The Human Condition in the Anthropocene: Epistemic Debates and Conceptual Tensions

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.48162/rev.36.151

Keywords:

Anthropocene, Philosophical Anthropology, Earth System, Gaia, Geobiological agency

Abstract

The article examines how the concept of the Anthropocene reshapes the foundational assumptions of philosophical anthropology, particularly the duality between nature and culture, and between necessity and freedom. It analyses the epistemological and political consequences of recognising humanity as a geobiological force. Within this framework, two major approaches are explored: one that preserves the homo/anthropos distinction to differentiate power from impact, maintaining the modern dual structure and its articulation with the concept of the technosphere; and another, inspired by pluriversal and materialist perspectives, that challenges the nature/culture dichotomy and introduces the concept of Gaia (Latour and Lenton) as an alternative to the Earth System model, emphasising the historicity, contingency, and heterogeneity of the relationships between the living and the non-living.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Noelia Billi, Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas (CONICET); Universidad de Buenos Aires

Licenciada y Doctora en Filosofía por la Universidad de Buenos Aires, donde enseña Antropología Filosófica en el Departamento de Filosofía. Se desempeña como Investigadora Adjunta del CONICET. Su principal área de investigación es el materialismo posthumano, en el marco del cual se dedica al examen de las ecologías críticas y las lógicas vegetales de existencia.

References

Barad, K. (2007). Meeting the Universe Halfway: Quantum Physics and the Entanglement of Matter and Meaning. Duke University Press.

Chernilo, D. (2016). “The question of the human in the Anthropocene debate”. European Journal of Social Theory, 20(1), 44-60. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368431016651874

Gehlen, A. (1993). Antropología filosófica: del encuentro y descubrimiento del hombre por sí mismo. Paidós.

Haraway, D. (2021). Seguir con el problema: generando parentesco en el Chthuluceno. Consonni.

Hoelle J. & Kawa N. C. (2021). “Placing the Anthropos in Anthropocene”. Annals of the American Association of Geographers, 0(0) 2020, pp. 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1080/24694452.2020.1842171

Horn, E. & Bergthaller, H. (2020). The Anthropocene: Key Issues for the Humanities. Routledge.

Hörl, E. (2017). General Ecology: The New Ecological Paradigm. Bloomsbury.

IUGS (International Union of Geological Sciences) (2024). “Declaration on the Anthropocene”. Disponible en: https://www.iugs.org/post/the-anthropocene-iugs-ics-statement

Latour, B. (2017). Cara a cara con el planeta. Siglo XXI.

Latour, B. & Lenton, T. (2019). “Extending the Domain of Freedom, or Why Gaia Is So Hard to Understand.” Critical Inquiry, 45(3), 659–680.

Podušelova, K. (2024). “Identifying the Possible Implications of the Concept of the Anthropocene for the Philosophical-Anthropological Thought” Pro-Fil 25(1), 38–52. https://doi.org/10.5817/pf24-1-37798

Stengers, I. (2017). En tiempos de catástrofes. Cómo resistir a la barbarie que viene. NED.

Published

21-02-2026

How to Cite

Billi, N. (2026). The Human Condition in the Anthropocene: Epistemic Debates and Conceptual Tensions. aberes prácticas. evista e Filosofía Educación, 10(2), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.48162/rev.36.151