Initially considering the more than human world, I thought about it as though it needed a second sort of characterization. As though ‘more than human’ weren’t enough words so as to allow the idea to make a whole amount of sense to me. However, upon further contemplation, I’ve found that the more than human world is a perfectly fine means of describing the concept. I’ve discovered, through thinking with the authors we’ve observed thus far, that the description had only unsettled me to begin with due to a certain inherent uncomfortability of mine with the idea of further minimalizing the human species in reference to other things or concepts I’d previously been unaware of.
Whether this is due to a certain amount of inherent egotism found within humanity or just a personal failure to humble myself on behalf of the world around me, I’m still not sure and, in all honesty, I wonder about the degree to which the real answer is probably a mixture of the two.
Becoming acquainted with the thoughts of others who’re not only credible in this area of discussion but who also illustrate approaches to thinking which vastly differ from my own have allowed for a widening of my perspective, in ways. The fact being that environmentalism as a movement wasn’t something I’d ever considered myself to be even relatively well-versed in the particular details of, the somewhat stubborn reluctancy I’d taken up when attempting to make meaning out of the ‘more than human’ world as a categorization seems more than a bit unwarranted to me now. Through understanding the phrase via the lenses of multiple disciplines which all seem to be focusing their gaze upon the same ominous picture with regards to it’s (the more than human world’s) future, the idea’s gained credibility as a verifiably rational notion to me.
The world is so much more than that which pertains to humanity. We like to focus our view through a lens of self-centeredness as though this lens itself were an inherent prerequisite to living a productive and fulfilled life; however I believe that quality of inherence to be more or less, for the purpose of pacifying our species’ collective ego. Now of course there are other factors to be taken into account, such as the specific cultural values and personal biases which any individual might bring with themselves when attempting to confront an idea or concept which does little to fit itself comfortably within the perceiver’s comprehension, however these unavoidable subjectivities can’t be helped to a certain degree, and so while relevant in the scope of a fully realized explanation, don’t lend themselves to the same level of magnification with regards to exactly why it is that they might be marring what would otherwise be an objective view of our species’ widespread inability to recognize the world as so much more than just human.
In conclusion, I believe there to be a multi-faceted definition as to why humanity grapples so tenaciously with it’s own inconsequence in relation to the more than human world, in particular, an unrelenting inability to reconcile the objective with the subjective. Upon learning how to separate the objectively observed reality within which we all inhabit from each of our own subjective outlooks which we bring with us to any problem or thought, a certain clarity is gained and the ability to be able to make the distinction from that which empirically exists and truthfully effects us all vs. any delineations from that which we create due to our own subjective world views and perspectives becomes more palatable. It’s this quintessential distinction which I believe to be imperative in the further recognition of the accuracy of the characterization of the world as ‘more than human’ by our species as a whole.