Behold the Creative Peaceful Human, Homo Artifex

By Ooi Kee Beng, at the “Scars of War and a Shred Commitment to Peace” dialogue panel on 10 September 2026, at the Lin iang Xiong Art Gallery in Penang.

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF ART is never static. It changes with time, with circumstances, with the need for expressions particular to the times. The same can be said of PEACE, and of WAR.

But these are very big words, these are terms that are very general in nature. Does WAR mean the same thing anytime and anywhere in the world?

All these are very big issues, so I would simply focus on what WAR and PEACE are in the context of Global Geopolitics. The global scenario, something we over time have come to call Globalisation over the last few hundred years, has been driven very much by Western powers, accompanied by Modern weapons, modern education, modern means of production, colonial exploitation and the creation and control of supply chains. These modern phenomena constructed the material and institutional conditions for global hegemony in all forms of human endeavour. This hegemony has been close to being total, and almost all-consuming.

WARS, as we remember them from recent times, are deeply understood in terms of the dynamics involved in the expansion and sustaining of that global hegemony. PEACE, then, is also seen in that context. Independence for most colonies was a process of WAR, and the PEACE that came thereafter had often been filled with internal conflicts.

If modern WARS are events in a process of exploitation and extraction and subjugation of various parts of the world, then PEACE understood in that process is an incidental phenomenon.

When we now wish to put the terms ART and PEACE together, we are taking on a conceptual challenge more than a policymaking challenge.

ART is about being HUMAN, in fact, but with ART being understood in a broad sense as the need to be creative and to exercise SELF EXPRESSION.

ART in that broad sense, offers us a path for new ways of thinking of the possibility of PEACE, not as an event when WAR is merely absent, but as the DEFAULT condition of human society and human beingness.

Let me clarify what I wish to say by introducing two terms.  The first taken from the academic discipline of “Art Criticism and Cultural Commentary”. It is Homo Artifex (Man the Creator), which is applied directly to artists, writers, and musicians. In that discipline, it is used as a collective noun for the creative community, signalling the human compulsion to reshape reality, to tell stories, and to leave an expressive mark on the world.

In the field of Philosophical Anthropology, Homo Artifex is used to expand upon certain traditional definitions and limitations of human nature.

1. Used in contrast to Homo Sapiens (meaning Human the Wise), the term Homo Artifex shifts our focus away from “pure intellect” to “creative imagination instead”
2. Used in contrast to Homo Economicus, (meaning the Economic Human), Homo Artifex denounces the idea that humans are driven solely by self-interest and economic gains.

Generally then, Homo Artifex is a philosophical and anthropological term to denote “Human the Artist” or “Human the Craftsman”, highlighting the capacity for creativity, aesthetic expression, imagination and craftsmanship as the core essence of humanity.

I am introducing this term here to point out that modern history has for too long been about another kind of human self-image. Our War and our Peace have been configured not merely by Homo Sapiens or Homo Economicus, but something that is more clearly the conceptual opposite of Homo Artifex. This is Homo Praedo (Man the Plunderer, the Pillager, the Predator), who gains goods by plundering, not by creating. He coerces instead of creates.

In short, I wish to highlight the need for a shift in our self-image. Away from ourselves as selfish and greedy, to one where we are proud of being creative and communal.

We are Homo Artifex, the toolmaker, the artist, the writer, the musician.

So should all our children and grandchildren be. Their self-image must not be the one we have entertained for far too long, that of the Homo Praedo—the plunderer, the predator, the pirate.

With that, let me now hand the stage to these very esteemed speakers assembled on this steady stage today, in this brilliant building, on this peaceful island of Penang.

Let us begin with our host, Professor Lin Xiang Xiong.

Next, let me invite Ms Tamar Gabelnick, the Director of ICBL, to the microphone.

Let us now listen to Mr Yves Marek, diplomat and writer.

I now invite Mr Emmanuel Dupuy, President of the IPSE think tank.

Our last speaker is from Singapore, Mr Lim Shao Bin, War-history researcher from Singapore.

Dialogue begins…

Let me now ask each panelist in turn to talk about Art and Peace, and the Scars of War. Or any aspect of today’s Subject which they find most important to share with audience today.

1. Let us discuss Art and what you consider to be its essence. What does Art give you?
2. What do you want of the observer of Art, the appreciator of Art?
3. Is Art entertainment, a philosophical quest, a philosophical tease?
4. Certain forms of Art, like writing, goes through the frontal lobe of our brain, while other forms seem important because they don’t do that first. They go straight to the gut, or the heart, before the brain begins to react and interfere?
5. What is Art to Man? Is it right to think of any skill as Art since it takes training, commitment, time and energy? Throwing a spear is an art.
6. The Art of Killing, the Art of War?
7. What is Art and what is Science? Are they very different? How?