Evolving Beyond Human Relations

  • Peter BloomEmail author


The second chapter explores the need to evolve beyond current anthropocentric views in order to prepare for a “transh-human” future. A seeming constant in contemporary society is the central place accorded to the human. While issues of the environment and animal welfare are increasingly prominent, humans remain the primary focus of politics, culture and the economy, trumping ethical concerns that may impede their ‘progress’. It is their needs that continue to reign supreme and around which all else must ultimately revolve. However, as A.I. develops and their potential for consciousness grows, humans will be forced to undergo their own Copernican revolution where they can no longer place themselves at the centre of the social universe.

What is crucial is not to simply reinvent human relations but to develop a new paradigm of transhumanism current anthropocentric views to prepare for this diverse technological future. A seeming constant in contemporary society is the central place accorded to the human-animal. While issues of the environment and animal welfare are increasingly prominent, humans remain the primary focus of politics, culture and the economy, trumping ethical concerns that may impede their ‘progress’. It is their needs that continue to reign supreme and around which all else must ultimately revolve. However, as A.I. develops and their potential for consciousness grows, humans will be forced to undergo their own Copernican revolution where they can no longer place themselves at the centre of the social universe. What is crucial is not to simply reinvent humanism but to develop a new paradigm of transhumanism.

This chapter will start by highlighting how culturally we construct ourselves as being in an “anthropocene” age dominated by human perspectives and desires. From this it will then turn to critical approaches such as “new materialism” to emphasise the possibilities and importance associated with “non-human” configurations in our natural and social environment. In this spirit, it will show how struggles with animal ethics and environmental issue are fundamental to this human evolution and key to preparing present day societies for a future of greater human and non-human contact and integration. It will furthermore highlight the role that serious gaming and virtual reality can have for bringing about this more expansive human vision.


  1. Alberts, P. (2011). Responsibility Towards Life in the Early Anthropocene. Angelaki, 16(4), 5–17.Google Scholar
  2. Altvater, E., Crist, E., Haraway, D., Hartley, D., Parenti, C., & McBrien, J. (2016). Anthropocene or Capitalocene?: Nature, History, and the Crisis of Capitalism. Pm Press.Google Scholar
  3. Atanasoski, N., & Vora, K. (2015). Surrogate Humanity: Posthuman Networks and the (Racialized) Obsolescence of Labor. Catalyst: Feminism, Theory, Technoscience, 1(1), 1–40.Google Scholar
  4. Bal, P. M., & de Jong, S. B. (2017). From Human Resource Management to Human Dignity Development: A Dignity Perspective on HRM and the Role of Workplace Democracy. In Dignity and the Organization (pp. 173–195). London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  5. Barad, K. (2013). Ma(r)king Time: Material Entanglements and Re-memberings: Cutting Together-Apart. How Matter Matters: Objects, Artifacts, and Materiality in Organization Studies, pp. 16–31.Google Scholar
  6. Becker, B. (2000). Cyborgs, Agents, and Transhumanists: Crossing Traditional Borders of Body and Identity in the Context of New Technology. Leonardo, 33(5), 361–365.Google Scholar
  7. Bell, A. C., & Russell, C. L. (2000). Beyond Human, Beyond Words: Anthropocentrism, Critical Pedagogy, and the Poststructuralist Turn. Canadian Journal of Education/Revue canadienne de l’éducation, 25, 188–203.Google Scholar
  8. Benedikter, R., Giordano, J., & Fitzgerald, K. (2010). The Future of the Self-Image of the Human Being in the Age of Transhumanism, Neurotechnology and Global Transition. Futures, 42(10), 1102–1109.Google Scholar
  9. Bennett, J. (2010). A Vitalist Stopover on the Way to a New Materialism. New Materialisms: Ontology, Agency, and Politics, 91(1), 47–69.Google Scholar
  10. Bennett, J., Cheah, P., Orlie, M. A., & Grosz, E. (2010). New Materialisms: Ontology, Agency, and Politics. Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Berg, P. O. (1986). Symbolic Management of Human Resources. Human Resource Management, 25(4), 557–579.Google Scholar
  12. Bettoni, A., Cinus, M., Sorlini, M., May, G., Taisch, M., & Pedrazzoli, P. (2014, September). Anthropocentric Workplaces of the Future Approached Through a New Holistic Vision. In IFIP International Conference on Advances in Production Management Systems (pp. 398–405). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
  13. Bignall, S., Hemming, S., & Rigney, D. (2016). Three Ecosophies for the Anthropocene: Environmental Governance, Continental Posthumanism and Indigenous Expressivism. Deleuze Studies, 10(4), 455–478.Google Scholar
  14. Bolden-Barrett, V. (2018, January 25). HR Is Taking a More Human-Centred Approach in 2018. HR Drive.Google Scholar
  15. Bossmann, J. (2016, October). Top 9 Ethical Issues in Artificial Intelligence. In World Economic Forum (Vol. 21).Google Scholar
  16. Bostrom, N., & Yudkowsky, E. (2014). The Ethics of Artificial Intelligence. The Cambridge Handbook of Artificial Intelligence, 1, 316–334.Google Scholar
  17. Braidotti, R. (2006). Posthuman, All Too Human: Towards a New Process Ontology. Theory, Culture & Society, 23(7–8), 197–208.Google Scholar
  18. Braidotti, R. (2017). Four Theses on Posthuman Feminism. In R. Grusin (Ed.), Anthropocene Feminism. University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  19. Burke, R. J., & Ng, E. (2006). The Changing Nature of Work and Organizations: Implications for Human Resource Management. Human Resource Management Review, 16(2), 86–94.Google Scholar
  20. Campbell, E. K. (1983). Beyond Anthropocentrism. Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences, 19(1), 54–67.Google Scholar
  21. Carrington, D. (2016, August 29). The Anthropocene Epoch: Scientists Declare Dawn of Human-Influenced Age. The Guardian.Google Scholar
  22. Chandler, D. (2013a). Ontopolitics in the Anthropocene: An Introduction to Mapping, Sensing and Hacking. Routledge.Google Scholar
  23. Chandler, D. (2013b). ‘Human-Centred’ Development? Rethinking ‘Freedom’ and ‘Agency’ in Discourses of International Development. Millennium, 42(1), 3–23.Google Scholar
  24. Chapman, A. R. (2010). Inconsistency of Human Rights Approaches to Human Dignity with Transhumanism. The American Journal of Bioethics, 10(7), 61–63.Google Scholar
  25. Cheese, P., & Hills, J. (2016). Understanding the Human at Work – How Neurosciences Are Influencing HR Practices. Strategic HR Review, 15(4), 150–156.Google Scholar
  26. Chernilo, D. (2017). The Question of the Human in the Anthropocene Debate. European Journal of Social Theory, 20(1), 44–60.Google Scholar
  27. Clark, N. (2014). Geo-Politics and the Disaster of the Anthropocene. The Sociological Review, 62, 19–37.Google Scholar
  28. Clark, T. (2015). Ecocriticism on the Edge: The Anthropocene as a Threshold Concept. Bloomsbury Publishing.Google Scholar
  29. Connolly, W. E. (2013). The ‘New Materialism’ and the Fragility of Things. Millennium, 41(3), 399–412.Google Scholar
  30. Coole, D. (2013). Agentic Capacities and Capacious Historical Materialism: Thinking with New Materialisms in the Political Sciences. Millennium, 41(3), 451–469.Google Scholar
  31. Crist, E., & Kopnina, H. (2014). Unsettling Anthropocentrism. Dialectical Anthropology, 38(4), 387–396.Google Scholar
  32. Cudworth, E., & Hobden, S. (2017). The Emancipatory Project of Posthumanism. Routledge.Google Scholar
  33. Dale, K. (2012). The Employee as ‘Dish of the Day’: The Ethics of the Consuming/Consumed Self in Human Resource Management. Journal of Business Ethics, 111(1), 13–24.Google Scholar
  34. Danielson, P. (2002). Artificial Morality: Virtuous Robots for Virtual Games. Routledge.Google Scholar
  35. de Freitas, E., & Curinga, M. X. (2015). New Materialist Approaches to the Study of Language and Identity: Assembling the Posthuman Subject. Curriculum Inquiry, 45(3), 249–265.Google Scholar
  36. Domanska, E. (2010). Beyond Anthropocentrism in Historical Studies. Historein, 10, 118–130.Google Scholar
  37. Dredge, S. (2015, October 16). VR Could Change Human Consciousness – If We Get There, Says Chris Milk. Guardian.Google Scholar
  38. Fagan, M. (2017). Security in the Anthropocene: Environment, Ecology, Escape. European Journal of International Relations, 23(2), 292–314.Google Scholar
  39. Featherstone, M., & Burrows, R. (Eds.). (1996). Cyberspace/Cyberbodies/Cyberpunk: Cultures of Technological Embodiment (Vol. 43). Sage.Google Scholar
  40. Ferrando, F. (2013). Posthumanism, Transhumanism, Antihumanism, Metahumanism, and New Materialisms. Existenz, 8(2), 26–32.Google Scholar
  41. Ferrando, F. (2016). The Party of the Anthropocene: Post-Humanism, Environmentalism and the Post-Anthropocentric Paradigm Shift. Relations: Beyond Anthropocentrism, 4, 159.Google Scholar
  42. Foster, J. B. (2016). Marxism in the Anthropocene: Dialectical Rifts on the Left. International Critical Thought, 6(3), 393–421.Google Scholar
  43. Foucault, M. (2008). The Birth of Biopolitics: Lectures at the Collège de France, 1978–1979 (Graham Burchell, Trans.) and (Arnold Davidson, Ed.). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  44. Fudge, E. (2000). Introduction: The Dangers of Anthropocentrism. In Perceiving Animals (pp. 1–10). London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  45. Gibson, K., Rose, D. B., & Fincher, R. (2015). Manifesto for Living in the Anthropocene. New York: Punctum Books.Google Scholar
  46. Giri, A. K. (2006). Cosmopolitanism and Beyond: Towards a Multiverse of Transformations. Development and Change, 37(6), 1277–1292.Google Scholar
  47. Gorini, A., Pallavicini, F., Algeri, D., Repetto, C., Gaggioli, A., & Riva, G. (2010). Virtual Reality in the Treatment of Generalized Anxiety Disorders. Studies in Health Technology and Informatics, 154, 39–43.Google Scholar
  48. Graham, E. (2004). Bioethics After Posthumanism: Natural Law, Communicative Action and the Problem of Self-Design. Ecotheology: Journal of Religion, Nature & the Environment, 9(2), 178–198.Google Scholar
  49. Grear, A. (2015). Deconstructing Anthropos: A Critical Legal Reflection on ‘Anthropocentric’ law and Anthropocene ‘Humanity’. Law and Critique, 26(3), 225–249.Google Scholar
  50. Grof, S. (1998). The Cosmic Game: Explorations of the Frontiers of Human Consciousness. SUNY Press.Google Scholar
  51. Grosz, E. (2010). Feminism, Materialism, and Freedom. In D. Coole & S. Frost (Eds.), New Materialisms: Ontology, Agency, and Politics (pp. 139–157). Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  52. Guest, D. (2002). Human Resource Management, Corporate Performance and Employee Wellbeing: Building the Worker into HRM. The Journal of Industrial Relations, 44(3), 335–358.Google Scholar
  53. Guo, B., Bricout, J. C., & Huang, J. (2005). A Common Open Space or a Digital Divide? A Social Model Perspective on the Online Disability Community in China. Disability & Society, 20(1), 49–66.Google Scholar
  54. Hamilton, C. (2017). Defiant Earth: The Fate of Humans in the Anthropocene. John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
  55. Hanlon, R. J., & Christie, K. (2016). Freedom from Fear, Freedom from Want: An Introduction to Human Security. University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
  56. Hayles, N. K. (2008). How We Became Posthuman: Virtual Bodies in Cybernetics, Literature, and Informatics. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  57. Hayward, T. (1997). Anthropocentrism: A Misunderstood Problem. Environmental Values, 6(1), 49–63.Google Scholar
  58. Heikkurinen, P., Rinkinen, J., Järvensivu, T., Wilén, K., & Ruuska, T. (2016). Organising in the Anthropocene: An Ontological Outline for Ecocentric Theorising. Journal of Cleaner Production, 113, 705–714.Google Scholar
  59. Herrmann, P., Waxman, S. R., & Medin, D. L. (2010). Anthropocentrism Is Not the First Step in Children’s Reasoning About the Natural World. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107(22), 9979–9984.Google Scholar
  60. Hester, H. (2018). Xenofeminism. John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
  61. Hinchcliffe, T. (2017, June 25). Virtual Reality Takes Consciousness Research into Mystic Realms of the Divine Play. The Sociable.Google Scholar
  62. Hobson, J. A., Hong, C. C. H., & Friston, K. J. (2014). Virtual Reality and Consciousness Inference in Dreaming. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 1133.Google Scholar
  63. Huselid, M. A. (2011). Celebrating 50 Years: Looking Back and Looking Forward: 50 Years of Human Resource Management. Human Resource Management-New York, 50(3), 309.Google Scholar
  64. Jackson, Z. I. (2013). Animal: New Directions in the Theorization of Race and Posthumanism. Feminist Studies, 39(3), 669–685.Google Scholar
  65. Jiang, J., Wang, S., & Zhao, S. (2012). Does HRM Facilitate Employee Creativity and Organizational Innovation? A Study of Chinese Firms. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 23(19), 4025–4047.Google Scholar
  66. Jones, M. P. (1996). Posthuman Agency: Between Theoretical Traditions. Sociological Theory, 290–309.Google Scholar
  67. Jotterand, F. (2010). At the Roots of Transhumanism: From the Enlightenment to a Post-Human Future. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy, 35(6), 617–621.Google Scholar
  68. Kansteiner, W. (2017). Digital Anxiety, Transnational Cosmopolitanism, and Never Again Genocide Without Memory. In A. Hoskins (Ed.), Digital Memory Studies: Media Pasts in Transition. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  69. Katz, E. (2000). Against the Inevitability of Anthropocentrism. In E. Katz, A. Light, & D. Rothenberg (Eds.), Beneath the Surface: Critical Essays in the Philosophy of Deep Ecology (pp. 17–42). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  70. Keenoy, T. (1999). HRM as Hologram: A Polemic. Journal of Management Studies, 36(1), 1–23.Google Scholar
  71. Koensler, A., & Papa, C. (2013). Introduction: Beyond Anthropocentrism, Changing Practices and the Politics of ‘Nature. Journal of Political Ecology, 20(1), 286–294.Google Scholar
  72. Kopnina, H., Washington, H., Taylor, B., & Piccolo, J. J. (2018). Anthropocentrism: More Than Just a Misunderstood Problem. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 1–19.Google Scholar
  73. Krause, S. R. (2011). Bodies in Action: Corporeal Agency and Democratic Politics. Political Theory, 39(3), 299–324.Google Scholar
  74. Langbert, M., & Friedman, H. (2002). Continuous Improvement in the History of Human Resource Management. Management Decision, 40(8), 782–787.Google Scholar
  75. Lathers, M. (2006). Toward an Excremental Posthumanism: Primatology, Women, and Waste. Society & Animals, 14(4), 417–436.Google Scholar
  76. Latour, B. (2017). Anthropology at the Time of the Anthropocene: A Personal View of What Is to Be Studied. In The Anthropology of Sustainability (pp. 35–49). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  77. Legge, K. (1995). What Is Human Resource Management. In Human Resource Management (pp. 62–95). London: Palgrave.Google Scholar
  78. Legge, K. (1998). Is HRM Ethical? Can HRM Be Ethical. Ethics and Organizations, 150–172.Google Scholar
  79. Leonhard, G. (2016). Technology vs. Humanity: The Coming Clash Between Man and Machine. FutureScapes.Google Scholar
  80. Lewis, S. L., & Maslin, M. A. (2015). Defining the Anthropocene. Nature, 519(7542), 171.Google Scholar
  81. Macpherson, A., Jones, O., & Zhang, M. (2005). Virtual Reality and Innovation Networks: Opportunity Exploitation in Dynamic SMEs. International Journal of Technology Management, 30(1–2), 49–66.Google Scholar
  82. Malm, A., & Hornborg, A. (2014). The Geology of Mankind? A Critique of the Anthropocene Narrative. The Anthropocene Review, 1(1), 62–69.Google Scholar
  83. Malone, K. (2016). Posthumanist Approaches to Theorizing Children’s Human-Nature Relations. In Space, Place, and Environment (pp. 185–206).Google Scholar
  84. McShane, K. (2007). Anthropocentrism vs. Nonanthropocentrism: Why Should We Care? Environmental Values, 16(2), 169–185.Google Scholar
  85. Mendieta, E. (2015). The Bio-Technological Scala Naturae and Interspecies Cosmopolitanism: Patricia Piccinini, Jane Alexander, and Guillermo Gómez-Peña. In Biopower: Foucault and Beyond (p. 158).Google Scholar
  86. Mercer, C., & Trothen, T. J. (Eds.). (2014). Religion and Transhumanism: The Unknown Future of Human Enhancement: The Unknown Future of Human Enhancement. ABC-CLIO.Google Scholar
  87. Mettler, R. (2018, January 8). Why Robots Should “Report” to HR. Personnel Today.Google Scholar
  88. Meulen, R. T. (2010). Dignity, Posthumanism, and the Community of Values. The American Journal of Bioethics, 10(7), 69–70.Google Scholar
  89. Mills, T. (2018, March 7). The Impact of Artificial Intelligence in the Everyday Life of Consumers. Forbes.Google Scholar
  90. Montes, G. A. (2018). Virtual Reality for Non-ordinary Consciousness. Frontiers in Robotics and AI, 5, 7.Google Scholar
  91. Morgan, G. (2017, July 27). What Will It Be Like to Have Robot Co-Workers? Fast Company.Google Scholar
  92. Nardi, B. A. (Ed.). (1996). Context and Consciousness: Activity Theory and Human-Computer Interaction. MIT Press.Google Scholar
  93. Nass, C. I., Lombard, M., Henriksen, L., & Steuer, J. (1995). Anthropocentrism and Computers. Behaviour & Information Technology, 14(4), 229–238.Google Scholar
  94. Neimanis, A. (2014). Alongside the Right to Water, a Posthumanist Feminist Imaginary. Journal of Human Rights and the Environment, 5, 5.Google Scholar
  95. Norton, B. G. (1984). Environmental Ethics and Weak Anthropocentrism. Environmental Ethics, 6(2), 131–148.Google Scholar
  96. Nunn, J. (2018, May 9). How AI Is Transforming HR Departments. Forbes.Google Scholar
  97. Nurka, C. (2015). Animal Techne: Transing Posthumanism. Transgender Studies Quarterly, 2(2), 209–226.Google Scholar
  98. O’neill, O. (1997). Environmental Values, Anthropocentrism and Speciesism. Environmental Values, 6, 127–142.Google Scholar
  99. Owen, H. H. (1997). Expanding Our Now: The Story of Open Space Technology. Berrett-Koehler Publishers.Google Scholar
  100. Papadopoulos, D. (2010). Insurgent Posthumanism. Ephemera: Theory & Politics in Organization, 10(2).Google Scholar
  101. Pickering, A. (2001). Practice and Posthumanism: Social Theory and a History of Agency. In T. Schatzki, K. KnorrCetina, & E. Von Savigny (Eds.), The Practice Turn in Contemporary Theory (pp. 163–174). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  102. Pickup, O. (2018, November 8). AI in HR: Freeing Up Time to be More Human. Raconteur.Google Scholar
  103. Pin-Fat, V. (2013). Cosmopolitanism and the End of Humanity: A Grammatical Reading of Posthumanism. International Political Sociology, 7(3), 241–257.Google Scholar
  104. Povinelli, D. J. (2004). Behind the Ape’s Appearance: Escaping Anthropocentrism in the Study of Other Minds. Daedalus, 133(1), 29–41.Google Scholar
  105. Pruchnic, J. (2013). Rhetoric and Ethics in the Cybernetic Age: The Transhuman Condition. Routledge.Google Scholar
  106. Pullen, A., & Rhodes, C. (2014). Corporeal Ethics and the Politics of Resistance in Organizations. Organization, 21(6), 782–796.Google Scholar
  107. Purser, R. E., Park, C., & Montuori, A. (1995). Limits to Anthropocentrism: Toward an Ecocentric Organization Paradigm? Academy of Management Review, 20(4), 1053–1089.Google Scholar
  108. Rae, G. (2014). Heidegger’s Influence on Posthumanism: The Destruction of Metaphysics, Technology and the Overcoming of Anthropocentrism. History of the Human Sciences, 27(1), 51–69.Google Scholar
  109. Read, J. (2009). A Genealogy of Homo-Economicus: Neoliberalism and the Production of Subjectivity. Foucault Studies, 6, 25–36.Google Scholar
  110. Ricci, A., Piunti, M., Tummolini, L., & Castelfranchi, C. (2015). The Mirror World: Preparing for Mixed-Reality Living. IEEE Pervasive Computing, 14(2), 60–63.Google Scholar
  111. Rose, E. J., & Walton, R. (2015, July). Factors to Actors: Implications of Posthumanism for Social Justice Work. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual International Conference on the Design of Communication (p. 33). ACM.Google Scholar
  112. Rothman, J. (2018, April 2). Are We Already Living in Virtual Reality? The New Yorker.Google Scholar
  113. Saldanha, A., & Stark, H. (2016). A New Earth: Deleuze and Guattari in the Anthropocene. Deleuze Studies, 10(4), 427–439.Google Scholar
  114. Salleh, A. (1996). An Ecofeminist Bio-Ethic and What Post-Humanism Really Means. New Left Review, 217, 138.Google Scholar
  115. Sanchez-Vives, M. V., & Slater, M. (2005). From Presence to Consciousness Through Virtual Reality. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 6(4), 332.Google Scholar
  116. Schmidt, J. (2013). The Empirical Falsity of the Human Subject: New Materialism, Climate Change and the Shared Critique of Artifice. Resilience, 1(3), 174–192.Google Scholar
  117. Serino, S., Pedroli, E., Keizer, A., Triberti, S., Dakanalis, A., Pallavicini, F., et al. (2016). Virtual Reality Body Swapping: A Tool for Modifying the Allocentric Memory of the Body. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 19(2), 127–133.Google Scholar
  118. Shook, J. R., & Giordano, J. (2014). A Principled and Cosmopolitan Neuroethics: Considerations for International Relevance. Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine, 9(1). Scholar
  119. Shrivastava, P. (1995). Ecocentric Management for a Risk Society. Academy of Management Review, 20(1), 118–137.Google Scholar
  120. Sisson, K. (1993). In Search of HRM. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 31(2), 201–210.Google Scholar
  121. Squire, V. (2014). Desert ‘Trash’: Posthumanism, Border Struggles, and Humanitarian Politics. Political Geography, 39, 11–21.Google Scholar
  122. Srnicek, N. (2017). New Materialism and Posthumanism: Bodies, Brains, and Complex Causality. In D. McCarthy (Ed.), Technology and World Politics: An Introduction (pp. 84–99). London: Routlege.Google Scholar
  123. Steffen, W., Crutzen, P. J., & McNeill, J. R. (2007). The Anthropocene: Are Humans Now Overwhelming the Great Forces of Nature. AMBIO: A Journal of the Human Environment, 36(8), 614–622.Google Scholar
  124. Steffen, W., Persson, Å., Deutsch, L., Zalasiewicz, J., Williams, M., Richardson, K., et al. (2011). The Anthropocene: From Global Change to Planetary Stewardship. Ambio, 40(7), 739.Google Scholar
  125. Steffen, W., Broadgate, W., Deutsch, L., Gaffney, O., & Ludwig, C. (2015). The Trajectory of the Anthropocene: The Great Acceleration. The Anthropocene Review, 2(1), 81–98.Google Scholar
  126. Steiner, G. (2010). Anthropocentrism and Its Discontents: The Moral Status of Animals in the History of Western Philosophy. University of Pittsburgh Press.Google Scholar
  127. Steyaert, C., & Janssens, M. (1999). Human and Inhuman Resource Management: Saving the Subject of HRM. Organization, 6(2), 181–198.Google Scholar
  128. Storey, J. (Ed.). (1995). Human Resource Management: A Critical Text. Cengage Learning EMEA.Google Scholar
  129. Strang, V. (2017). The Gaia Complex: Ethical Challenges to an Anthropocentric ‘Common Future. In The Anthropology of Sustainability (pp. 207–228). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  130. Taylor, N. (2012). Animals, Mess, Method: Post-Humanism, Sociology and Animal Studies. In Crossing Boundaries: Investigating Human-Animal Relationships (pp. 37–50). Boston: Brill Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  131. Taylor, A. (2017). Beyond Stewardship: Common World Pedagogies for the Anthropocene. Environmental Education Research, 23(10), 1448–1461.Google Scholar
  132. Templeton, G. (2018, May 15). 25 Examples of A.I. That Will Seem Normal in 2027: From Cooking to Dating to Art. Inverse.Google Scholar
  133. Tomasini, F. (2007). Imagining Human Enhancement: Whose Future, Which Rationality? Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics, 28(6), 497–507.Google Scholar
  134. Ulrich, W. L. (1984). HRM and Culture: History, Ritual, and Myth. Human Resource Management, 23(2), 117–128.Google Scholar
  135. Van der Tuin, I., & Dolphijn, R. (2010). The Transversality of New Materialism. Women: A Cultural Review, 21(2), 153–171.Google Scholar
  136. Vazquez, R. (2017). Precedence, Earth and the Anthropocene: Decolonizing Design. Design Philosophy Papers, 15(1), 77–91.Google Scholar
  137. Waxman, S., & Medin, D. (2007). Experience and Cultural Models Matter: Placing Firm Limits on Childhood Anthropocentrism. Human Development, 50(1), 23–30.Google Scholar
  138. Weiskopf, R., & Munro, I. (2012). Management of Human Capital: Discipline, Security and Controlled Circulation in HRM. Organization, 19(6), 685–702.Google Scholar
  139. Willmott, H. (1993). Strength Is Ignorance; Slavery Is Freedom: Managing Culture in Modern Organizations. Journal of Management Studies, 30(4), 515–552.Google Scholar
  140. Willmott, H. (1998). Towards a New Ethics? The Contributions of Poststructuralism and Posthumanism. In M. Parker (Ed.), Ethics and Organizations (pp. 76–121). London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  141. Wilson, S., & Haslam, N. (2009). Is the Future More or Less Human? Differing Views of Humanness in the Posthumanism Debate. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 39(2), 247–266.Google Scholar
  142. Wolfe, C. (2009). Human, All Too Human: “Animal Studies” and the Humanities. PMLA, 124(2), 564–575.Google Scholar
  143. Woolgar, S. (Ed.). (2002). Virtual Society?: Technology, Cyberbole, Reality. Oxford University Press on Demand.Google Scholar
  144. Yasuaki, O. (2000). In Quest of Intercivilizational Human Rights: Universal vs. Relative Human Rights Viewed from an Asian Perspective. Asia-Pacific Journal of Human Rights and the Law, 1, 53–88.Google Scholar
  145. Zalasiewicz, J., Williams, M., Haywood, A., & Ellis, M. (2011). The Anthropocene: A New Epoch of Geological Time? Philosophical Transaction of the Royal Society, 369(1938), 835–841.Google Scholar
  146. Zembylas, M., & Bozalek, V. (2014). A Critical Engagement with the Social and Political Consequences of Human Rights: The Contribution of the Affective Turn and Posthumanism. Acta Academica, 46(4), 29–47.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of EssexColchesterUK

Personalised recommendations