Zentrum steht die Frage, wie moderne Technik einerseits als lebensweltliche Entfremdung des Menschen problematisiert und andererseits als Produkt menschlicher Freiheit und Weltgestaltung gewürdigt werden kann. In vier Kapiteln werden die methodischen Ansätze und Antworten vorgestellt, die der Philosoph und Pädagoge Eugen Fink (1905–1975), der Philosoph Martin Heidegger (1889–1976), der Philosoph und Erziehungswissenschaftler Theodor Litt (1880–1962) und der Soziologe Helmut Schelsky (1912–1984) auf die Frage nach dem Verhältnis von Bildung und Technik gegeben haben. Im Durchgang durch ihre Positionen wird ein Konzert erarbeitet, dessen Originalität darin liegt, Abstimmungsprobleme von Bildung, Technik und Lebenswelt aus postdualistischer, praxistheoretischer sowie posthumanistischer Perspektive zu thematisieren. / The study attempts to open Husserl's model of a non-scientific lifeworld for pedagogical investigations of the relationship between technology and “Bildung” in the scientific world. It discusses developmental problems of late modernity under plural questions and brings together approaches and traditions that have taken different paths to the further development of modern “Bildungs”-theory. The central question is how modern technology can be problematized on the one hand as the alienation of human beings from the world of life and on the other hand be appreciated as a product of human freedom and the shaping of the world. Four chapters present the methodological approaches and answers that philosopher and educator Eugen Fink (1905–1975), philosopher Martin Heidegger (1889–1976), philosopher and educationalist Theodor Litt (1880–1962), and sociologist Helmut Schelsky (1912–1984) have given to the question of the relationship between education and technology. In the course of their positions, a concert will be developed whose originality lies in addressing the coordination problems of “Bildung” (education), “Technik” (technology) and “Lebenswelt” (lifeworld) from a post-dualist, praxis-theoretical as well as post-humanist perspective.
|
Page generated in 0.069 seconds