DéborahDanowski and Eduardo ViveirosdeCastroThe Ends of the WorldMalden, MA: Polity Press, 2017. 180 p. $19.95 (pbk.).

Abstract

In the twenty-first century the relationship between population and environment has reemerged as a central question for demography. Consensus has been reached that we live in the Anthropocene, a geological era in which human activity is determining environmental trends. The Ends of the World is written for those who seek to answer the question: what might come next? Déborah Danowski, Professor of Philosophy at the Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro, and Eduardo Viveiros de Castro, Professor of Anthropology at the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, engage this question with passion. They note the dire consequences human activity is having on our world. The pace of global warming, climate change, and rising sea levels is accelerating, and with the proliferation of nuclear weapons the threat of humans ending all life on the planet is a constant possibility. This leads the authors to see the Anthropocene as necessarily being a temporary era. The first five chapters give an account of how we have arrived at a point where envisioning our future is a depressing endeavor. This is done largely through a critical review of the works of four scholars: Günther Anders, an Austrian philosopher and early critic of the role of technology in modern life; Dipesh Chakrabarty, a University of Chicago historian focusing on post-colonial and subaltern studies; Isabelle Stengers, a Belgian philosopher of science noted for her ideas on cosmopolitics; and Bruno Latour, a French philosopher and anthropologist known for questioning the superiority of modern (Western) thoughts and values. During the past 400 years, Enlightenment progress has allowed humans to exert ever-greater control over nature, and industrial capitalism has spread over much of the globe. These two trends are identified as prime causes of the present perilous relationship between humanity and the planet. Although heavy going in places, this discussion is enlivened by references to relevant fiction and films. For example, a parallel is drawn between the situation depicted in the film Melancholia, where a large asteroid is on a collision course with earth, and the current situation where human actions threaten our existence. With this view of the present, what possible futures do the authors envision? One is a human-free world, much like the one that existed before the arrival of Homo sapiens, that re-emerges after the passing of our species. Another is a world much less hospitable to life, only capable of supporting a human population greatly reduced in numbers and living conditions. A third is one in which human technological innovation manages to restore the environment to a pristine condition and to provide everyone with a bountiful life. The last, the authors judge, is the most unlikely. The final three chapters look to Amerindian groups living at the periphery of the modern world for a way of dealing with the present. Their creation myths allow for a world without endless progress, and during the last 400 years they have persevered after their worlds had ended with the devastation of their populations and cultures. The authors find in the Amerindian “subvival” a blueprint for our future: to live democratically with “comparatively modest populations” and “relatively simply technologies” while making the best of the “world we have left them.”