Advertisement

Special? Oh, Please! And Yet …

  • Roland KaroEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Issues in Science and Religion: Publications of the European Society for the Study of Science and Theology book series (ESSSAT, volume 4)

Abstract

Advances in primatology show that there is little uniquely human about humanity. Language and culture were long considered the likeliest bearers of the imago Dei, but it has convincingly been proven that neither theory of mind, language nor the ability to use tools is reserved to humans only. Even the sacred is no longer a distinctly human domain. There is a discourse evolving around signs of transcendence in human behavior (e.g. phenomena such as play, the ever-present yearning for ‘something more’, love, etc.). All of these are also present in other species. Dogs play, birds form long-standing bonds, and so on. So if there is something uniquely human about our sense of the beyond, it must not reside in simply having that sense per se. It must be with what we do with that sense. Departing from the concepts of actual and potential and using theological metaphors as an example, I will argue that our uniqueness – if it is, indeed, there – may lie in how we relate to our sense of the beyond.

Keywords

Actuality and potentiality Human uniqueness Imago Dei Language Love Metaphors Play Primatology Reconciliation Transcendence 

Bibliography

  1. Carter, C. S. (1998). Neuroendocrine perspectives on social attachment and love. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 23(8), 779–818.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Foerst, A. (1998). Cog, a Humanoid Robot, and the Question of the Image of God’. Zygon, 33(1), 91–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Geraci, R. M. (2007). Robots and the sacred in science and science fiction: Theological implications of artificial intelligence. Zygon, 42(4), 961–980.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Goodall, J. (2005). Primate spirituality. In B. Taylor (Ed.), Encyclopedia of religion and nature (pp. 1303–1306). Continuum: London/New York.Google Scholar
  5. Karo, R. (2014). God and romance: Love in religion and interpersonal relationships. Antonianum, LXXXIX, 359–378.Google Scholar
  6. Porges, S. W. (1998). Love: An emergent property of the mammalian autonomic nervous system. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 23(8), 837–861.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Puckett, J. (2012). The apologetics of joy: A case for the existence of god from C. S. Lewis’s argument from desire. Cambridge: Lutterworth Press.Google Scholar
  8. Savage-Rumbaugh, S., Fields, W. M., Segerdahl, P., & Rumbaugh, D. (2005). Culture prefigures cognition in Pan/Homo Bonobos. Theoria, 54, 311–328.Google Scholar
  9. Schäfer, L. (2008). Nonempirical reality: Transcending the physical and spiritual in the order of the one. Zygon, 43(2), 329–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Tomberg, J. (2011). Kirjanduse lepitav otstarve. Tartu: Tartu Ülikooli Kirjastus.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of TartuTartuEstonia

Personalised recommendations