đŸ’Ÿ Archived View for library.inu.red â€ș file â€ș metrius-the-simian-redemption.gmi captured on 2023-01-29 at 12:53:27. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content

View Raw

More Information

âžĄïž Next capture (2024-06-20)

-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Title: The simian redemption
Author: Metrius
Date: April 2, 2014
Language: en
Topics: deep ecology, phenomenology, history, environmental degradation, philosophy, evolution, ethology, Gaia-hypothesis
Source: See footnotes

Metrius

The simian redemption

The simian redemption

“You don’t know nothing, but you don’t need to know. The wisdom’s in the

trees, not the glass windows”. – Jack Johnson

[1

]

A lot of theories have surfaced in the relatively new millennium

concerning the human species’ relationship to the planet it calls home.

Historically, the mechanized view on nature advocated in the 17^(th)

century Scientific Revolution is criticized by ecological movements as

alienating humanity from its origins. With the advent of the clock for

example, man started measuring time according to its own inventions,

exempting the sun of this function. Likewise, the clock became a

metaphor for the machinery of nature, and “God” became a passive

clockmaker who wound his invention at the point of creation only to let

it tick towards unknown eternities by itself. Thus began the burgeoning

dominance of Western scientific modernity, with its instrumentalist view

on nature’s processes and resources, on a scale earlier civilizations

never envisioned.

[2

]

Throughout this assignment I reflect on humanity’s separation from

nature, using several different disciplines: evolutionary theory,

history, phenomenology, Gaia theory, animism and biochemistry. The

assignment as a whole addresses how recent ecological discoveries and

disruptions might alter modern humanity’s felt relationship with the

rest of the biosphere, as simian mammals of the planet, rather than gods

on Earth.

First I shed light on some evolutionary aspects of the human species.

For this I draw in large part on Mark Rowland’s reflections on the

simian animal in The philosopher and the wolf. Secondly, I construct a

historically modern context, highlighting the main causes of today’s

civilizational degradation of both mental and physical ecology. Next, I

reflect on deep green and alternative methods for reconnecting our

modern-day simian animal with nature, focusing on sensory phenomenology

and humanity’s co-dependence with the biosphere as a whole. Lastly I

summarize by weaving the three parts together and conclude with a

planetary orientation.

The ultimate predator

“Take your stinking paws off me you damn dirty ape!”

[3

]

The nature of the exclusively simian intelligence seems to be based in

scheming and lying, with hierarchies arranged according to the

individual’s capacity to outmaneuver one’s neighbors in social games of

power. This sort of intelligence developed in accordance with the need

to deceive others before one was deceived, an arms-race of manipulation.

Understanding, intellect and creativity came later as a result of this.

Mark Rowlands make these conclusions in light of Frans de Waal’s study

of chimpanzee group dynamic in Chimpanzee politics

[4

], where intricate games are played for alpha dominion of the group. One

of the situations goes as follows: Luit flashes his erect penis to a

female chimp, with his back to Nikkie, the official alpha. As Nikkie

gets to his feet, Luit takes a few casual steps away from the female,

keeping track of Nikkie while maintaining both erection and cover. As

Nikkie picks up a heavy stone and moves in, Luit looks down at his

penis, which is slowly losing its erection, then walks towards Nikkie

“in an impressive demonstration of just what a ballsy chimp he is” only

to sniff the stone and leave Nikkie alone with the female.

[5

]

Compared to other species, sex plays a dominant role in the simian mind.

For instance, alpha wolves have sex once or twice a year, and the

pleasure experienced is a direct consequence of the drive to reproduce.

The ape on the other hand has inverted this relationship, where

reproduction is an occasional and often inconvenient result of the hunt

for pleasure. Thus, deception forms instinctual patterns of behavior for

apes in much of their social life. Aristotelian, Cartesian and Freudian

understanding of human thought divide basic desires and rational

intellect, with the latter elevating humans from the rest of nature.

Rowlands bridges the divide in claiming that “rationality is, in part, a

consequence of our drive to acquire pleasure”.

[6

]

However, the greater the deceptions, still greater the risks. The sort

of malicious prosecution Nikkie had in mind for Luit’s potential scheme

is not found in other animals. Whereas other animals may fight and even

kill each other, it is crimes of passion, not calculated punishment in

cold blood. Nikkie’s stone proves premeditated intention, the difference

between manslaughter and murder in a modern day court of law. Luit’s

deception worked where simple submission would have cost him his life.

Aforethought malice is indeed an endemic feature of simian character.

[7

]

Landscape designers and realtors understand intuitively that potential

buyers want to have a high view of open terrain, preferably close by

water in some shape or form. This is exclusively aesthetic — not

practical — but buyers will pay what they can afford to live like this.

In other words, people pay more to live in environments that imitate the

ones our species developed in through millions of years in Africa, where

social status was decided by the height of one’s tree-branch and

subsequent view.

[8

]

It’s easy to romanticize prehistoric and indigenous people, given their

apparent harmonic lifestyles with nature. Often with animistic reverence

for nature, and a courage few civilized humans can hope to embody, they

are nostalgically viewed as our common ancestry, a remnant of humanity’s

instinctive relationship to the flora and fauna of the Earth. However,

it is important to nuance the perspective. About 13.000 years ago an

explosion of extinctions occurred in North America. By the beginning of

the Holocene epoch, still going strong today, nearly 40 species had

disappeared. Small fur-bearing creatures seem untouched, but the

megafauna had taken a massive toll. Giant armadillos, short-faced bears

nearly double the size of today’s grizzlies, huge beavers, dire-wolves,

mammoths, American varieties of camels, the saber-toothed tiger, etc.

All gone. Paleoecologist Paul Martin theorize that the great migrations

of humans correlate with these extinctions. The theory, which was dubbed

Blitzkrieg, contends that the megafauna didn’t have any reason to fear

the newly arrived humans as predators. The human pioneers had by then

learned to make spears and other weapons out of wood and stones, and

could simply surround the various packs of megafauna without alarming

them for fight or flight.

[9

]

That primitive humans hunted big game for more food is a given, but the

systematic annihilation of all these mythic-sounding species can make

one think of Agent Smith’s infamous quote from The Matrix:

Every mammal on this planet instinctively develops a natural equilibrium

with the surrounding environment, but you humans do not. You move to an

area and you multiply and multiply until every natural resource is

consumed and the only way you can survive is to spread to another area.

There is another organism on this planet that follows the same pattern.

Do you know what it is? A virus.

[10

]

As Martin concludes: “I can’t imagine a more appropriate setting to

describe what amounts to genocide. (
) They were all exterminated,

simply because it could be done.”

[11

]

These examples are not meant to be misanthropic or advocate any sort of

biological determinism, where humans are imprisoned in manipulative and

genocidal behavioral patterns. They are meant to remind us of our

species’ behavioral tendencies, be it within civilization or out in the

“wild”. Given that humans share 98 % genes with modern day chimps

[12

], such examples may mirror the fact that humans are mammalian primates,

and often act accordingly. Embarrassed by our simian cousins, we strive

to put greater distance between us and them by building up our rational

arrogance.

Anthropocentrism is instinctive to most modern people, whose logic lie

in the fact that every species prioritize its own kind. However, if

humanity indeed is the supreme species of the planet, it cannot per

definition reflect upon itself in the same tribalist manner as other

species. The truly mature thing to do is acknowledge and respect our

heritage, not to live in denial. Only then can we ever hope to become

the magnanimous species we so desperately imagine ourselves to be.

The ecology of modernity

“It’s useless to wait. For a breakthrough, for revolution, the nuclear

apocalypse or a social movement. To go on waiting is madness. The

catastrophe is not coming, it is here. We are already situated within

the collapse of a civilization. It is within this reality that we must

choose sides.”

[13

]

Modernity’s intellectual and political paradigm is highly influenced by

respectively RenĂš Descartes and Thomas Hobbes. Descartes was a pioneer

of the aforementioned Scientific Revolution, and is most famous for

theorizing the mechanization of nature and the duality of mind and body.

Like Aristotle before him, Descartes claimed that non-human animals were

comparable to programmed machines, and empathy for such creatures was

consequently seen as redundant. What set humans above the rest of the

biosphere for Descartes was our rational minds, which exists in an

elevated dimension to that of nature.

[14

]

In the political sphere, Hobbes claimed that all of civilization was the

result of a social contract made between humans fed up with living in

the chaos of nature, where life was defined by constant war and

lawlessness. In the natural state, human lives were “solitary, poor,

nasty, brutish and short”.

[15

] Modern political thought is thus founded on the notion that

civilization is humanity’s escape from the vicious wild of nature, and

our development of society is a way of climbing the tree to safety.

However, as Rowland states with humanity’s obsession with power in mind,

contracts are made with those who can either help or hurt you, people

with agendas. According to Hobbes, primitive humans exchanged parts of

their freedom for the security of a Leviathan’s law and order, a

deliberate sacrifice for anticipated gain. A classically simian loophole

in the contract is thus revealed: not to sell one’s freedom, but to make

others believe you have, because image is everything.

[16

] Hobbes believed that “men are in incessant struggle for power over

others”

[17

], but his theoretical contract never put a stop to it – the game just

took on an unprecedented level of sophistication. “Wildness or

civilization: which is really red in tooth and claw?”

[18

]

Today, the human species has taken it upon itself to consume as much of

the planet’s resources as it possibly can – and in a hurry. The devoted

disciples of market liberalism remain in denial of ecological realities

on a finite planet – metaphorically climbing the hierarchical tree trunk

in a race for a better view and favor with a fictional alpha Leviathan.

[19

] And in the process, there are terrifyingly many innocent victims.

Half the planet’s cultivable soil and forests are destroyed. The former

degraded at a rate of 25 million acres a year, and the latter vanishing

at a rate of 130 square miles annually.

[20

] The Amazon rainforest loses the size of a football field every two

seconds

[21

], and only 20 percent of its accompanying cerrado savannahs are still

intact after decades of degradation by unsustainable monocultural food

production.

[22

] Humans use 50% of the biosphere’s fresh water, 80 % of which goes to

agriculture

[23

]- who in turn pollute rivers with dangerous fertilizers and use

pesticides which kill off millions of ecologically essential bees.

[24

] In addition, farmers, manufacturers, supermarkets and consumers in the

West discard up to half of their food, enough to feed the world’s hungry

at least three times over. Agricultural production thus boasts

responsibility for nearly one tenth of the West’s greenhouse gas

emissions growing food that will never be eaten!

[25

]

25 % of coral reefs, atolls and cays are ruined, and half the remaining

ones are in danger beyond recovery within the next 30 years.

[26

] Between 2006 and 2012 China and India built 800 new coal-fired power

plants

[27

], while CO2 levels in the atmosphere are at its highest in 440.000

years. Earth’s ozone layer was formed over 3.5 billion years, and the

human caused hole in it hit a record of four square km in 2006.

[28

] From 1970–2003 researchers saw a 31% terrestrial decline in

biodiversity. 12 % of bird species and 25 % mammalians will be gone at

this rate in 30 years. 200 species are extinct every day, giving

humanity the Medal of Honor for singlehandedly — directly and indirectly

[29

] — causing the sixth greatest extinction in Earth’s history.

[30

]

In addition to the irreversible degradation of Earth’s physical ecology,

humanity’s mental ecology is being polluted and strained by

consumer-targeted marketing. Ubiquities commercialism haunts both urban

and rural humans, stimulating homogenized thinking.

[31

] Each of the human brain’s 100 billion or so neurons can make between

1.000 and 10.000 synaptic connections with each other, which result in

incomprehensibly complex patterns of behavior.

[32

] It seems our subconscious minds make most of our decisions, and our

perplexed simian consciousness then spends time justifying them, a fact

the marketing gurus knows well. In the US alone they have over 90

neuro-marketing consultancies.

[33

] “[Psychology is] a science wherein the psyche has itself been reified

into an ‘object’”.

[34

]

In 2004 marketing companies worldwide spent more than $200 billion on

advertising. That adds up to about 3.500 sales-shots at our conscious

and sub-conscious attention every day, one for every 15 seconds of our

waking lives.

[35

] Often erotically aggressive and aimed at creating material needs,

critics claim it’s an industry with one overriding message: we do not

yet have all we need to be satisfied. Humanity’s simian instincts are

still programmed to fear scarcity and gather information – clear winners

in the game of evolution – but ultimately made more sense in the trees

and Neolithic villages than in modern day megamalls.

[36

]

The sensuous connection

“I went to the woods because I wished to live deliberately, to front

only the essential facts of life, and see if I could not learn what it

had to teach, and not, when I came to die, discover that I had not

lived.”

[37

]

Of course, anthropocentric ethics didn’t begin at the dawn of modernity,

but is a fundamental aspect of civilization as we know it through

written history. The focus of ethics should concern holistic entities,

which can be seen as various complementary “wholes”. A tree is an entity

comprised of unnumbered smaller component “wholes”, just as a forest is

made up of trees.

[38

] An ecosystem is always inter-dependent with larger versions of the

same dynamics, and so in this sense you might call the biosphere as a

whole one big ecosystem. “The whole Ecosphere is even more significant

and consequential [than its human part]: more inclusive, more complex,

more integrated, more creative, more beautiful, more mysterious, and

older than time.”

[39

] This is the position of deep-green ecocentric parts of today’s

ecological movements, which is elaborated on in this chapter.

[40

]

Ecocentric perspectives reject assumptions based on the idea that some

or all natural beings have independent moral status.

[41

] The interconnectedness of the biosphere makes separation between

hunter and prey irrelevant within the biospheric equilibrium. In

opposition to Cartesian dualism, Hobbesian fear-laden sense of security

and Aristotelian logic, which are based on the law of identity and

contradiction, ecocentrism is founded on paradoxical logic. Common to

Eastern Taoism and Zen-Buddhism, paradoxical logic “assumes that A and

non-A do not exclude each other.”

[42

] Conventional modern minds often perceive the grand nature of dynamic

polarity – life/death, up/down, active/passive, plus/minus – not as a

game of black and white, but “instead, we play the game of black versus

white”.

[43

]

David Abram uses phenomenology as a method to reconnect humans with

their forgotten origins. By dismissing Cartesian duality, he guides the

rationally confused human back into its holistic animal body, focusing

on its sentient means of entering into relation with nature. Through the

perspective of our animal selves, the entire material world itself seems

to come alive.

[44

] Recognizing that whatever we may sense in the woods reciprocally

senses us back, creates an understanding for intersubjective phenomena.

For Abram, the boundaries of a living body are open and indeterminate,

“more like membranes than barriers”. By enabling the use of

mirror-neurons and associative empathy, phenomena are thus shared with

other centers of experience.

[45

]

Unlike conventional modern scientific methods, Abram calls for

explanations of the world not from the outside, but within it. To

reiterate my starting point: to be of the planet, not on it. The trees

are the lungs of the earth, breathing in carbon dioxide while breathing

out oxygen, in direct polarity to humans. “Oxygen gets you high”

[46

], and meditation is in its essence a matter of filling the body with

oxygen. Thusly, the biosphere doesn’t just describe the surface of

Earth, but includes the whole atmosphere – a “whole” Abram has coined

“Eairth”. This term includes the air we breathe and trees produce in the

concept of our home planet.

[47

] Within this perspective, it would not be odd to say that humans exist

within the Earth, or to view birds as swimming in an invisible ocean of

air.

The body’s actions are never wholly determinate, since it continually

adjusts itself to a terrain that is constantly on the move.

[48

] Existence is a participation in the activity of the world, and by

lending the impressive force of human imagination to things, the nature

of life reveals itself more fully. In such a light, there is no wonder

why indigenous peoples all over the world often have an animistic

reverence for trees, rivers or the Earth as a whole – what ecocentric

people now might call the “Gaia-hypothesis”.

[49

] The followers of this hypothetical superorganism are not intent on

making everything global, but recognizes that all locals are globally

connected.

[50

] As Abram suggest: “We might as well say that we are organs of this

world”.

[51

]

The very last footnote in The Spell of the Sensuous seems to imply that

animism never left humanity, it just metamorphosed into viewing

alphabetic letters and logos as the new symbols of deity. Rather than a

rational account of animism, Abram thus posits an animistic account of

rationality.

[52

] Following this line of thought, the grand ideology of modernity is

seen as an animistic religion, with devoted disciples waiting in line

for days and hours for the next generation of passively consumable

technology. Techno-science is now integral to both industry and

government, which are becoming ever closer. In the global North, it has

now become so powerful and dogmatic as to constitute, in effect, a

secular religion with its own powerful and democratically unaccountable

elite.

[53

] As Erich Fromm articulates it: “Man projects his own powers and skills

into the things he makes, and thus in an alienated fashion worships his

prowess, his possessions.”

[54

]

Planetary consciousness (summary)

“To survive some say we need to heed indigenous people. Perhaps what we

also need is to be indigenous, people: Do we belong to planet Earth or

an alien invasion? A decision that might decide our human fate – good

evening.”

[55

]

In lieu of the many different examples in this paper, I will now

summarize and clarify the different perspectives. First, we were

confronted with the fact that humans are a mammalian species, with some

character-traits that may be hard to swallow. Secondly, the

philosophical, scientific and political rationale of modernity, still

going strong today, are revealed as the tenets of humanity’s separation

from nature. The ecological consequences of this are then laid bare.

These two chapters are meant to produce both humility for the

evolutionary aspect, and the rage and/or grief of a struggling planet.

The third chapter sought to produce hope and love. In light of the

devastation articulated in chapter two, deep-green perspectives have an

“urgency matched only by the extent it is ignored.”

[56

] By combining sensuous love with the horror of modernity and humility

of evolution, we climb the tree to get a better view of the situation.

Thus we can start to orient ourselves in the natural and mental

landscape that is our lives, analyze what sort of epoch we are alive

within, and consequently what role we are going to play in it.

The term “planetary consciousness” can be understood in two ways. One is

the perspective of sensuous orientation, acknowledging oneself as a

species on a planet rotating on its axis; not settling for seeing a

banana-shaped moon, but envisioning its three-dimensionality when it

reflects the set sun. The other is the perspective of the planet as a

superorganism, an all-encompassing Ecosphere capable of reacting to

stimuli; a living entity full of cells that can themselves decide

whether to be healing or cancerous.

As mentioned earlier, we may be embarrassed by our distant chimp

cousins. But whenever we become aware of such thoughts, we should

immediately flip the board: maybe they are embarrassed by us? Basic

psychology suggests that humans project its own flaws onto others. Maybe

our rationally arrogant distance from our origins in reality is arrogant

rationality?

In closing, I will quote an animistic technique for connecting to the

phenomenal field (the druids of ancient Britain called the tree spirits

dryads): “A powerful technique, if the dryad allows it, involves

breathing in as the dryad breathes out and vice-versa, forming a mutual

energetic exchange.”

[57

]

[1

] Jack Johnson, Breakdown, In between dreams album (2005)

[2

] Steven Shapin, Den vitenskapelige revolusjonen (1996), p. 37, 38, 39

[3

] Rise of the planet of the apes (2011):

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1318514/quotes

[4

] Mark Rowlands, The philosopher and the wolf (2008), p. 67

[5

] Rowlands, The philosopher and the wolf, p. 73, 74

[6

] Rowlands, The philosopher and the wolf, p. 76

[7

] Rowlands, The philosopher and the wolf, p. 77, 78

[8

] Edward O. Wilson, Morgenbladet:

http://morgenbladet.no/ideer/2012/om_kunstenes_opprinnelse#.U0Ues3Y4Xcs

[9

] Alan Weisman, The world without us (2007), p. 69, 72

[10

] The Matrix (1999): http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0133093/quotes

[11

] Weisman, The world without us, p. 82

[12

] Jared Diamond, The third chimpanzee (1992), p. 23

[13

] The Invisible committee, The coming insurrection (2009), p. 96

[14

] David Abram, The spell of the sensuous (1996), p. 48

[15

] Rowlands, The philosopher and the wolf, p. 121

[16

] Rowlands, The philosopher and the wolf, p. 120–126

[17

] Thomas Hobbes, Leviathan(1651, Penguin Classics translation 1985), p.

183

[18

] Rowlands, The philosopher and the wolf, p. 124 — 126

[19

] Patrick Curry, Ecological Ethics (2011), p. 21

[20

] Curry, Ecological Ethics, p. 18, 19

[21

] Nasjonal Digital LĂŠringsarena: http://ndla.no/nb/node/25468

[22

] http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2011/apr/11/meat-industry-food

[23

] Curry, Ecological Ethics, p. 17, 18

LeMonde diplomatique MiljĂžatlas (2009), p. 16

[24

] Al Jazeera English:

http://www.aljazeera.com/video/europe/2013/04/20134631924285553.html

[25

] Tristram Stuart, Waste (2009), Back cover

[26

] Curry, Ecological Ethics, p. 17, 18

[27

] Fareed Zakaria, The post-American world (2008), p. 31

[28

] LeMonde diplomatique MiljĂžatlas, p. 50

[29

] Everything is direct when the planetary biosphere is seen as a whole

in itself, which I will return to in «Planetary consciousness».

[30

] Curry, Ecological Ethics, p. 16,

Derrick Jensen, Deep Green Resistance (2011), p. 21

[31

] Adbusters, Whole Brain Catalog (2010), p. 15, 16

[32

] Adbusters, Whole Brain Catalog, p. 5

[33

] John Naish, Enough (2009), p. 20, 21

[34

] Abram, The spell of the sensuous, p. 35

[35

] John Naish, Enough, p. 15, 19

[36

] John Naish, Enough, p. 3, 8, 10

[37

] Henry David Thoreau. (n.d.). BrainyQuote.com. Retrieved April 1, 2014,

from BrainyQuote.com Web site:

http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/h/henrydavid107665.html

[38

] For more on «wholes» I recommend Arthur Koestler’s «The roots of

coincidence»

[39

] Curry, Ecological Ethics, p. 57

[40

] Curry, Ecological Ethics, p. 54, 94

[41

] Curry, Ecological Ethics, p. 93

[42

] Erich Fromm, The art of loving (1995), p. 57

[43

] Alan Watts, The Book (1989), p. 35 (my emphasis)

[44

] Abram, The spell of the sensuous, p. 65

[45

] Abram, The spell of the sensuous, p. 37,46

[46

] Tyler Durden in Fight Club (1999):

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0137523/quotes

[47

] Abram, The spell of the sensuous, p. 46, 47

[48

] Abram, The spell of the sensuous, p. 49

[49

] Abram, The spell of the sensuous, p. 58

[50

] Michiel Schwartz, Sustainism, p. 46

[51

] Abram, The spell of the sensuous, p. 68

[52

] Abram, The spell of the sensuous, p. 303

[53

] Curry, Ecological Ethics, p. 24

[54

] Fromm, The art of loving, p. 50

[55

] Rap News, War on terra, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RM3W5XBrVEA

[56

] Curry, Ecological Ethics, p. 94

[57

] Danu Forest, Nature spirits, p. 30. The author is a Celtic shaman.