Skip to main content

Is anthropea taking off?

I was thinking a bit about the image I used last week in my talk on political ecology against modernity. There I compare Latour's modes of existence - thought sometimes in terms of tools for designing new forms of common life - Christopher Alexander's patterns for architecture - oriented towards enhancing life and beauty - and sumak kawsay, the buen vivir as a political project. And I come up with this image of the moderns have been slowly preparing to leave the planet, to create a controlled environment of their own - as if they were prepared to board another planet, I called it Anthropea, which would take off the Earth and free us from all natural constraints (and all need to negotiate with anything non-human). Latour's proposal is that we stop getting ready to board Anthropea and take off and start making ourselves comfortable here in Gaia. I thought the anthropocene could itself be a rehearsal for the moderns to take off in a planet of their own: we can now match the geological forces, we can now have a geology of our own. We're getting independent of the alien nature, has the message that the moderns draw about the anthropocene. Indeed, in the Peter Wall Institute for Advanced Studies debate about the anthropocene, that brought together Latour and Descola in Vancouver (see here), Latour mentions the dangers of the notion of anthropocene. It can be read, he says, as a confirmation that the Earth is a machine that needs proper maintenance, a machine that could be more and more human. The image is maybe that Gaia is being replaced by Anthropea and we won't even need to depart as we'll colonize all the non-human population to our benefit. I'm not sure which way we're going, but it does look increasingly to me as if the moderns were preparing themselves for a future life of pure spirits, where bodies don't matter, where matter is just information.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Hunky, Gunky and Junky - all Funky Metaphysics

Been reading Bohn's recent papers on the possibility of junky worlds (and therefore of hunky worlds as hunky worlds are those that are gunky and junky - quite funky, as I said in the other post). He cites Whitehead (process philosophy tends to go hunky) but also Leibniz in his company - he wouldn't take up gunk as he believed in monads but would accept junky worlds (where everything that exists is a part of something). Bohn quotes Leibniz in On Nature Itself «For, although there are atoms of substance, namely monads, which lack parts, there are no atoms of bulk, that is, atoms of the least possible extension, nor are there any ultimate elements, since a continuum cannot be composed out of points. In just the same way, there is nothing greatest in bulk nor infinite in extension, even if there is always something bigger than anything else, though there is a being greatest in the intensity of its perfection, that is, a being infinite in power.» And New Essays: ... for there is nev

Talk on ultrametaphysics

 This is the text of my seminar on ultrametaphysics on Friday here in Albuquerque. An attempt at a history of ultrametaphysics in five chapters Hilan Bensusan I begin with some of the words in the title. First, ‘ultrametaphysics’, then ‘history’ and ‘chapters’. ‘Ultrametaphysics’, which I discovered that in my mouth could sound like ‘ autre metaphysics’, intends to address what comes after metaphysics assuming that metaphysics is an endeavor – or an epoch, or a project, or an activity – that reaches an end, perhaps because it is consolidated, perhaps because it has reached its own limits, perhaps because it is accomplished, perhaps because it is misconceived. In this sense, other names could apply, first of all, ‘meta-metaphysics’ – that alludes to metaphysics coming after physics, the books of Aristotle that came after Physics , or the task that follows the attention to φύσις, or still what can be reached only if the nature of things is considered. ‘Meta-m

Memory assemblages

My talk here at Burque last winter I want to start by thanking you all and acknowledging the department of philosophy, the University of New Mexico and this land, as a visitor coming from the south of the border and from the land of many Macroje peoples who themselves live in a way that is constantly informed by memory, immortality and their ancestors, I strive to learn more about the Tiwas, the Sandia peoples and other indigenous communities of the area. I keep finding myself trying to find their marks around – and they seem quite well hidden. For reasons to do with this very talk, I welcome the gesture of directing our thoughts to the land where we are; both as an indication of our situated character and as an archive of the past which carries a proliferation of promises for the future. In this talk, I will try to elaborate and recommend the idea of memory assemblage, a central notion in my current project around specters and addition. I begin by saying that I