Critique of technology as metaphysics: reflection on the post-nature narrative of the Antropocene

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15448/1984-6746.2020.1.36679

Keywords:

Technology. Metaphysics. Anthropocene. Post-environmentalism.

Abstract

This text proposes a critique of technology as addressed in the post-nature narrative of the Anthropocene. Within this narrative, also called post-environmentalism, Anthropocene is the historical moment in which the impossibility of an idealized notion of nature – distinct from human intervention – becomes clear. In this text, it is argued that, although questioning crucial aspects of modern thought, this narrative also has significant theoretical-conceptual problems derived from the centrality attributed to technological mediation, which eventually turns it into a kind of metaphysics. The exposition of the post-nature arguments comes from the dialogue with texts of post-environmental activists, such as Michael Shellenberger and Ted Nordhaus, and from scholars who provide post-environmentalists with theoretical and conceptual background, such as Bruno Latour. and Peter Sloterdijk. The critique draws on the arguments of the contemporary philosophers Dieter Mersch and Andreas Luckner, who unfold ideas already introduced by Martin Heidegger and point to the shortcomings of metaphysical perspectives on technology.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Tales Tomaz, Universidade de Salzburgo (PLUS), Salzburgo

Doutor em Ciências pela Escola de Comunicações e Artes da Universidade de São Paulo (ECA/USP, São Paulo, SP, Brasil). Pesquisador na área de economia política da comunicação e das tecnologias no Departamento de Ciências da Comunicação da Universidade de Salzburgo (Áustria).

References

ANKER, P. Buckminster Fuller as Captain of Spaceship Earth. Minerva, v. 45, p. 417-434, 2007. ANKER, P. Buckminster Fuller as Captain of Spaceship Earth. Minerva, v. 45, p. 417-434, 2007. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-007-9066-7 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-007-9066-7

BAMMÉ, A. (org.). Schöpfer der zweiten Natur: Der Mensch im Anthropozän. Marburg: Metropolis, 2014.

BAUDRILLARD, J. Simulations. Nova York: Semiotext[e], 1993.

BONNEUIL, C. The Geological Turn: Narratives of the Anthropocene. In: HAMILTON, C.; BONNEUIL, C.; GEMENNE, F. (org.). The Anthropocene and the Global Environmental Crisis: Rethinking Modernity in a New Epoch. Nova York: Routledge, 2015. p. 17-32. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315743424-2 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315743424-2

CRUTZEN, P. Geology of Mankind. Nature, v. 415, p. 23, 2002. https://doi.org/10.1038/415023a DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/415023a

CRUTZEN, P.; STOERMER, E. The “Anthropocene”. Global Change Newsletter, v. 41, p. 17-18, 2000.

HEIDEGGER, M. Holzwege. Frankfurt: Vittorio Klostermann, 1977. (GA 5)

HEIDEGGER, M. Vorträge und Aufsätze. Frankfurt: Vittorio Klostermann, 2000. (GA 7)

KAGAN, S. Art and Sustainability: Connecting Patterns for a Culture of Complexity. Bielefeld: Transcript Verlag, 2013.

KOYRÉ, A. Do mundo fechado ao universo infinito. 4. ed. Rio de Janeiro: Forense Universitária, 2006.

LATOUR, B. Agency at the Time of the Anthropocene. New Literary History, v. 45, n. 1, p. 1-18, 2014. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/nlh.2014.0003

LATOUR, B. An Inquiry into Modes of Existence: An Anthropology of the Moderns. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2013.

LATOUR, B. Love Your Monsters: Why We Must Care for Our Technologies as We Do Our Children. Breakthrough Journal, n. 2, p. 21-28, 2011b.

LATOUR, B. Network, Societies, Spheres. International Journal of Communication, v. 5, p. 796-810, 2011a.

LATOUR, B. On Technical Mediation: Philosophy, Sociology, Genealogy. Common Knowledge, v. 3, n. 2, p. 29-64, 1994.

LATOUR, B. We Have Never Been Modern. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1993.

LUCKNER, A. Heidegger und das Denken der Technik. Bielefeld: Transcript, 2008. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783839408407

MERSCH, D. Die Frage nach der Alterität: Chiasmus, Differenz und die Wendung des Bezugs. In: DALFART, I.; STOELIGER, P. (org.). Hermeneutik der Religionen. Tübingen: Mohr Sibeck, 2007. p. 35-57.

MERSCH, D. Ordo ab chao – Order from Noise. Zurique: Diaphanes, 2013a.

MERSCH, D. Turing-Test oder das “Fleisch” der Maschine. In: ENGELL, L.; HARTMANN, F.; VOSS, C. (org.). Körper des Denkens: Neue Positionen der Medienphilosophie. Munique: Wilhelm Fink, 2013b. p. 9-27. DOI: https://doi.org/10.30965/9783846755297_003

MERSCH, D. Countenance-Mask-Avatar: The “Face” and the Technical Artifact. In: GUNKEL, D. J.; MARCONDES FILHO, C.; MERSCH, D. (org.). The Changing Face of Alterity: Communication, Technology and Other Subjects. Londres: Rowman & Littlefield International, 2016. p. 17–37.

MICKLE, E. Téchne y técnica, ousía y materia. Hypnos, São Paulo, v. 3, n. 4, p. 18-27, 1998.

PICKERING, A. The mangle of practice: time, agency, and science. Chicago: The University Chicago Press, 1995. https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226668253.001.0001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226668253.001.0001

RIIS, S. The Symmetry Between Bruno Latour and Martin Heidegger: The Technique of Turning a Police Officer into a Speed Bump. Social Studies of Science, v. 38, n. 2, p. 285-301, 2008. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312707081379 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312707081379

RÜDIGER, F. Contra o conexionismo abstrato: réplica a André Lemos. Matrizes, São Paulo, v. 9, n. 2, p. 127-142, 2015. https://doi.org/10.11606/issn.1982-8160.v9i2p127-142 DOI: https://doi.org/10.11606/issn.1982-8160.v9i2p127-142

SHELLENBERGER, M.; NORDHAUS, T. The Death of Environmentalism: Global Warming Politics in a Post-Environmental World. [s.l.]: Breakthrough, 2004.

SLOTERDIJK, P. Wie groß ist “groß”? In: CRUTZEN, P.; DAVIS, M.; MASTRANDEA, M.; SCHNEIDER, S.; SLOTERDIJK, P. (orgs.). Das Raumschiff Erde hat keinen Notausgang: Energie und Politik im Anthropozän. Berlim: Suhrkamp, 2011. p. 93-110.

Published

2020-05-15

How to Cite

Tomaz, T. (2020). Critique of technology as metaphysics: reflection on the post-nature narrative of the Antropocene. Veritas (Porto Alegre), 65(1), e36679. https://doi.org/10.15448/1984-6746.2020.1.36679