‘Should we decentre the human? If so, how?’ The Forum on Decentering the Human and Global Epistemologies are organising an essay competition open to all undergraduate and postgraduate students at Queen Mary University of London.
The aim of the competition is to encourage students to explore the fascinating questions that challenging anthropocentrism raises, and to discuss these questions in an original piece of writing that may inspire them to engage further with the topic in the future.
Students should write a 500-word essay on the question ‘Should we decentre the human? If so, how?’ Students can answer this question broadly or focus on a specific topic or field. There is a £250 prize for one undergraduate student and a £250 prize for one postgraduate student.
By Ava Anstee, Undergraduate Student, School of History
Humans will become extinct long before the universe, such that they would hardly make the footnotes of a universal textbook. ‘…there once was a star on which clever animals invented knowledge. …and the clever animals had to die.’ The human should without a doubt be decentred, for why should such an insignificant parasite be a fundamental part of the universe? Yet herein lies the paradox: how can humans decentre humans? And if we are to decentre humans, what displaces it. If one considers how exactly humans are centred, it opens discussion on which humans are more centred than others, exemplifying the prejudice and barriers rife in daily society. Therefore, can we expect a human to not only decentre themselves, but also their entire species in a balanced way.
Perhaps to decentre the human, we should take a leaf from Rousseau and reexamine the fundamentals of human nature, returning ourselves to the level of the rest of the natural environment, away from the elevated pedestal upon which we unwisely lift humanity. Yet again, by centring nature, we are again placing an intrinsic value on something that we perceive as human: life. Perhaps instead, we should centre the fundamental nature of the universe itself: the stanch laws of physics or perchance even the many-worlds theories, upon whose examination the centring of a small part of just one universe seems inaccurate.
The advent of Artificial Intelligence demonstrates a new, yet no more fundamentally different, way to examine the universe. AI is potentially the only way to decentre the universe, as humans will always centre the universe away from its core: our very nature strives for the importance of life and the improvement of our nature. Yet an AI centring of the universe away from the human engenders many problems, the most concerning of which being the embedding of human-centric values and belief systems into the programming and training of the AI, leading to an AI that either centres itself, humanity, or something else unforeseeable. However, even if the AI does decentre humanity, its legitimacy to do so, particularly through human values and beliefs, simply realigns the problem of a human centring the universe.
Therefore, there is no way for humans or their successors to truly decentre humanity, and their belief in self-importance in our universe. On the same line as why we should decentre the human as humans are significant in the universe, why does it then matter what humans and their successors centre into the universe? By asking the very question of whether we should centre the human, we centre the human even further, by implying that the answer of the human is more valid than the very course of nature or the physics of the universe. We should decentre the human, yet it is impossible for any species that believes themselves to be conscious to do so, leading me to conclude that the centring of the universe should not evolve around sentience.
Download Ava Anstee's essay [PDF 55KB].
By Savni Virka, Postgraduate Student, School of Business and Management
The anthropocentric narrative, central to western thought for millennia, positions humanity as the pinnacle of creation, imbuing us with dominion over the natural world. Yet, the ecological crisis and the rise of artificial intelligence (AI) necessitate a critical re-evaluation of this dominant paradigm. This essay delves into the theoretical foundations of "decentring the human," exploring its philosophical underpinnings, evaluating its necessity in light of contemporary challenges, and proposing strategies for its practical implementation within a post-anthropocentric framework.
The Judeo-Christian concept of stewardship, while fostering environmental responsibility, still reinforces human exceptionalism. Similarly, Enlightenment philosophies, with their emphasis on human reason and mastery over nature, laid the groundwork for the environmental exploitation we witness today. Decentring the human necessitates dismantling these narratives and embracing a more nuanced ontology.
Posthumanism offers a framework for transcending the human-centric binary. Donna Haraway's concept of the "cyborg" underscores the blurring boundaries between human and machine, suggesting an emergent subjectivity that transcends traditional anthropocentrism. Karen Barad's theory of agential realism proposes an "intra-active" world where humans are not separate entities but entangled participants within a dynamic web of existence.
Indigenous knowledge systems, often grounded in a holistic view of the world, offer valuable insights. Viveiros de Castro's concept of "multinaturalism," for instance, recognizes the inherent perspectivism of all beings, human and non-human alike, challenging the anthropocentric notion of a singular, objective reality.
The ecological crisis serves as a stark reminder of the limitations of anthropocentrism. Planetary boundaries have been breached, and the very systems that sustain life are under threat. Decentring the human compels us to acknowledge the intrinsic value of the natural world and prioritize its well-being.
The development of advanced AI raises pressing ethical questions. As machines approach or even surpass human cognitive abilities, the traditional anthropocentric framework for moral decision-making becomes inadequate. Decentring the human necessitates exploring the ethical ramifications of AI and potentially incorporating non-human perspectives into decision-making processes.
Decentring the human requires a concerted effort across various disciplines. Environmental science can inform policy for sustainable resource management, while philosophy and ethics guide the development of responsible AI. Additionally, integrating indigenous perspectives on environmental stewardship can promote ecological balance.
Traditional governance structures, predicated on anthropocentrism, need revision. International treaties could incorporate the rights of non-human entities, such as ecosystems. Algorithmic governance can be developed with principles of ecological sustainability and ethical AI in mind.
Technology, both a driver and a potential solution, can play a crucial role. AI can be instrumental in ecological monitoring and data analysis, fostering a deeper understanding of interconnected ecosystems. However, we must ensure AI development serves the purpose of decentring the human, not bolstering anthropocentric control.
Decentring the human is not a negation of our significance, but a reconceptualization of our place within a complex web of existence. It necessitates a paradigm shift – from mastery over nature to collaborative co-existence. By embracing a post-anthropocentric approach, informed by philosophical critique, interdisciplinary collaboration, and responsible technological development, we can forge a more sustainable and ethically sound future for all beings. This ongoing process might even redefine what it means to be human, fostering an era of interconnectedness and shared responsibility for the well-being of our planet.
A variety of philosophical approaches, such as posthumanism (Donna Haraway, Karen Barad) and criticisms of anthropocentrism, served as the basis for this essay. It also integrates ideas from current debates on AI ethics as well as insights from indigenous knowledge systems (Viveiros de Castro).
Download Savni Virka's essay [PDF 111KB].