The Human-Nature Dichotomy
How did the planet become subservient to human needs?
The human-nature dichotomy is an anthropocentric approach to making sense of the world and lays at the heart of the climate crisis. Its central tenet is the premise that humans are separate from, and superior to, nature. Throughout history, it has been a culturally-contingent worldview. Thus tracing how this dichotomy has been constructed and adapted over time can enable the process of disentangling ourselves from it.
The theological foundations of the human-nature dichotomy date back to antiquity. One of the most ancient understandings of it is found in Taoist thought. One of the core concepts from Taoism is the disharmony that emerges when the human psyche disconnects from the flow of Tao, the way of nature. Unlike plants and animals, the trajectory of human evolution occurred in such a way as to engender the rise of language and goal orientation. These are both cognitive endeavours that act upon the world, rather than move harmoniously with the subtle energies of Tao.
Some scholars have argued that the Genesis Creation story in the Judaeo-Christian Bible, rather than encourage harmony with nature, endorses this disconnect. After creating the world, God made Adam in his own image, plucking Eve from his rib as an afterthought. Man established his dominance over all the animals by ascribing names to them, resembling the quote from the Tao Te Ching ‘One who speaks does not know’. The act of naming formalised the differences between Adam and animals, and the power to do so imposed a hierarchy. Henceforth the purpose of the latter was to serve man. The Creation story depicts Adam as separate from, but also morally superior to other physical entities since he shares many of God’s transcendent qualities. By the fifteenth century, Christianity had largely supplanted all other religion in Europe and spread its seed further through colonialism.
“For the whole world works together in the service of man; and there is nothing from which he does not derive use and fruit”
The seventeenth century witnessed a surge in popularity of the human-nature dichotomy through science and philosophy. In On the Wisdom of the Ancients, (1609) Francis Bacon described how ‘For the whole world works together in the service of man; and there is nothing from which he does not derive use and fruit’. Similarly, René Descartes’ seventeenth century mind-body dualism argument ‘I think, therefore I am’, encapsulated the philosophical superiority of humans. This century culminated with the beginning of the Enlightenment, which emphasised rationality and individualism. By the age of the Industrial Revolution, non-Western cultures stood in stark contrast to societies based on notions of material progress and the subordination of nature.
‘Whereas divine will was ultimately benevolent, market forces are sterile and lack compassion. An orthodox reading of market logic renders humans as economic actors and commodifies all else’.
In the early 1990s, following the collapse of the Soviet Union, neoliberalism spread its hegemony over vast swathes of the globe. As an economic doctrine, neoliberalism replaces the supremacy of God with that of the market, supported by a system of private property rights. Whereas divine will was ultimately benevolent, market forces are sterile and lack compassion. An orthodox reading of market logic renders humans as economic actors and commodifies all else. Commodities lack agency and their value is derived through an economic lens. Human agency is judged in terms of the ease with which an individual can operate in the economic realm. Environmental protection limits the extent to which nature can be appropriated for economic purpose, and thus hinders human agency. This logic widens the human-nature dichotomy.
The relentless surge of capitalism in the face of ecological and social breakdown suggests that Margaret Thatcher’s slogan ‘There is No Alternative’ seems to have been realised. Consider the definition of ‘sustainable development’ popularised by the 1987 Brundtland Report: ‘Sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs’. This definition recognises the trade-off between economic development and the environment. But since it is suffused with anthropocentrism, it sustains an extractive economy that views nature as a commodity for human consumption.
“With the population explosion, the carcinoma of planless urbanism, the now geological deposits of sewage and garbage, surely no creature other than man has ever managed to foul its nest in such short order.”
The fatigue of struggling against a hegemonic economic order is captured by the phrase designating our current epoch the ‘Anthropocene’. Ecologically, the words of Lynn White resonate: ‘With the population explosion, the carcinoma of planless urbanism, the now geological deposits of sewage and garbage, surely no creature other than man has ever managed to foul its nest in such short order’. Yet the term is problematic for the way in which it portrays collective human agency - itself determined by economic agency - as such an unstoppable force as to be rendered practically impotent as individuals. By homogenising humanity as a polluting mass, the term smothers the structural inequalities embedded in the economic system at the heart of the climate crisis. Further, it characterises human nature as inherently detrimental to, and separate from, the environment.
Yet these power relations can be remedied through dismantling the human-nature duality through ecocentric approaches. For instance granting legal standing and rights-based protections to non-human entities, or designing with the principles of biomimicry. An ecocentric outlook works with the regenerative cycles and sustainable designs found in nature. Rather than economic, its focus is a holistic planetary well-being.
As with all change, it begins from within. For me this has taken the form of growing vegetables, eating seasonally, and becoming more attuned to circadian rhythms. At our current historical juncture, overcoming the human-nature dichotomy seems like an insurmountable task. Detaching from the materialism and individualism that characterises mainstream culture can be challenging, but there is a magic in attempting to live life more in accordance with the way of Tao.
