In Jeff VanderMeer’s Annihilation, the author makes certain that the environment, laws, and beings of “Area X” are alienated and abnormal compared to the rest of Earth. However, the perplexing world created by Vandermeer is not meant only to create a sense of estrangement, but to force a reconsideration of what the concept of humanity actually means. The definition of humanity is broadened through the unique lense of the book, and the author suggests that human society must be thought of more in terms of the natural environment which it destroys. The Biologist, as we get to know her, is central in VanderMeer’s challenge to the commonly held conception of humanity, due to her literal transformation away from being a purely “human” specimen. After being contaminated and colonized by the strange work of the Crawler, the biologist reports that she is being altered internally by the environment. It is apparent, through her enhanced perception of Area X, she is becoming more in tune with nature and the surrounding pristine world. When the confronted by the surveyor and …show more content…
Through removing this distinctly human practice from Area X, the researchers seem less immediately human, making it easier for the reader to reanalyze the role and characteristics of humanity. According to the Biologist, “Names belonged to where we had come from, not to who we were while embedded in Area X” (VanderMeer 11). VanderMeer is suggesting that previously important societal elements are not recognized in Area X, and that the term human must be reimagined to fit this new conception of the world. By losing their names, the expeditionists have effectively lost their previous status in the human world, and seem to become their roles in the ecosystem. They are just more variables to be analyzed and sorted, and the concept of humanity with
Sandra Steingraber, an ecologist and author of the essay “Despair Not”, focuses her essay on the ongoing environmental issues, “In fact, the
“If you want to think about why humans are so dangerous to other species, you can picture a poacher in Africa carrying and Ak-47/ better still, you can picture yourself, holding a book on your lap” (Kolbert 266). This excerpt alone sets up the dark narrative that lies within The Sixth Extinction. It is uncomfortable to think about the impact that humans have on the environment on a global scale; however, it is nearly unbearable to recognize individual actions such as reading a book, directly contribute to the devastation of the earth.
In Thomas Palmer's essay, "The Case For Human Beings", Palmer explores the topics of human accomplishment, the diversity of humankind, and the havoc that said diversity has caused on the environment. Using irony and sarcasm, with the occasional clever analogy, he burdens the reader with his cynical outlook on humankind in regards to its brutish treatment of the earth's delicate ecosystem. In one paragraph, Palmer states, "The only way to...restore biodiversity to its greatest possible richness, would be to arrange for every human being on earth to drop dead tomorrow" (323-24). Palmer's combative literary form, however, is not entirely lacking its own beauty and grace. When he uses human acheivements such as a Bach chorale, man's first journey to the moon, and three-masted schooners, he is bringing glory back to humankind. Although he explains the splendor of the Bach chorale, he still states, "Human consciousness...cannot, in this view, contribute to biodiversity, except by staying as far out of the picture as possible, so as to avoid tainting still-intact landscapes with unnatural influences" (324). No Bach chorale, no three-masted schooner, no Apollo landing, Palmer reveals, contributes to the ecosystem.
This can bring about both benefits and problems to the anthropologist, and this is what will be examined in this essay. When conducting fieldwork in a different environment, there are many
In Richard Preston’s “The Hot Zone” there is the overarching theme which is that nature is a power that dwarfs the achievements and power that humans possess. This lends to the consideration that humans should strive to understand the viruses and diseases that nature “throws” at the human race. Preston uses gruesome imagery, and characterization to persuade the reader to take the direction of overcoming the viruses and horrors of nature through research to better society.
Fromm underlines a split in humans, a theme of separation that is evident. To begin with, Fromm proposes that humans have been torn away from their prehistoric union with nature because of “reason.” Fromm suggests that man is a part of nature, while being “apart” from it, this is a result of “self-awareness, reason, and imagination.” These humanistic characteristics have disrupted harmony in nature, creating this dichotomous human existence. Furthermo...
In Stegner’s perception, humans are the only wild species left. Humans are the only ones who have survived genetically unchanged. They are the ones who create the technological advan...
Our awareness, our perception within nature, as Thomas states, is the contrast that segregates us from our symbols. It is the quality that separates us from our reflections, from the values and expectations that society has oppressed against itself. However, our illusions and hallucinations of nature are merely artifacts of our anthropocentric idealism. Thomas, in “Natural Man,” criticizes society for its flawed value-thinking, advocating how it “[is merely] a part of a system . . . [and] we are, in this view, neither owners nor operators; at best, [are] motile tissues specialized for receiving information” (56). We “spread like a new growth . . . touching and affecting every other kind of life, incorporating ourselves,” destroying the nature we coexist with, “[eutrophizing] the earth” (57). However, Thomas questions if “we are the invaded ones, the subjugated, [the] used?” (57). Due to our anthropocentric idealism, our illusions and hallucinations of nature, we forget that we, as organisms, are microscopically inexistent. To Thomas, “we are not made up, as we had always supposed, of successively enriched packets of our own parts,” but rather “we are shared, rented, occupied [as] the interior of our cells, driving them, providing the oxidative energy that sends us out for the improvement of each shining day, are the mitochondria” (1).
Anthropocentrism has been a central belief upon which modern human society has been constructed. The current state of the world, particularly the aspects that are negative, are reflective of humans continuously acting in ways that are in the interest of our own species. As environmental issues have worsened in recent decades, a great number of environmentalists are turning away from anthropocentric viewpoints, and instead adopting more ecocentric philosophies. Although anthropocentrism seems to be decreasing in popularity due to a widespread shift in understanding the natural world, philosopher William Murdy puts forth the argument that anthropocentrism still has relevancy in the context of modern environmental thought. In the following essay, I will explain Murdy’s interpretation of anthropocentrism and why he believes it to be an acceptable point of
In the poem “Cascadilla Falls” by A. R. Ammons, the poet writes about an evening where the narrator visited a stream below the falls. Although, man’s role in nature has always been questioned, humans have always been the center of the universe revolving around us. In the poem, Ammons makes a strong statement against humanism by relating natural occurrences in nature to human beings. The universe is a vast place with endless possibilities and we live on a planet that is teeming with life. Humans, however, have taken over this world and view other life forms as inferior and abuse nature for resources.
Peoples, James, and Garrick Bailey. Humanity: An Introduction to Cultural Anthropology. 9th ed. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning, 2003. Print.
Pinker, Steven. The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature. New York: Viking, 2002. Print.
Author Yuval Noah Harari has a unique way of reviewing the past fourteen billion years in his monograph Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind. His intention for writing this book is mainly to bring up the conversation of the human condition and how it has affected the course of history. In this case, the human condition coincides with the inevitable by-products of human existence. These include life, death, and all the emotional experiences in between. Harari is trying to determine how and why the events that have occurred throughout the lives of Homo Sapiens have molded our social structures, the natural environment we inhabit, and our values and beliefs into what they are today.
Evolutionary theory throws humans into a tizzy. Driven by the need to amass knowledge, we find ourselves surging forward into the exploration of a story where the more we know, the less we can feature ourselves. Eminent evolutionary biologist Ernst Mayr contends that anthropocentrism and belief in evolution by natural selection are mutually exclusive (Mayr 1972). In other words, the Darwinian story of biological evolution rejects the notion of progress and replaces it with directionless change, thereby subverting the conception of human superiority on a biological scale toward perfection. Evolution by natural selection undermines the idea that humans are the culmination and ultimate beneficiaries of all nature. However, to say that anthropocentrism necessarily dissolves in the rising tide of evolutionary theory is to ignore the ways in which human centered humanness plays an intriguing role in evolution.
A human induced global ecological crisis is occurring, threatening the stability of this earth and its inhabitants. The best path to address environmental issues both effectively and morally is a dilemma that raises concerns over which political values are needed to stop the deterioration of the natural environment. Climate change; depletion of resources; overpopulation; rising sea levels; pollution; extinction of species is just to mention a few of the damages that are occurring. The variety of environmental issues and who and how they affect people and other species is varied, however the nature of environmental issues has the potential to cause great devastation. The ecological crisis we face has been caused through anthropocentric behavior that is advantageous to humans, but whether or not anthropocentric attitudes can solve environmental issues effectively is up for debate. Ecologism in theory claims that in order for the ecological crisis to be dealt with absolutely, value and equality has to be placed in the natural world as well as for humans. This is contrasting to many of the dominant principles people in the contemporary world hold, which are more suited to the standards of environmentalism and less radical approaches to conserving the earth. I will argue in this essay that whilst ecologism could most effectively tackle environmental problems, the moral code of ecologism has practical and ethical defects that threaten the values and progress of anthropocentricism and liberal democracy.