Homo Sapiens as Geological Agents

Abstract:

In the 18th and 19th centuries, earth scientists came to understand the magnitude and power of geological and geophysical processes. In comparison, the activities of humans seemed paltry if not insignificant. With the development of radiometric dating in the 20th century, scientists realized that human history was but a miniscule part of Earth history. Metaphors to this effect abounded, and filled textbooks: If Earth history were a 24-hour day, human history would not occupy even the final second. If Earth history were a yardstick, the human portion would not even be visible to the naked eye. Generations of scientists were taught that one of the principal contributions of geology, qua science, was the demonstration of our insignificance. The Anthropocene concept disrupts this. To affirms its existence is to insist that human activities compete in scale and significance with other Earth processes, and may threaten to overwhelm them. It also inverts our relation to normative claims. For more than a century earth scientists and evolutionary biologists insisted that their theories were descriptive and not normative—that there was no moral conclusion to be drawn from either planetary or human evolution. Now, we confront the suggestion that there is a moral component to our new paradigm: we can scarcely claim that humans are disrupting the climate, destroying biodiversity, and acidifying the oceans without implying that there is something troubling about these developments. Thus, the Anthropocene concept suggests both a radical redefinition of the scope of Earth science, and a radical reconsideration of the place of normative judgments in scientific work.