Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
##common.pageHeaderLogo.altText##

Articles

No. 1(14) (2018): The Future in the Social Sciences

The Loss of the Future in the Anthropocene

  • Ewa Bińczyk
DOI
https://doi.org/10.51196/srz.14.6
Submitted
May 23, 2020
Published
2018-04-01

Abstract

As Martín Caparrós argues: “ecology has become a sign of the times, the times that lack the vision of the future.” It is my belief that an excellent illustration of Caparrós’s thesis can be found in the interdisciplinary debate on the position of Eugene F. Stoermer and Paul Crutzen, who have proposed that, on account of the scale and scope of human interference in planetary systems, the current geological epoch be called the Anthropocene – the epoch of man. Scientists concerned by the scale of the current planetary crisis are already voicing further warnings to humanity. But, is the Anthropocene also an epoch without any ideas for the future? We have lost much of our coral reefs, climate stability, the seasons, many species and even nature at large. How should we understand the thesis of the loss of the future in the epoch of man? As it appears, an insurmountable barrier to thinking about the future in the 21st century is the dominance of market-based attitudes, in which an investment horizon of no more than 20–30 years is taken into consideration. Could it be that ignoring the climate and environmental costs inherent in the development of modern economies is evidence of a collective repression of the very notion of a future? How, then, in such circumstances, can we formulate any far-reaching future scenarios? Does the risk of sudden climate change not put into question the validity of linear thinking and the current Western understanding of time? In the article I seek possible answers to this questions relying on earlier analyses of the selected narratives in the debate on the Anthropocene. These include: 1) the naturalistic narrative of scientists (E. Stoermer, P. Crutzen, W. Steffen, J. Zalasiewicz, J. Rockström), 2) the narrative of humanists from post-naturalist circles (D. Haraway, B. Latour, I. Stengers, D. Chakrabarty), 3) the discourse of eco-Marxists, who use the label Capitalocene and are critical of the Anthropocene label (J. Moore, I. Angus, A. Hornborg, A. Malm, C. Bonneuil, J.-B. Fressoz, S. Lewis, M. Maslin), 4) the eco-catastrophic discourse (C. Hamilton, E. Crist, J. McBrien, E. Swyngedouw, N. Oreskes, E. Conway), and 5) the narrative of eco-modernists peaking about a good or even great Anthropocene (T. Nordhaus, M. Schellenberger, D. W. Keith).

References

  1. Angus I. 2016. Facing the Anthropocene. Fossil Capitalism and the Crisis of the Earth System, Monthly Review Press.
  2. Asafu-Adjaye J. et al. 2015. Manifest ekomodernistyczny, http://www.ecomodernism.org/jzyk-polski/; dostęp: 7.09.2017.
  3. Ballard G. et al. 2016. Special Report on Oil, „The Economist”, nr z 26 listopada, s. 3–12.
  4. Bendyk E. 2016. Odzyskać wizję, „Polityka. Niezbędnik Inteligenta”, nr 2, s. 113–114.
  5. Berkhout F. 2014. Anthropocene Futures, „The Anthropocene Review”, nr 1 (2), s. 154–159.
  6. Bińczyk E. 2013. Problem sceptycyzmu wobec zmiany klimatycznej a postkonstruktywizm, „Przegląd Kulturoznawczy”, nr 1 (15), s. 48–66.
  7. Bińczyk E. 2015. Monitorowanie technologii a nieusuwalne granice sterowalności (na prz ykładzie krytyki projektu inżynierii klimatu), „Studia BAS – Biura AnalizSejmowych”, nr 3 (43), s. 113–136.
  8. Bińczyk E. 2017. Odrobina krytycznego dystansu. Historia środowiska na temat debaty o antropocenie, „Avant”, vol. VIIII, nr 3, s. 193–206.
  9. Bińczyk E. 2018. Epoka człowieka. Retoryka i marazm antropocenu, Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.
  10. Bińczyk E. 2018a. Idea wspaniałego antropocenu: wrogie przejęcie cz y antropodycea?, „Prace Kulturoznawcze”, nr 1–2, Klimat kultury, red. A. Kil, J. Małczyński, s. 31–44.
  11. Blühdorn I. 2015. A Much-Needed Renewal of Environmentalism?, [w:] The Anthropocene and the Global Environmental Crisis. Rethinking Modernity in a New Epoch, red. C. Hamilton, C. Bonneuil, F. Gemenne, Routledge, s. 156–167.
  12. Bonneuil C., J.-B. Fressoz J.-B. 2016. The Shock of the Anthropocene: The Earth, History and Us, tłum. D. Fernbach, Verso.
  13. Booker K.M. 1994. The Dystopian Impulse in Modern Literature: Fiction as Social Criticism, CT: Greenwood Press.
  14. Brysse K., Oreskes N., O’Reilly J. et al. 2013. Climate Change Prediction: Erring on the Side of Least Drama?, „Global Environment Change”, nr 23, s. 327–337.
  15. Caparrós M. 2015. Głód, tłum. M. Szafrańska-Brandt, Wydawnictwo Literackie.
  16. Caradonna J. et al. 2015. A Degrowth Response to An Ecomodernist Manifesto; http://www.resilience.org/articles/General/2015/05_May/A-Degrowth- Response-to-An-Ecomodernist-Manifesto.pdf; dostęp 20.01.2018.
  17. Castree N. 2014. The Anthropocene and the Environmental Humanities, „Environmental Humanities”, nr 5, s. 233–260.
  18. Chakrabarty D. 2015. The Anthropocene and the Convergence of Histories, [w:] The Anthropocene and the Global Environmental Crisis. Rethinking Modernity in a New Epoch, red. C. Hamilton, C. Bonneuil, F. Gemenne, Routledge.
  19. Chakrabarty D. 2018. Anthropocene Time, „History and Theory”, vol. 57, nr 1, s. 5–32.
  20. Corcoran P., Moore C.J., Jazvac K. 2014. An Anthropogenic Marker Horizon in the Future Rock Record, „The Geological Society of America”, nr 24 (6), s. 4–8.
  21. Craps S., Crownshaw R., Wenzel J. et al. 2017. Memory Studies and the Anthropocene: A Roundtable, „Memory Studies”, s. 1–18, https://doi.org/10.1177/1750698017731068; dostęp: 08.03.2018.
  22. Crutzen P., Stoermer E. F. 2000. The ‘Anthropocene’, „Global Change Newsletter”, nr 41, s. 17–18.
  23. Dalby S. 2016. Framing the Anthropocene: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly, „The Anthropocene Review”, nr 3 (1), s. 33–51.
  24. Delanty G., Mota A. 2017. Governing the Anthropocene: Agency, Governance, Knowledge, „European Journal of Social Theory”, nr 20 (1), s. 9–38.
  25. Domańska E. 2014. The New Age of the Anthropocene, „Journal of Contemporary Archeology”, nr 1.1, s. 96–101, DOI: 10.1558/jca.v1i1.73; dostęp: 3.11.2018.
  26. Domańska E. 2017. Sprawiedliwość epistemiczna w humanistyce zaangażowanej, „Teksty Drugie”, nr 1, s. 41–59.
  27. Franciszek (papież). 2015. Encyklika Laudato si’. W trosce o wspólny dom, tłum. K. Stopa, Edycja Świętego Pawła.
  28. Hallmann C.A., Sorg M., Jongejans E. et al. 2017. More than 75 Percent Decline over 27 Years in Total Flying Insect Biomass in Protected Areas, „PLOS ONE”, nr 12 (10): e0185809; https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0185809; dostęp: 31.10.2017.
  29. Hamilton C. 2016. The Anthropocene as Rupture, „The Anthropocene Review”, nr 3 (2), s. 93–106.
  30. Hamilton C. 2017. Defiant Earth. The Fate of Humans in the Anthropocene, Polity Press.
  31. Hamilton C., Bonneuil C., Gemenne F., red. 2015. The Anthropocene and the Global Environmental Crisis. Rethinking Modernity in a New Epoch, Routledge.
  32. Haraway D.J. 2016. Staying with the Trouble: Anthropocene, Capitalocene, Chthulucene, [w:] Anthropocene or Capitalocene? Nature, History, and the Crisis of Capitalism, red. J.W. Moore, PM Press, Kairos, s. 34–76.
  33. Harrington C. 2016. The Ends of the World: International Relations and the Anthropocene, „Millennium: Journal of International Studies”, nr 44 (3), s. 478–498.
  34. IPCC. 2014. Międzyrządowy Zespół do spraw Zmian Klimatu. Summary for Policymakers, [w:] Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Part A: Global and Sectoral Aspects. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, red. C. B. Field et al., Cambridge University Press, s. 1–32.
  35. Irwin R. 2010. Reflections on Modern Climate Change and Finitude. , [w:] Climate Change and Philosophy. Transformational Possibilities, red. taż, Continuum, s. 48–72.
  36. Kolbert E. 2016. Szóste wymieranie. Historia nienaturalna, tłum. T. Grzegorzewska, P. Grzegorzewski, Wydawnictwo W.A.B.
  37. Kunnas J. 2017. Storytelling: From the Early Anthropocene to the Good or the Bad Anthropocene, „The Anthropocene Review”, nr 4 (2), s. 136–150.
  38. Latour B. 2015. Telling Friends from Foes in the Time of the Anthropocene, [w:] The Anthropocene and the Global Environmental Crisis. Rethinking Modernity in a New Epoch, red. C. Hamilton, C. Bonneuil, F. Gemenne, Routledge, s. 145–155.
  39. Latour B. 2015a. Fifty Shades of Green. Presentation to the panel on modernism at the Breakthrough Dialog. Sausalito, 21–23 czerwca 2015. http:// www.bruno-latour.fr/sites/default/files/downloads/00-BREAKTHROUGH- 06-15_0.pdf; dostęp: 29.10.2016
  40. Malm A., Hornborg A. 2014. The Geolog y of Mankind? A Critique of the Anthropocene Narrative, „The Anthropocene Review”, nr 1/1, s. 1–8.
  41. Marshall G. 2014. Don’t Even Think About It: Why Our Brains Are Wired to Ignore Climate Change, Bloomsbury Press.
  42. Moore J.W., red. 2016. Anthropocene or Capitalocene? Nature, History, and the Crisis of Capitalism, PM Press, Kairos.
  43. Moore C., Philips C. 2011. Plastic Ocean. How a Sea Captain’s Chance Discovery Launched a Determined Quest to Save the Oceans, Avery.
  44. New M.G. et al., red. 2011. Four Degrees and Beyond: the Potential for a Global Temperature Increase of Four Degrees and its Implications, „Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society”, vol. 369, nr 1934 [wydanie specjalne].
  45. Olson V., Messeri L. 2015. Beyond the Anthropocene. Un-Earthing an Epoch, „Environment and Society: Advances in Research”, nr 6, s. 28–47.
  46. Oreskes N., Conway E.M. 2010. Merchants of Doubt: How a Handful of Scientists Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke to Global Warming, Bloomsbury Press.
  47. Paris Climate Agreement. 2015. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, http://unfccc.int/files/essential_background/convention/application/pdf/english_paris_ agreement.pdf; dostęp: 24.11.2016.
  48. Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research and Climate Analytics. 2014. Turn Down the Heat: Confronting the New Climate Normal, World Bank.
  49. Ripple W.J. et al. 2017. World Scientists’s Warning to Humanity. A Second Notice, „Bioscience”, nr z 15 października, https://academic.oup.com/bioscience; dostęp: 10.12.2017.
  50. Rockström J. et al. 2009. A Safe Operating Space for Humanity, „Nature”, nr 46, s. 472–475.
  51. Ruddiman W.F. et al. 2015. Defining the Epoch we Live in, „Science”, nr 348, s. 38–39.
  52. Steffen W. et al. 2004. Global Change and the Earth System: A Planet Under Pressure, The IGBP Series.
  53. Steffen W., Grinevald J., Crutzen P., McNeill J.R. 2011. The Anthropocene: Conceptual and Historical Perspectives, „Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society” Series A, 369 (nr 1938), s. 842–867.
  54. Steffen W., Crutzen P., McNeill J.R. 2007. The Anthropocene: Are Humans Now Overwhelming the Great Forces of Nature?, „Ambio” nr 36 (8), s. 614–621.
  55. Steffen W., Broadgate W., Deutsch L., Gaffney O., Ludwig C. 2015. The Trajectory of the Anthropocene: The Great Acceleration, „The Anthropocene Review”, nr 2 (1), s. 81–98.
  56. Stephenson N. 2011. Innovation Starvation, „World Policy Journal”, nr 28 (3), s. 11–16.
  57. Swyngedouw Erik. 2010. Apocalypse Forever? Post-political Populism and the Spectre of Climate Change, „Theory, Culture & Society”, nr 27 (2–3), s. 213– 232.
  58. Vugt M. van, Griskevicius V., Schultz P.W. 2014. Naturally Green: Harnessing Stone Age Psychological Biases to Foster Environmental Behavior, „Social Issues and Policy Review”, nr 8 (1), s. 1–32.
  59. Wagar W.W. 1982. Terminal Visions: The Literature of Last Things, Indiana University Press.
  60. Worm B., Barbier E.B., Beaumont N. et al. 2006. Impacts of Biodiversity Loss on Ocean Ecosystem Services, „Science” nr 314, 5800, s. 787–790.
  61. Zwierzchowski M. 2016. Śnimy już tylko koszmary, „Polityka. Niezbędnik Inteligenta”, nr 2, s. 100.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.