tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1438289051411770399.post7686481483753899234..comments2024-03-28T09:51:55.365-06:00Comments on ECOLOGY WITHOUT NATURE: The Answer of the RealTimothy Mortonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05067377804366363020noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1438289051411770399.post-16677598854491054252010-05-03T20:35:24.016-05:002010-05-03T20:35:24.016-05:00Sure, what counts as "nonhuman phenomenon&quo...Sure, what counts as "nonhuman phenomenon" is more an exercise in our consciousness, perception, and culture's attitudes about what is "out there" (to borrow from you :); but if we accept that we are interconnected -- that nature is not "telling us something" because nature is not outside of us, then I worry that some would take the removal of a causal link to mean we are not implicated in acting responsibly towards nature (and I realize writing "towards" is problematic, but bear with me!)Annabelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07869399254197607283noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1438289051411770399.post-91884551056868413692010-04-20T05:07:53.639-05:002010-04-20T05:07:53.639-05:00maybe it is the same as Latour's argument: &qu...maybe it is the same as Latour's argument: "our conceptions of natural fact and reality must be re-examined in order or make room for other members of the political-ecological collective." <br /><br />cf. "I therefore had to deny knowledge in order to make room for faith"Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04378012821134475538noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1438289051411770399.post-51382019185658715022010-04-20T04:37:36.471-05:002010-04-20T04:37:36.471-05:00I think this is more interesting than you give it ...I think this is more interesting than you give it credit for - rather than simply attributing phantasmatic agency to 'Nature', there is a pragmatic-irrationalist meta-argument: Its tone tacitly admits that superstitious talk of omens is beyond the pale, but it then suggests either that in order to come to terms with the reality of our situation we would best act <i>as if</i> we did have superstitious fears.<br /><br />Thus, 'rational voices' would be wrong to scoff at 'more superstitious ages' <i>not</i> because superstitious beliefs are well-founded, but because those belief systems are somehow more <i>pragmatically</i> effective in 'managing the earth' than weighing up scientific evidence and thinking rationally -- maybe ('glacial timescale') because they include some notion of aeonic time..<br />So the volcanic ash plume 'is indeed an ill omen', but a kind of <i>objective</i> opportunity for augury, from which it is our responsibility to construct the correct signifier ...Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04378012821134475538noreply@blogger.com