Dude this is so far from true for biological/physical anthropologists (the ones that do bi-cultural evolution) and even some biologists (Gould, etc)

Point taken - though in fairness to Agamben, from the context of the quote by “the becoming human of man” I think he’s just talking about the appearance of language rather than human evolution broadly taken. But I’m not familiar enough with the relevant literature to really contest the point too much.

1. interruptions liked this
2. autochthones reblogged this from interruptions and added:

   It’s just a tad too much Heidegger for me. I prefer Stiegler to most others on the question of the ‘human’. Still like...

3. interruptions reblogged this from autochthones and added:

   I just think Agamben...trying to delimit an ‘essence’ of the human as linguistic, which...

4. autochthones liked this
5. interruptions posted this