One claim made by many environmentalists, and I think one which could potentially alienate a great number of people, is that the world would be better off without humans. As if humans were this spectacular disaster which could only happen once. As if extinguishing all of humanity would really make any sort of difference in the grand scheme of things.
All species fill some sort of ecological niche. Reading The Ecological Thought has made me more aware than ever how extraordinarily fluid these niches are-- it's as if the universe is constantly chasing its tail. The prey evolves, the predator follows, but before it can some of the grasses are overgrazed and other grasses take over and so new prey evolves to eat the grass and god only knows what all of this rapid change is doing to the bacteria in the soil, not to mention the soil's basic composition. Changes in the soil will cause adaptations in plants, &c. I realize I'm making everything sound much more deliberate than Timothy Morton implies it is, but that is merely for purposes of expediency.
The fact remains that the first humans weren't beamed to earth from some other dimension. They evolved on this planet just like everything else. If anything, this is what we should take away from the mesh-- humans are natural. That's why ecological disaster is affecting us. We are completely and totally natural, and as such, I think it's incredibly silly to assume that if we kill all the humans everything will go according to Mother Nature's plan. We are the plan. At the moment the plan doesn't appear to be working perfectly, to which I say gang aft agley-- species have destroyed themselves before and they will again.
We've seen apes with the ability to utilize basic technology, and really, as Timothy Morton points out, anyone could have been the bipedal tool-user. Didn't have to be the descendants of apes. Could have been lizard people, or amphibious beings who grew from winged tadpoles. Giant mollusks with hands (ick).
Essentially, the idea that wiping out humanity will fix everything is wrong, and it is wrong because we are nature. If humans are gone, something new will turn up, and I, for one, am not willing to put my blind faith in nature to produce consciousness plan B. We are the product of nature, and we have to make the most of that.
Check out _War with the Newts_, by Karel Capek...
ReplyDeleteI came back to this post b/c I like very much how you are wrestling with the material--productively I think. And I'd be curious to hear about how you are seeing the relationship(s), if any, between this course and the iPad course. Keep at it!
ReplyDeleteOn Tim's blog, ecologywithoutnature, I got into a debate about art & aesthetics with someone who turned out to be a nihilist of the "the world would be better off without humans" variety. As a permaculturist, I was talking about the value of different kinds of art in relation to "people and their needs and functions".
ReplyDeleteAnd he said, "What if the function of humanity is to annihilate the planet?"
His argument implied that there is such a thing as "humanity". If you follow ET (ecological thought, or we are all aliens) logically, then if there is no "nature over there", there is also no "humanity over here". Saying "the function of humanity" is like saying "destiny" or "fate" or "doom" or any of those kinds of imaginary things.
But I didn't even use the word "humanity"; I said "people". People don't have destinies. They have needs and functions. Food in, fertilizer out, just like all the other organisms, is basically what it comes down to. All we have to do is start eating from our own gardens and stop pooping in the ocean. Once you do something basic right, everything else starts falling into place.
Amelie, I'm actually going to quote Nick (from one of his posts at http://pefkfl.blogspot.com/ ) here, because I think he really gets at some of the questions you've been struggling with about the *practical" dimensions of the ecological thought. (And Nick, thanks for all your contributions on this blog -- so great. And if you happen to be in New Orleans next week, join us for Tim's visit and talk!)
ReplyDeleteFrom Nick Guetti:
"...when you apply ET (coincidental acronym? Perhaps not, since we are all pretty alien in this philosophy) to pragmatist design methodologies such as permaculture, you may find that a lot of things that you were refusing to think about--because you couldn't get them to fit--start making sense, and your practice becomes yet more practicable. Practice, if it leads somewhere, is never depressing, as gardeners and martial artists well know. Painful? Yes, sometimes, even to the point of deep grief. Frustrating? Indeed! But not depressing."