IMPLICATIONS OF THE CONCEPTIONS OF HUMAN AND NATURE IN ENVIRONMENTAL POLICIES

Abstract

This paper aims to analyze the role of the production of subjectivity in environmental policies, indicating the economic, social and environmental implications of symbolic operations. Two divergent perspectives will be approached, drawn from the comparison proposed by Bruno Latour between Galileo Galilei and James Lovelock. On one hand, that of “capitalist realism”, presented according to Fisher and contextualized by Quijano, Grosfoguel, Deleuze and Guattari, in which the notion of individuality is split from the environment and from society and leads to the objectification of natural and human resources. In the other hand, that of “buen vivir”, presented according to Acosta and contextualized by Guattari, Danowski and Castro, in which interdependence turns any natural process into a legitimate political subject, as proposed by the Gaia theory and the amerindian anthropomorphism. The comparison between such perspectives reveals how the conceptual mode of operation alters the elements in question. The bifurcation of nature, origin of the first perspective, is surpassed by recent scientific advances, such as the structural coupling of the embodied mind, core of the second perspective, requiring a paradigmatic revision of the economy in favor of systemic benefit.