Anthropocene, Capitalocene or Pliroforicene? Regardless, We Need Gelassenheit
Abstract
The current breakdown in the relationship between humans and the rest of the natural world is evident in the crisis of anthropogenic climate change. This critical situation has prompted intellectuals to think through a proper name for our contemporary era. Some opt for the “Anthropocene,” the era of humans, which highlights the uniquely human role in planetary destruction. Others prefer the “Capitalocene” to emphasize capitalism’s role in the crisis. Still others argue that our era is marked by an age of information, which the author labels the “Pliroforicene” since pliroforia roughly means “information” in ancient Greek. Having discussed the pros and cons of these labels, the author discusses conscious rebellions against the Capitalocene and the Pliroforicene through the lenses of the work of sociologist Erik Olin Wright and philosopher Richard Polt. The author then argues that Martin Heidegger’s concept of Gelassenheit, which is defined as a comportment towards beings in which one is open to the ways in which they reveal themselves as they are rather than subsuming them into one’s own interests, may prove to play a crucial role in our contemporary era, regardless of what we call it since it allows us to respect the integrity of things.