Is the Human Impact Natural?
Is the Human Impact Natural?
Naturalizing the human impact refers to the claim (implicit or open) that our ecological predicament is a consequence of our species’ nature and thus also an extension of the natural order. The chapter “Is the Human Impact Natural?” dissects a proclivity within environmental thought (and more broadly) to attribute the onslaught on the natural world to peculiarities or distinctions of “human nature.” The chapter argues that when human nature is evaluated as the culprit behind the ecological crisis, the discursive space for investigating the sociocultural conditioning into human supremacist beliefs and actions shrinks, and there is less incentive to pursue solutions by superseding the dominant anthropocentric worldview. The chapter examines three influential environmental discourses that naturalize humanity's impact: the “land-use transition” model; Anthropocene literature; and the Pleistocene Overkill Hypothesis. The commonalities running through these discourses is that they represent the human impact as a natural phenomenon and, being high-profile, are influential in shaping how the human juggernaut is understood. By deconstructing these three discourses the chapter argues that locating the culprit in our biological nature is largely an effect of narrative—of how the human impact is framed and represented.
Keywords: human nature, Anthropocene, land transition, Pleistocene Overkill, narrative
Chicago Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.
Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.
If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.
To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs, and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us.
