Human and non-human beings. Possibilities of interaction
https://doi.org/10.28995/2073-6401-2020-2-47-56
Abstract
The paper presents an analysis of the ways for interaction between man and non-human beings. Those ways are considered in anthropological and philosophical-ecological methodical approaches. The approaches imply rejecting the anthropocentrism as actual ontological basis of the Western cultural tradition. T. Morton models a coexistence of humans and non-human beings as a network uniting all living creatures. Human and non-human beings are now placed in a single process of coexistence and the human ends to be at the top of the natural hierarchy. One of the options to revise the system of interaction of human and non-human beings is to rely on the non-Western (Chinese) philosophical tradition. The anthropological approach to rethinking the position of human in the world is presented in E. Cohn’s project. He considers the human being in the framework of his interactions with the world of non-human often crucial for survival. Based on the semiotics by C. Pierce, Cohn postulates that all living beings are capable to represent the world around them using certain signs for that. A way to establish interspecies communication is animism and concept of perspectivism, which clarifies it. Animism is about the internal similarity of living beings, with a difference in external characteristics. Perspectivism allows to add that every living creature is able to understand the other by accepting his or her point of view, his or her perspective. Thus, the rejection of the anthropocentrism enables development of equal relations of human and non-human beings. Such equal coexistence may have a positive impact on sustainability
About the Author
A. A. VolkovaRussian Federation
Anna A. Volkova, postgraduate student
bld. 6, Miusskaya Sq., Moscow, 125993
References
1. Bart, R. (2016), Kak zhit’ vmeste: romanicheskie simuliyatsii nekotoryh prostranstv povsednevnosty [How to live together. Romanic simulations of some spaces of everyday life.], Ad Marginem Press, Moscow, Russia.
2. Descola, F. (2012), Po tu storony prirody i kul’tury [Beyond Nature and Culture], Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie, Moscow, Russia.
3. Jullien, F. (2014), Velikii obraz ne imeet formy, ili Cherez zhivopis’ – k ne-ob’ekty [The Great Image has no Form, or Through painting – to a non-object], Ad Marginem Press, Moscow, Russia.
4. Castro, E.V. de. (2017), Kannibal’skie metafiziki. Rubezhi poststrukturnoi antropologii. [Mеtaphysiques Cannibales: Lignes d’anthropologie post-structurale = Cannibal metaphysicians. The frontiers of poststructural anthropology], Ad Marginem Press, Moscow, Russia.
5. Kohn E. (2018), Kak myslyat lesa: k antropologii po tu storonu cheloveka [How Forests Think. Towards an Anthropology Beyond the Human], Ad Marginem Press, Moscow, Russia.
6. Kuster, H. (2018), Istoria lesa. Vzglyad iz Germanii [Geschichte des Waldes. Von der Urzeit bis zur Gegenwart. = History of the forest. View from Germany] Izd. dom Vysshei shkoly ekonomiki, Moscow, Russia.
7. Morton, T. (2019), Stat’ ekologichnym [Being Ecological], Ad Marginem Press, Moscow, Russia.
Review
For citations:
Volkova A.A. Human and non-human beings. Possibilities of interaction. RSUH/RGGU BULLETIN. Series Philosophy. Social Studies. Art Studies. 2020;(2):47-56. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.28995/2073-6401-2020-2-47-56