Professor Donald Worster proposed an academic report at Institute of European Civilization entitled“ ‘Anthropocene’—Age of the Humans: Are We In It Or Not?”. Professor XIA Mingfang from Renmin University of China, Associate Professor HOU Shen from Renmin University of China, and Professor Lisa M. Brady from Boise State University were welcomed as special commentators. Professor LI Xuezhi presided over the academic report.
Professor Worster introduced the concepts and basic theories of the Anthropocene and then showed his own skeptical attitude towards Anthropocene.Firstly, he thought that there were still many intangibilities in the concepts of Anthropocene which should be defined by professionals,while ordinary people should be more cautious about this new definition. Science could show us a lot of contents,but it could not accurately describe the comparison between human influence on and the influence of previous Pleistocene on the earth.Under joint influence of many unknown situations, it is irrational and maybe ridiculous to draw a conclusion unadvisedly.
Furthermore, Professor Worster analyzed two main driving forces which promoted the discussion of Anthropocenein current society. One was “the Enlightenment project”that had never stopped since hundreds of years ago. In this project, humans were filled with the desire to conquernature and dominate the earth. Another component was the group of environmentalists.They thought that by naming a new geological era, people could be reminded of taking responsibility for their actions. However, whether we should name an epoch after our own species? From another perspective, no one could be sure that how long Anthropocene’s influence on the earth will last. Until 2017, we were sure that human cannot control the earth. The earth was countering us constantly with an unknown power which might bring the Pleistocene or other epochs back to the earth.These would be entirely beyond the part which was considered and influenced by human with careful thinking.
Professor Lisa Brady commented on Professor Worster’s report and said that she supported most of Worster's views except some disagreements. She believed that we could still adopt this understanding if it could really put human beings in the consideration of nature and aroused people’s sense of responsibility and awareness of nature no matter whether there was anything wrong with the parlance of Anthropocene. As we were in a crisis, we should utilize all resources to strive for inspiring human’s responsibility at all costs.
Associate Professor HOU Shen was quite knowledgeable about the study of Anthropocene. She believed that human would never be able to conquer nature and the usage of the concept of Anthropocene was likely to make scientists more alienated from we humanities who were just discussing within themselves and falling into another vicious cycle. She also worried that humanities would lose their originality. The carnival states of the humanities, which causedby borrowing terms from natural sciences, could affect humanities’ creativity.
Professor XIA Mingfang believed that the power between man and nature was not antagonistic. Nowadays, the concept of nature puts man and nature was in opposition, which led to a chaotic relationship between man and nature.The relationship between heaven, earth, and objects in the ancient Chinese concept of nature was considered as the relationship between family members and there was no much contradiction between each other. It was time for us to rethink the concept of nature.
(2017-10-26)
