No. 37 (2020): Núm. 37 (2020) enero-junio 2020. Lógoi. Revista de Filosofía

From the second half of the twentieth century to the present day, we have lived philosophy in an atmosphere of passage, of journey, of a path that announces a course towards other times. We crossed worldviews, languages, systems, truths that began to be revealed in "crisis", that gave way to other ways of thinking about the world and that, in different ways, we knew as postmodernity. Our reflections took place in the midst of borderline airs, of discussions with the ‹‹past››, of claims, while we understood that philosophy was revealed to be closer to the body, to dialogue, to the rhizome or deconstruction. These reflections built bridges to profoundly review our epistemologies, to recognize ourselves as diverse and situated – and not pure consciousness or transcendental – to think about the plural without separating ourselves from the world, diluting otherness, dualisms and finding perspectives. That postmodernity, moreover, did not mean a "transition" – at least not until now – towards a new adjustment, towards another stable terrain, of accommodation, as some voices dreamed of imagining the postmodern era as a kind of Renaissance. Nothing obliges the different paths of revision and change to lead us to another time of foundations, to another project that orders our lives; That aspiration still evokes, secretly, modern times. Although we cannot guarantee that it will not happen either. Those complex revisions at the end of the century and the beginning of the millennium, which did not show the desire to found or substantiate, which met the Olympic force of technology, have allowed us to reach these amazing times that we are going through today, which are distinguished, very especially, because they announce the "past". Because they predict the new or what will undoubtedly come. Times in which there is no longer a proper dialogue with what has been thought or what happened, but rather announces what has been left behind.

Although the Renaissance or modern "new times", for example, assumed the same in relation to their predecessors, we, however, are facing an unstoppable irruption of the dominance of the Latin prefix post. Post-truth, post-photography, post-present, post-democracy, post-enlightenment, post-anthropocentrism, posthumanism... et alia. It was never easy to define postmodernity, at least in a clear and shared sense. But in the face of post-postmodernity, that may no longer be relevant. But of all the posts that visit us, or that we visit, we have to think philosophically about one, posthumanism. We cannot trace precise times, but it is, as is well stated, the philosophy of our time. That primacy of the post, ‹‹after››, necessarily leads us to the question: what is it that we so insistently want to leave behind? Or, in a more posthuman tone, what are the things that must be left behind? The plural is important. And each one, from their craft and reflection, will tell us what is implied in this farewell to photography, the Enlightenment or the truth. In the case at hand, the farewell is to "the human", to the humanities. We must know, then, what we are abandoning and what comes "after". From the perspective of posthumanism, the notion of the human, of man as we have conceived him until now, is being rethought, deconstructed, unveiled—with Nietzschean, Foucaltian, Deleuzian legacies, among others—while we aim for a new understanding. We can begin to raise it from the ecological awareness of our times, the urgency of correcting our excesses against nature, the decisive irruption of technology, reflection and openness towards the plural and the diverse. In this meeting of consciences and changes, there has been an urgent need to rethink what is human.