Abstract

Posthumanism has established itself as a new paradigm of theory. Like all social discourses, it is a sum of power struggles, subject positions, identities – and thus full of conflict. In this discourse, which includes mainly contemporary and hence techno cultural motifs, but which of course also has a long history, there is no agreement about what the posthuman actually is, that is if it is the best or the worst that could happen to man, to his humanity, to mankind and the humanistic tradition in general. Neither is there agreement as to whether posthumanism is inevitable, already a reality or just a mirage; or whether it is politically, culturally, socially progressive or to the contrary perhaps even regressive; whether it is solely produced by technological change or mainly constructed and thus ideologically motivated. The debate between Stefan Herbrechter and Karin Harrasser explores the reasons for the career of posthumanistic motives as well as related fears and hopes.