Brian, I sense that you are standing by the concept of the exceptionalism of the
human species. I also hold some internal space for the potentiality that what is
here—humans on a planet within an indeterminate cosmos—is something 'special'.
However, having formally finished eight years exploring localized geosystems,
unless invoking a god/goddess-factor, I more-and-more view human presence as
simply one element in *the* whole cosmological 'natural' system. We are 'of' the
materials of the planet; we alter the materials of the planet (not unlike all
Life that we know of); we came into being at one moment in time of the planet's
limited existence; we will vanish in a relatively short time. Traces will
remain, as much of Life leaves both tangible and invisible traces of its
passing. Everything we know, again, aside from a 'super-natural'
god/goddess-factor suggests that everything is transitory.
This way of thought—one influenced deeply by that immersion in
geoscience/deep-time perspectives—places little dominion in the abstracted
monuments and detritus of thoughtless power we have built and will build to
ourselves: they are as transitory as everything else.
The conflict between these two thought-systems, in my existence, is ongoing and
without conclusion, apparently until I conclude that existence, at which point I
will either know, or I will simply not exist except for the remaining, momentary
negentropic energies I temporarily harnessed while be-ing a transitory form of Life.
I think we share that ambivalence, you with a bit more faith(?) in the potential
for altruistic relief within the species.
cheers,
John
On 4/17/24 9:36 AM, Brian Holmes via nettime-l wrote:
MP asked:
"Or everything is natural in our culture?"
I am currently reading about biomimicry. You probably know a lot about it,
curious to hear your ideas. The concept suggests both a distance between
humans and nature, and a possible rapprochement. To me that's intuitive. I
can't accept the idea that there is no difference between humanity and
nature. Sure, if you adopt a (fictional) distance of a million miles away,
then our little planet is going through a typical, natural ecological
overshoot phenomenon that will lead to a typical, natural period of forest
fires, rising oceans and perhaps eventual disappearance of water and
oxygen. But as a situated being, I see an ever-diversifying and intricately
self-regulating biological world that is mostly subject to intrusive human
violence, but which can also be understood, imitated, stewarded and so on.
Conversely, the full-on postmodern idea that humanity has artificialized
everything and nature is a social construct seems to me wrong and disproven
by the storms of the Anthropocene. This is why I really appreciate
Christian's statement that "whatever we mean by nature it is necessary to
keep the discussion about the meaning of 'nature' possible."
Nature is somehow an Other with whom we must compose. Which doesn't just
mean leaving it alone. When the American agronomist Wes Jackson proposed
"nature as measure," it was in view of transforming the agricultural system
through the creation of perennial grains. Biomimicry, in short.
--
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Dr. John Hopkins, BSc, MFA, PhD
subscribe to the neoscenes blog::
https://neoscenes.net/blog/87903-subscribe-to-neoscenes
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
--
# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
# more info: https://www.nettime.org
# contact: [email protected]
