Week 9 - Nature and Human-Centered Society PDF

Week 9 Nature and Human-Centered Society Sociology 1210 Dr. Elisabeth Rondinelli Learning Objectives Define anthropocentrism and its origins Identify the link between anthropocentrism and capitalism (social structure) Identify anthropocentrism in language and science (cul...

Week 9 Nature and Human-Centered Society Sociology 1210 Dr. Elisabeth Rondinelli Learning Objectives Define anthropocentrism and its origins Identify the link between anthropocentrism and capitalism (social structure) Identify anthropocentrism in language and science (culture) Notice! The attention to social structure and culture (from part 1 and 2 of the course); we are trying to make connections between distinct parts of this course You have the tools to understand the *kind* of society we live in today What is anthropocentrism and where did it come from? Anthropocentrism: the idea that humans are superior and meant to be 'in control' of nature; the environment is seen as a resource to satisfy human needs anthrōpos is "human being" and kéntron is “center.” Culturally rooted in Judeo- Christian tradition: ‘dominion over the earth’; populate the earth and subdue nature Took hold in North America via Industrial Revolution and colonial expansion the cultural notion that humans should be masters of the natural world fuelled the Industrial Revolution shift to mass production, rapid exploitation of nature mass consumption and living beyond necessity opposes Indigenous cultural worldviews about the natural world ‘What we call ‘property’ exists only when cultures have beliefs that define it as real. Like many Native American tribes, for example, the Wampanoag traditionally viewed land as part of nature and not something that people could own. They could live in it, farm it, hunt on it, worship it, and admire its beauty, but they could not treat it as property. When English settlers came to the island of Nantucket off the southern coast of Massachusetts, however, and ‘purchased’ land from the tribe, the Wampanoag believed they had sold the English only a right to share in the use of the land. They were dumbfounded, then, by what the white settlers did next: the English arrested and punished anyone who ‘trespassed’ on what they now regarded as ‘private property’. The Wampanoag could no longer walk on or otherwise use the land, because it no longer ‘belonged’ to them. The Wampanoag social system had no place for such ideas. To the Wampanoag, the norms of English culture defined a relationship to the land that simply was not possible’ (Johnson, pg. 49) What is the link between capitalism and anthropocentrism? (structure)  Accumulation by Dispossession Transforming elements of the natural world with no monetary value into private property for profit Public assets become sources of profit for private companies. “Productive assets” include natural resources, such as earth, forest, water, and air.  Mass Production The manufacture of goods in large quantities by machinery and by use of techniques such as the assembly line and division of labour.  Consumerism Active participation in consumption that is driven by the belief that objects express elements of the self and one’s identity and are required for the good life  Planned Obsolescence Policy of designing a product with an artificially limited life, so that it becomes obsolete (unfashionable or no longer functional) after a certain period of time.  Disposability Culture Excessive production and consumption of short-lived or disposable items over durable goods that can be repaired, reused, or are everlasting  Social structure patterns the ways in which resources are distributed in a society (power, prestige, money) Where does our money go? Where does the natural world fit into the capitalist economy, which values perpetual growth and expansion? What does the forest deserve? Should a forest’s right to live take priority over the developer’s desire for a new apartment complex? What cut of a country’s GDP should be distributed back to the natural world? anthropocentrism prevents us from considering questions like this in a serious and committed way How is anthropocentrism present in language and science? (culture)  In the English language, people and the natural world are distinguished from one another, with consequences “He, she, they, his, hers, “It” theirs” The natural world, (including animals that People and animals that we do not relate to, we live with insects, plants, rivers, mountains, and so on In science, the impulse to objective inquiry denies the agency of nature - western science distinguishes between the scientist (active observer) and the world of nature (passive objects to be observed) - it neglects the relationship of reciprocity that we have to the natural world; it does not see this relationship as one between active participants - objective science involves putting aside questions of spirituality, art, beauty, & values in relation to the natural world So: what’s the problem of “it”? Kimmerer says it’s reductive, doesn’t mesh with what she knows of nature and what she learned in the Potawatami language, knowledge, and culture reinforces the idea that people are active subjects who have control over a world made up of passive objects Colonialism meant the suppression of knowledge and Indigenous knowledges of nature, which take nature as animate, active, Residential schools Industrial revolution and the Enlightenment Certain cultures and languages, and therefore knowledge, become invisible in these processes A new language emerges A living being of the earth: ‘ki’ as pronoun ”Ki is giving us maple syrup” Language of ‘animacy’ Our very language shapes our relationship to nature; our limited language is lending insight into our exploitative approach to nature Sustainability is embedded in idea of ownership of nature and the desire to keep taking from it and consuming it Reciprocity: we’re not just taking from the earth and earth doesn’t just provide; the earth sustains us and we have the responsibility to sustain earth in return: MUTUALITY “So much of what we do as environmental scientists — if we take a strictly scientific approach, we have to exclude values and ethics […] Because those are not part of the scientific method. There’s good reason for that, and much of the power of the scientific method comes from the rationality and the objectivity. But a lot of the problems that we face in terms of … the environment lie at the juncture of nature and culture. So we can’t just rely on a single way of knowing that explicitly excludes values and ethics.” - Kimmerer What do you think of the term ‘climate anxiety’? What do you think it means, and what is it referring to? Is it a useful term? If you do think about climate change as something for which some group, some process, or some thing, can be made responsible, who or what is/are the target(s)? How do you and your friends talk about climate change? What emotions are expressed? What language? Week 9 Key Concepts anthropocentrism disposability culture consumerism mass production planned obsolescence accumulation by dispossession language of animacy