Abstract
What role do contemporary narratives and counter-narratives play in policy regarding the Anthropocene crisis? Given the centrality of the anthropos in the Anthropocene, what conditions might make possible a “post-anthropocentric” or “non-anthropocentric” narrative? Tracing the production of both dominant and counter-narratives, the struggle for narrative power centers the role of the anthropos in the Anthropocene. The standard narrative—“strong anthropocentrism”—maintains humanist assumptions relating to the “control” and “cultivation” of the non-human. In contrast, counter-narratives, from both alter-humanist eco-centric and post-humanist positions, attempt to de-center human-centrism toward more egalitarian responses to the Anthropocene. Despite these attempts at de-centering human spheres of influence, this article argues that these counter-narratives maintain a “weak anthropocentrism,” given their maintenance of human volition and intentionality. The production of “post-anthropocentric” or “non-anthropocentric” narratives of the Anthropocene crisis would require speculative moves beyond the human: toward human abolition and disconnection.
Author supplied keywords
Cite
CITATION STYLE
Biswas Mellamphy, N., & Vangeest, J. (2024). Human, all too human? Anthropocene narratives, posthumanisms, and the problem of “post-anthropocentrism.” Anthropocene Review, 11(3), 599–613. https://doi.org/10.1177/20530196241237249
Register to see more suggestions
Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.