Complex Systems: “Nature,” “Society” and “Human” Domination

Abstract

“Nature,” “society,” and “human” — all are highly contestable terms. Increasingly it is becoming accepted that nature is social, and as such, variably constructed across time, space and place (Soper 1995, Cronon 1995, Mcnaghten and Urry 1998). Some sociologists are questioning prevailing conceptions of “society” (Urry 2000) and more radically, suggesting that sociality is not exclusively human (Benton 1993). Yet as Kay Anderson suggests above, the “human” is also a social construct linked to formations of power, and all ecologisms would agree, albeit in different ways.

The species divide is not solely a behavioural or biologically-determined distinction, but a cultural and historically changing attribution … humanity has persistently been seen not as a species of animality, but rather as a condition operating on a fundamentally different (and higher) level of existence to that of “mere” animals … the norm of the human became identified with the achievements of “civilized” Western humanity measured (especially under modernity, but also for the ancients) in terms of acquiring technical control over nature.

Kay Anderson (2001:80, my emphasis)