The bedrock of this dissertation is the idea that our patterns of thought, speech, and action can be distilled into two distinct approaches defined by (1) the use of things on one hand and (2) the relation to persons on the other. That first approach is represented in our life with technology and has expanded to the point of omnipresence. Being so ubiquitous, technology largely goes unexamined in the way it functions, the effect it has on us, and the effect it has on our neighbor. In this manner, the technological approach is an over-extension of the manipulation of things to the negation of the relation to persons. As a result, our capacity to relate to persons outside a narrow scope had been atrophied. This work is an attempt at renewing the relational approach within contexts shaped by and shaped for the manipulation of things, i.e., technically minded society. To that end, it is necessary to first explore the work of thinkers who have written on relationality in ways which address the over-extension of the technological approach. The thinkers I have chosen in this endeavor are Martin Buber, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Dorothy Day, and Ivan Illich, each of whom wrote thoughtfully …

This dissertation is an investigation and analysis of the contributions of the human organism to climate change, specifically concerned with its adverse effect on the biosphere. The focus of the analysis rests on three phenomena distinctive to humans participating in globalized economies and modernized societies; the distortions of anthrosupremacy, an uncritical development of technology, and an unhealthy cathexis with economic growth. These are analyzed and identified as stark contributors to the creation, proliferation, and pervasiveness of systems contributing to the decline of the biosphere. These phenomena serve to dissociate humans from the consequences of their actions in systemic ways; thereby thriving by preying on the faults of human agency. Using a biogenic framework to analyze human agency, these faults are identified as problematic to the teleological pursuits of the human organism (i.e., extantcy). An analysis of these phenomena in relationship to the faults in human agency is done to create an awareness of how certain mythologies, technologies, and socioeconomic practices have created enabling constraints that deter a more efficacious and sustainable exercise of human agency. Existing strategies and philosophies that have been promoted to address the issue have failed to account for these enabling constraints and, have therefore, fallen short …

For such a vexing topic as gender identity, this dissertation asks a rather straightforward question: If gender identity is—as Judith Butler has asserted—socially constructed and discursively mediated, then why does transgender hormone therapy (THT) work? This is the question concerning endocrinology that I ask Butler, and their answer is, if requiring of delicate assessment and interpretation, clear: it doesn't. Butler's work reveals an admonishing view that the efficacity of THT is due to placebo effect, in turn brought on by the bewitchment of the trans* who seeks medical transition. In a logic similar to sin and salvation, if only the trans* had not believed in gender dysphoria, then there would be no (putative) efficacity to THT whatsoever. With our answer, we begin a perilous adventure of discovering just why such a preeminent gender theorist (and trans* themselves) with no experience of gender dysphoria, and no desire to medically transition, would say this. We examine Butler's gender theory, their concept of desire, their views on the self, on transsexuality, their rarely discussed philosophies of science and nature, and their dearth of citations of transsexual voices. Due to this lack, I lend my own, relying upon my experience with gender dysphoria, THT, …