Nature, discourses and valuation languages
Situating ourselves in the context of the profound emerging conflict around the modes of production/appropriation of Nature that mark the contemporary epoch distinctly, in the present work we try to expose the ontological power-the politics of popular environmentalism, understanding it, rather than...
Guardado en:
| Autor principal: | |
|---|---|
| Formato: | Artículo revista |
| Lenguaje: | Español |
| Publicado: |
Facultad de Filosofía y Humanidades. Escuela de Letras
2019
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | https://revistas.unc.edu.ar/index.php/heterotopias/article/view/27411 |
| Aporte de: |
| Sumario: | Situating ourselves in the context of the profound emerging conflict around the modes of production/appropriation of Nature that mark the contemporary epoch distinctly, in the present work we try to expose the ontological power-the politics of popular environmentalism, understanding it, rather than as dissident discourse, as a radically alternative language of valuation (Martínez Alier, 2002). A re-existent language (Porto Goncalves, 2003) that, instead of posing another language to speak about Nature, is offered as a language that seeks to understand us with Nature; even from and as Nature.
In itself, rather than a minority language, it is a language that is radically denied as such. For we are faced with a system of enunciation and production of meaning which -from its origins to the present day- was systematically (badly) treated as non-language, that is, as something absolutely and insanably lacking logos.
We analyzed this original dispossession as the foundational moment of the discourse that hegemonic Modernity/Coloniality established as a single presumed rationality to allude to and account on the “nature”. This discourse, which is erected from the (auto)attribution of the universal place of enunciation, has operated as a semiotic-political machine of uniformization of the world, which actually exists. As such, it is an event that can be located in the origins of the Capitalocene as one of its main etiological vectors. Beyond the significant changes that have taken place in the course of the successive historical declinations, we are interested in identifying a hard core of metaphysical presuppositions and institutional axioms that -We maintain that they continue to operate with relentless efficiency, as a regime of truth from which the boundary between the thinkable and the abyss of the absolute irrational is drawn.
In a complementary way, we are particularly interested in analyzing the specific particularities of the neoliberal inflection of this discourse, conceiving it as part of the symptomatology of the present, and as an up-to-date discursive formation from which the renewed operation of challenging/expropriating the conditions of enunciation of the other languages takes place. |
|---|