Author Archives: barbezat

Power-With: Citizenship in the Anthropocene

Posted on by
Reply

The most impactful theme for me this quarter has been practicing new ways of thinking. Engaging with both the action project and course material, contemplative practices led me to a more relational point of view, which helped me to manage feelings of frustration or stagnation. When I perceive disfunction, my response is more effective when I can let go of the impulse to “overcome” and instead consider how I want to relate to a challenge. Thinking in systems, I can develop a stronger sense of identity as a citizen to find inspiration rather than depletion in the face of the Anthropocene.

My group’s project was focused on the concept of collective climate trauma. In reviewing the literature on the topic, I noticed a consensus among the authors on the importance of reflective witnessing in one form or another. Rather than overcoming or moving beyond the trauma, authors emphasized practices designed to honor and reflect upon it- thereby opening space for new collective stories in relation to the traumatizing phenomena. This reminded me of an argument presented in The Worm at the Core ­­– human beings cannot overcome the terror of death, so should instead remain mindful of how it impacts our lives (221). In both cases, as with my own experience in the class, there is a chance for renewed energy through a relational reframing.

In Active Hope, Macy and Johnstone parallel this with their distinction between “power-over” and “power-with” (106-108). While the exercise of “power-over” is a zero-sum resource game, “power-with” is a model wherein power is a practice, generated by action in relationships. Instinctively, I can see this “power-with” when I imagine an ecosystem, but it has been harder to conceive of in political systems. As an individual, grief and frustration regarding the Anthropocene deplete me, and “overcoming” the emotions, much less the global phenomenon, feels impossible.

With practice, I can lean into a “power-with” identity, working with the emotions and as a citizen – (a node in a human-system response) to guide my orientation to anthropogenic crisis. In this framing, a citizen mindset provides an opportunity to respond to Death and the Anthropocene from a place of diffuse and renewable strength. I look forward to a “power-with” relationship between the human and natural world, and the reciprocal healing that will facilitate. I am grateful for the tools this course has provided to support that vision.

Image source: https://www.patheos.com/blogs/tippling/2020/01/22/life-as-an-emergent-property-and-rocks/

Connection To, or Knowledge Of?

Posted on by
Reply

In reflection, I am grateful for the epistemological shift facilitated by the contemplative practices this quarter. Because of the emotional and intellectual breadth and depth of our course materials, I’ve had greater access by way of building connection to the material than through my attempts to “grasp” it. To this end, the contemplative practice has been very helpful. I doubt very much that I’ll ever really know Death, or (beyond a comically reduced synopsis), understand the convergent processes which together constitute the Anthropocene. Instead, my best work and healthiest responses come about through exploration of my relationship to these concepts.

As we watched Journey of the Universe in class, I was struck by the implication that human “insight” is causally linked to (and therefore inextricable from) the physical and biological processes of the universe. Rather than something generated or contained within me, awareness may simply arise there. Consciousness, by this model, is an emergent property of a system. While conceptually I can muster a dim understanding of this, I can more wholly come into a felt experience of it. I’ve been primed to accept this sense through awareness of breath – like the breath, a thought or a feeling can arise, interact with my body, and return, changed, to the broader system. Instead of repository, I can frame myself as a conduit for information.

I consider this in relation to philosopher Timothy Norton’s definition of hyperobjects – explained in this blurb as “entities of such vast temporal and spatial dimensions that they defeat traditional ideas about what a thing is in the first place”. He offers climate change as the ultimate example; I would argue that “death” or “Anthropocene” also qualify. As “things” in themselves, these concepts are too massive for me to contain intellectually, and the concept of managing them is absurd. I can, instead, cultivate a relationship with the hyperobject. How does awareness of it arise in me? What does it do when it lands? And how can that awareness return, changed, to the broader system? Because it facilitates this relational engagement, I see contemplative practice as a path out of overwhelm and isolation in the face of the planetary hyperobjects with which we engage in this course.

 

The aquarium in my home is a system whose parts I do not fully understand, but instead define relationally.

 

Terror Management and Empathy

Posted on by
Reply

To the extent that I can accept terror management theory, I am appreciative it as an opportunity to feel more connected to other human beings. It is a comforting concept that we are all, in one or another way, reckoning with the inevitable negation of the self. I can more easily tolerate efforts people make to be “valuable participants in a meaningful universe” (Solomon et al., 39) when I choose to believe we are, at least fundamentally, up against this same reckoning. Terror management theory helped me to understand my disdain, and ultimately feel compassion for, the author of one of our readings by reminding me of our common ground: we are both trying to find meaning in the face of the Anthropocene.

Because the Anthropocene forces me to confront human caused extinction and death, it brings me to question many of my anthropocentric constructs of meaning and value. Thus, engaging the concept of “Anthropocene” represents both biological and ideological die-off. How can I be sure of my way of life when confronted with the destruction it necessitates? To tend to this profound discomfort, I gravitate toward a sense of purpose quite like the “natural transcendence” mentioned in The Worm at the Core (221). As the Anthropocene threatens my sense of belonging as a human, I find greater comfort in a sense of a more permanent “self” as a part of nature.

I was initially surprised by how angry I got while reading excerpts from Lynas’s The God Species. However, the lens of terror management theory provided a possible explanation for this anger – I see Lynas’s perspective as a threat to my “natural transcendence” worldview! Even the title poses a threat, as it suggests the omnipotence and immortality of humanity. His rhetoric about the “flaw” in natural systems (Lynas, 19) or his contention that “nature can no longer tame us” (8) represent, to me, a human-centric threat to the sense of meaning I have constructed. Faced with the same global crises, Lynas appears to have doubled down on human exceptionalism, whereas I’ve tried to refute it. I am grateful for terror management theory as a tool to expand my compassion for Lynas and others as we collectively reckon with death in the Anthropocene.

Image Source: https://www.mindful.org/are-you-really-available-for-connection/

Works Cited

Lynas, Mark. The God Species: Saving the Planet in the Age of Humans. National Geographic, 2011.

Solomon, Sheldon, et al. The Worm at the Core: On the Role of Death in Life. Penguin Books, 2016.

Thinking in Systems: Sam Barbezat’s Experience of Getting Started

Posted on by
Reply

As I begin to engage in the course material, I am feeling relieved. Although the concepts we are exploring weigh heavy in nearly every aspect of my life, it is so often a lonely or subconscious task to carry them! Addressing the ties between politics and ecology (especially through the lens of death) feels like an opportunity to tend to personal and conceptual isolation. In the interest of forming deeper connections, I am looking forward to examining what it means to be human in the Anthropocene together.

I’ve also encountered a fair amount of sadness already in engaging in the class materials. When looking at the ecological impact of human industry, I am distressed not only because of the death and destruction itself, but also because I am deeply invested in its continuation. As a member of an ecological system I may be horrified, but as an individual I am thrilled to have access to Costco hotdogs and Amazon two-day shipping. Thanks to the Ibe piece we read, I can think of this internal conflict as a sort of “policy resistance” – I’m encountering subsystems within me which are in conflict! I’m hopeful to explore this notion more as we progress through the class. Do other people feel this way? Can this conflict serve as the basis for the kind of “creative tension” we read about in the Schley piece?

I am also excited to be guided through contemplative practices as part of our course material. While watching the film Anthropocene, I was struck by the potency of the astronauts’ photograph of Earth from space – how collectively affected people seemed to be by this unique chance to look inward from outside of their normal perspective. Observing Earth from above, we’re invited to reflect: Which systems, at what scale, do we think about? (How) can they fit together? It is exciting to think of meditation as a similar form of exploration, in which I’m able to examine my own interrelated subsystems with new perspective.

Image source: NASA,  Apollo 8 Earthrise

 

Works Cited

Ibe, Khalil. “Summary of Thinking in Systems by Donella Meadows.” Medium, Medium, 2 May 2019, https://medium.com/@opuhasanopu/summary-of-thinking-in-systems-by-donella-meadows-b54aec0f40f8.

Schley, Sara. “Sustainability: The Inner and Outer Work.” The Systems Thinker, 14 Mar. 2018, https://thesystemsthinker.com/sustainability-the-inner-and-outer-work/.