Was reading this fascinating paper re post-anthroposcene. It contains a fair bit of seemingly clearly articulated ideas. (clear in my mind.) Probably will come back to it a few times. 2 that pop in mind are the anthropocene from a feminist view and, linked to that, the question of indifference, difference, and differentiation.
However, in my mind, the more I seem to look into anthroposophic oriented ideas, the more that way of thinking seems peculiar. Am missing something – not sure yet what 🙂
OK.. There is a link to be made between geo observed activities and processes – and human activities. However, the Question of linking these is unclear. Why operate on effects of time – as reflected/manifested by geological stuff, rather than Time in itself? Why deal with various facets in a manifestionist way, a way that looks at effects which in and of itself requires missing stuff and what is being focused operates as expressions from time? Why not go for time itself? The rhythms, the sequences, the streams, the intervals of time. How do we live with them?
If indeed we have effects upon stuff quicker than we may realise at the event – as the question of When anthropocene only illustrates, then why not focus on time?
Indeed, geological questions as the discipline of Geology are from a perception that focuses of time’s effects upon materials. The expressions of time, as if time in itself is an inescapable element. Is it because time is not seen?
However, surely, perhaps if we are talking about such a catcleasmic change. A change in which we might realise that we are not just indifferent, not just able to be different, but make differences – then perhaps the question to focus is on frictions with time itself?
Maybe time as an element requires more understanding?
Is time an understanding kind of element?
Perhaps time is an element to approach without understanding but, for example, Doing?
Like prisoners do?
Are we prisoners?
Prisoners of the anthropocene perhaps?
Perhaps there is a notion that where as certain elements such as rain, earth, tides, etc., are not indifferent for human activities and are indeed intertwined with them – time is not?
No matter what we do, the daily cycle on earth is 24 hours.
Might be, but its rhythms are ours. For example, perhaps people will consider life differently when they live in a 30 hour , or a 10 hour rhythm?
Perhaps, since so many things in human and geological as well as other activities come from ways of cognition, it could well be that the signs we see expressed in geological terms, are reflections of how we might negotiate our times and the earths time? Or even how earth might perceives its own time?
I really don’t know.
Perhaps the interest here is more aesthetic, sensual, than anything else. It might indeed not be the case that time is the culprit of all these anthropocenic events. It might be that am using the anthropocene as a way to imagine stuff from, to wonder into time in a universal scale?
Time as a linking quality, between the quantifiable and the un-quantitative- able? Maybe just between quality and quantity?
Time as the eternity itself? Time as a family of all infinities in this time?