Self-Cultivation, Homo Techne, Adaptation

As has been previously discussed, self-cultivation can be not only a means in a program of Ethics, but its goal, e. g. if the goal is the cultivation of Homo Techne.  As has also been shown, by incorporating the Body into the doctrine, the goal of Spinoza's Ethics can be interpreted as the cultivation of Homo Techne, a goal consistent with his commitment to Pantheism/Monist Naturalism.  That doctrine is heterodox for the era in two respects--it jettisons Homo Sapiens as the definition of Human, and it advocates the very behavior that according to prevailing Theology is the cause of a divine curse on the Human species.  Now, in 1660, such obliquely presented digressions might be easily overlooked.  But the rapid Technical development of the species in subsequent centuries proves that Humans have entered a new epoch, in which old definitions and old myths have perhaps become obsolete.  The full meaning of the radical change becomes perhaps clearer two centuries latter, when Adaptation becomes recognized as a fundamental behavioral principle.  Now, Adaptation is equivocal--it can signify Adaptation-To, or Adaptation-Of, i. e. a relation to an environment that is passive vs. one that is active.  So, the emergence of Homo Techne signals an epochal Evolutionary development--Humans becoming more active in relation to their habitat, which Spinoza signifies by his emphasis on Activity in his doctrine.