Questions about the meaning of humanity seem to baffle modern science more than they did the ancient mystics. Where did we come from? Why are we here? Where are we going? Why are we different? What makes us the same? How do individuals and societies understand and progress toward their purpose or is progress a delusion? Does anything matter? Is the human a machine, an organism, an illusion, all the above?

Once in the realm of pre-modern religion and philosophy, modern scientists and postmodern philosophers wrestle with these same questions. However, even with advances in technology, the resulting philosophies seem as varied as the answers that have created thousands of disparate religions throughout human history. While postmodern philosophers might scoff at the thought of any universal human characteristics, one consistent human trait that seems to have spanned history and civilization is myopia that results from viewing the world through a single philosophical lens.

Philosophical myopia seems clear when exploring competing perspectives on human development. As with competing religions, the field of human development includes scores of philosophical "isms", with each philosophy representing itself as the only correct philosophy, and automatically dismissing all others. While an oversimplification of reality, academics have attempted to classify the competing philosophies under three of Stephen Pepper's "reasonably adequate" theories of human development: mechanism, organicism, and contextualism.

The Human Development category will analyze competing philosophies of human development to do the following:

• Summarize the historical and emerging state of the field of human development;
• Explore key theories and practices that have emerged from each philosophy, and;
• Synthesize disparate perspectives into an integrated approach to personal and collaborative growth.

The fundamental lenses for exploring Human Development include:

• Mechanism. What makes people what they are, and how we passively react to internal and external forces over which we have no control.
• Organicism. Why people are what they are, and how we actively make choices about how we react to and control the internal and external forces of our lives to progress toward and transcend potential.
• Contextualism. How people are shaped by events, time, and place; how we are products of context, and how to use science to define reality and advance agendeas.
• Synthesis. How people overcome methodological myopia by combining perspectives that we are all the above, machine, organism, and contest.