Subject: Re: AUT: science, technology and ecology
Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2002 15:53:42 -0600


Ben,

Some people have read alienation as 'alienation from what is possible', from
an ecstatic humanity, a not-yet-but-possible humanity.  Rather than see it
as something pre-defined, we could argue that we have had, for the entirety
of human existence, seen glimpses of this possible, from this humanity as
its own end.  In that sense, I think that the humanity underlying alienation
is a negative humanity, a negation of humanity-against-itslef which does not
claim to know exactly what humanity for itself will mean just yet, merely
that it is possible.

Hope that makes some vague sense.

Chris

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ben Hoh" <jebni-AT-bigpond.com>
To: <aut-op-sy-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu>
Sent: Monday, February 04, 2002 3:18 AM
Subject: Re: AUT: science, technology and ecology


> Harald,
>
> Let's establish this from the beginning: I have a very low tolerance for
all
> that hippie tree-hugging shit.
>
>
> > The appreciation of "wild" nature is in itself a very anthropocentric
notion.
>
> Sure, and the preconceptions contained therein (that wildlife is just
> something for us to appreciate, that aspects of the planetary system can
be
> fetishised as "nature") are exactly what I think we need to challenge. By
> "ethical relationship" I mean a non-fetishistic, non-dominative
interaction
> that challenges the presumed identities of both parties. Saying that we
> shouldn't try to establish such relationships because anthropocentrism is
> inevitable is like saying that because xenophobia is inevitable, racism is
> somehow "natural".
>
>
> > The declared anti-anthropocentric currents seem to me often to be
> > the foremost expressions of a (capitalist) alienation from nature.
>
> Yeah, I'd say that most "pro-nature" narratives are simply the idiotic
> flipside of capitalist instrumentalism. But the problem I have with the
> usual deployment of the concept of alienation is that it can inscribe an
> origin that we somehow have to faithfully return to -- for me, the term
> "species being" raises, among other things, the spectre of 19th Century
> scientistic quackdom. But I think the concept describes something that
> really happens, so I'd rather say that we're alienated from possibilites
> rather than any kind of authenticity. And so rather than an alienation
from
> "nature", I'd say that "nature loving" crypto-anthropocentrism a product
of
> the lack of that ethical relationship. And no, I don't know what that
would
> be, exactly. That's what experimental political practice is all about.
>
>
> Ben
>
>
>
>      --- from list aut-op-sy-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
>



     --- from list aut-op-sy-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---