The Boundaries of Dualism - A Multidisciplinary Exploration of Human-Nature Relations
2024
read the full thesis here
2024
read the full thesis here
INTRODUCTION
Where is the human place in nature? Are humans part of nature? Or is nature specifically the other-than-human? How do we relate to the other-than-human?
I say I want to go to nature on the weekend, but how do I know when I am in nature? Is it because I am standing in an ancient forest or a pristine landscape? If I need to leave my environment to find nature, then where do I live? Being born, raised, socialised and educated in Western Europe at the start of the 21st century my understanding of what is human and what is non-human or in other terms what is culture and what is nature, has been heavily influenced by the Western glasses of dualism, that create a strict separation between human life and other than human life. This dualistic worldview manifests itself not just on a personal level, in how we relate to our environment, but also has real-time implications on politics and policymaking. As artists, we relate to the world around us or within us and create work that communicates with our environment. Now, we can only relate to what we know, and if we see ourselves as separate or something distinctly different from the natural world, this will also reflect on our work as artists. Therefore, within this thesis, I want to continuously reflect as I am also learning, on how we can challenge and potentially rethink the restraints of nature-culture dualism as individuals, as artists and as activists.
In the next chapters, we will explore different modes of relating to the human and non-human world, both historically and contemporary. Therefore I will introduce the works and research of six scholars, who all have in common a critical questioning of the separation of nature and culture, but who approach the concept from different scholarly angles. The aim is not to give a conclusive summary of their life work but to give impulses, which will help us to question our own relationship to the human and non-human world. The hope is to both learn and unlearn together.
The first chapter follows American Environmental Historian William Cronon, who in his essay ‘The Trouble with Wilderness, Or Coming Back to the Wrong Nature’ challenges the notion of a nature in the name of wilderness that is untouched by humans. He presents the argument that there is no such thing as a land that has not been marked by the presence of humans, but that the presence of Native people in their homelands has simply been erased from the historical records. Therefore, he provokes the statement that the notion of wilderness, as a pristine untouched nature, is nothing more than a flight from historical responsibilities.
In the second chapter, we will follow French Anthropologist Philippe Descola, as he examines how various cultures perceive and relate to their environment. We will find that the separation of wild and domesticated spaces is not universally applicable. With his work ‘Beyond Nature and Culture’ Descola identifies four ontological zones of how humans classify and relate to the non-human world. We will focus on Naturalism, which is the dominant ontology in Western thought and Animism, which is the opposite of Naturalism and is found in many Indigenous cultures across the globe. In Naturalism, humans and non-humans are similar in physical makeup but different in interiority, with only humans being capable of self-reflective thought. In Animism, both humans and non-humans share interiority, meaning they both have a soul and consciousness, but they differ in their physical form. Brazilian Anthropologist Eduardo Viveiros De Castro departs from the Animism identified by Descola and adds the additional clause of Perspectivism, which suggests that each species perceives itself and others uniquely based on its perspective.
French Philosopher Bruno Latour tries to break the restraints of a nature-culture dualism, so inherent in Western Naturalism, from a philosophical angle. Latour argues that the separation of nature on one side and society on the other side, which he refers to as the work of purification, is an illusion and construct of Modernity. Latour instead makes a case for what he refers to as Hybrids, which are the result of the interconnectedness of nature and culture. Climate Change is such a Hybrid since it is neither of a purely natural nor a purely societal origin. Environmental Issues are Hybrids because they involve natural processes that are significantly influenced by human activities.
Following the topic of Environmental Issues, we will get into a critical discourse on the convergence of environmental and social justice. Giovanna Di Chiro, professor for Environmental Justice argues that environmental and social justice cannot be separated and therefore makes a practical case on how the separation between the natural world and the human world is thought too short.
Ecofeminist and Biologist Donna Haraway is in line with Bruno Latour’s and Giovanna Di Chiro’s belief that the human and the non-human world are interconnected and cannot be thought of as separate or opposite entities. With her manifest ‘Staying with the Trouble: Making Kin in the Chthulucane’, Haraway challenges us to render also non-human species as capable actors in making a future that holds space for multi-species survival on our damaged planet. She calls for staying with the trouble of our times by allowing new stories, practices and interspecies relationships to form. Instead of seeking escape in doomsday storylines or believing in technofixes, Haraway encourages us to embrace the complexities and interdependence of life on a damaged earth. She calls this new epoch the Chthulucene. Lastly, Haraway introduces us to two art, science, community projects which can teach us intimacy without proximity and multi-species collaboration in a strive for a more socially and ecologically just future.
Where is the human place in nature? Are humans part of nature? Or is nature specifically the other-than-human? How do we relate to the other-than-human?
I say I want to go to nature on the weekend, but how do I know when I am in nature? Is it because I am standing in an ancient forest or a pristine landscape? If I need to leave my environment to find nature, then where do I live? Being born, raised, socialised and educated in Western Europe at the start of the 21st century my understanding of what is human and what is non-human or in other terms what is culture and what is nature, has been heavily influenced by the Western glasses of dualism, that create a strict separation between human life and other than human life. This dualistic worldview manifests itself not just on a personal level, in how we relate to our environment, but also has real-time implications on politics and policymaking. As artists, we relate to the world around us or within us and create work that communicates with our environment. Now, we can only relate to what we know, and if we see ourselves as separate or something distinctly different from the natural world, this will also reflect on our work as artists. Therefore, within this thesis, I want to continuously reflect as I am also learning, on how we can challenge and potentially rethink the restraints of nature-culture dualism as individuals, as artists and as activists.
In the next chapters, we will explore different modes of relating to the human and non-human world, both historically and contemporary. Therefore I will introduce the works and research of six scholars, who all have in common a critical questioning of the separation of nature and culture, but who approach the concept from different scholarly angles. The aim is not to give a conclusive summary of their life work but to give impulses, which will help us to question our own relationship to the human and non-human world. The hope is to both learn and unlearn together.
The first chapter follows American Environmental Historian William Cronon, who in his essay ‘The Trouble with Wilderness, Or Coming Back to the Wrong Nature’ challenges the notion of a nature in the name of wilderness that is untouched by humans. He presents the argument that there is no such thing as a land that has not been marked by the presence of humans, but that the presence of Native people in their homelands has simply been erased from the historical records. Therefore, he provokes the statement that the notion of wilderness, as a pristine untouched nature, is nothing more than a flight from historical responsibilities.
In the second chapter, we will follow French Anthropologist Philippe Descola, as he examines how various cultures perceive and relate to their environment. We will find that the separation of wild and domesticated spaces is not universally applicable. With his work ‘Beyond Nature and Culture’ Descola identifies four ontological zones of how humans classify and relate to the non-human world. We will focus on Naturalism, which is the dominant ontology in Western thought and Animism, which is the opposite of Naturalism and is found in many Indigenous cultures across the globe. In Naturalism, humans and non-humans are similar in physical makeup but different in interiority, with only humans being capable of self-reflective thought. In Animism, both humans and non-humans share interiority, meaning they both have a soul and consciousness, but they differ in their physical form. Brazilian Anthropologist Eduardo Viveiros De Castro departs from the Animism identified by Descola and adds the additional clause of Perspectivism, which suggests that each species perceives itself and others uniquely based on its perspective.
French Philosopher Bruno Latour tries to break the restraints of a nature-culture dualism, so inherent in Western Naturalism, from a philosophical angle. Latour argues that the separation of nature on one side and society on the other side, which he refers to as the work of purification, is an illusion and construct of Modernity. Latour instead makes a case for what he refers to as Hybrids, which are the result of the interconnectedness of nature and culture. Climate Change is such a Hybrid since it is neither of a purely natural nor a purely societal origin. Environmental Issues are Hybrids because they involve natural processes that are significantly influenced by human activities.
Following the topic of Environmental Issues, we will get into a critical discourse on the convergence of environmental and social justice. Giovanna Di Chiro, professor for Environmental Justice argues that environmental and social justice cannot be separated and therefore makes a practical case on how the separation between the natural world and the human world is thought too short.
Ecofeminist and Biologist Donna Haraway is in line with Bruno Latour’s and Giovanna Di Chiro’s belief that the human and the non-human world are interconnected and cannot be thought of as separate or opposite entities. With her manifest ‘Staying with the Trouble: Making Kin in the Chthulucane’, Haraway challenges us to render also non-human species as capable actors in making a future that holds space for multi-species survival on our damaged planet. She calls for staying with the trouble of our times by allowing new stories, practices and interspecies relationships to form. Instead of seeking escape in doomsday storylines or believing in technofixes, Haraway encourages us to embrace the complexities and interdependence of life on a damaged earth. She calls this new epoch the Chthulucene. Lastly, Haraway introduces us to two art, science, community projects which can teach us intimacy without proximity and multi-species collaboration in a strive for a more socially and ecologically just future.