Why is the desire to create a world in socio-ecological interweaving considered something utopian? Isn't the ecology of utopia or ecotopia in substance a projection of what we might create together?
By
Saras Dewi
·5 minutes read
SALOMO TOBING
Saras Dewi
My drive to Jembrana, Bali, was filled with anxiety. Heavy rain was accompanied by flashes of lightning that made the winding roads even more thrilling. While crossing the Bilukpoh bridge, I witnessed the deafening roar of the overflowing river.
The flash flood disaster that occurred in Jembrana left the people of the surrounding areas with sadness. The water entered people's houses, causing everything to be shattered. Major floods like this are becoming increasingly frequent in Jembrana. This year, the floods do not only occur in the western region of Bali, but also in the south, such as in Seminyak, Kuta, to the eastern part of Bali such as in Bebandem, Karangasem.
At the evacuation camp, I took shelter from the increasingly heavy rain while listening to stories and complaints from residents. Some members of my family from Penyaringan Village talked about the loss of their house, which was swept away by the terrifying flood. This flood disaster struck 18 villages in Jembrana, causing hundreds of houses to be damaged and destroyed and even the fierce roar of the water broke seven bridges.
This disaster occurred due to several reasons, such as extreme weather as well as forest encroachment and developments that disturbed river basins. Extreme weather phenomena that occur are inseparable from climate change. Climate disaster is no longer a prediction that may come, but we are currently experiencing this disaster, which will worsen in the future if we are not agile in making adaptation and mitigation.
Warnings about environmental deterioration and its impacts have long been echoed by environmental thinkers. My awareness about nature has been greatly influenced by some of these thinkers, such as James Lovelock and Bruno Latour. While both have the same focus on examining ecological problems, they developed different theories in an effort to identify environmental problems. The death of these two figures in 2022 made me think about their knowledge and persistence in promoting the environment in discourses.
He gave an example of homeostasis, namely the body's mechanism for balancing itself. To him, Earth's ability to nurture life is interpreted as a form of Gaia's intelligence.
James Lovelock was a British scientist and inventor. He was credited for creating the electron capture detector (ECD), namely a tool that can detect atoms and molecules contained in gases through the process of capturing electron ionization. These findings lead to knowledge breakthroughs, particularly revealing chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and their impact on the depletion of Earth's ozone layer. However, what makes James Lovelock unique as a scientist, in my opinion, is the way he talks about Earth, which he calls Gaia.
James Lovelock's Gaia: A New Look at Life on Earth is a brilliant manifesto, an expression of one's concerns for life on Earth. He argued that Earth is a living, self-controlled entity. He believed that Gaia, through its cybernetic ability, manages all rivers, seas, mountains, plants and microscopic organisms in such a way to create harmony in life. Everything is part of Gaia. He gave an example of homeostasis, namely the body's mechanism for balancing itself. To him, Earth's ability to nurture life is interpreted as a form of Gaia's intelligence.
Lovelock's courage to defend the Gaia hypothesis, despite being criticized by the scientific community, shows his belief that humans need to respect and share responsibility for protecting the environment. Lovelock was credited for opening up a space for conversation about ecology not only involving scientists, but also the wider community by telling scientific facts through the Gaia narrative, which manages to touch people's feelings and sensibilities.
Meanwhile, Bruno Latour, a philosopher and anthropologist from France, proposed the actor-network theory (ANT). This theory puts forward the idea that our life is actually formed from a constantly changing relationship between factors. The factors referred to by Latour are not only humans, but all beings or objects, anything that is non-human also plays a role in this flow of reality. During this pandemic I read his work titled After Lockdown and can understand how viruses are factors that cause major disruptions and changes, especially affecting humans.
Latour's criticism against Lovelock is that he tended to be anthropomorphic, trying to make Earth have the same image as humans. In fact, Earth consists of particularities that are not that simple to unite into a human-like figure. Imagine that through the study of geology, from that knowledge, we can learn about Earth's materials that are constantly changing and how the processes of crystallization, sedimentation and dissolution are magnificent processes that have occurred for millions of years.
Then what do we need to do after the regional quarantine? Latour's suggestion is that pandemics and climate disasters in this anthropocene era should encourage us to metamorphose, including survival by studying non-human networks and then working together. Latour proposed a technological breakthrough in adapting to climate change, a multidisciplinary scientific exploration for the sake of mitigating the cataclysm of climate change.
As I said at the beginning, the two thinkers have two different philosophizing styles, but have the same anxieties about Earth. To me, these two thinkers, despite their differences, are futurists who dream and hope about the future of life on Earth. In the current state of environmental downturn, the aspiration to welcome a new world ignites the urge to act. Why is the desire to create a world in socio-ecological interweaving considered something utopian? Isn't the ecology of utopia or ecotopia in substance a projection of what we might create together?
Beyond theoretical debates about the environment, I remember my grandmother's story about a huge snake that lived guarding the forest in Jembrana. The name Jembrana itself is a combination of the words jimbar which means 'big' and jana which means 'forest'. I don't know whether it is perceived from an animist point of view or the ANT, but I got goosebumps seeing the dark brown body river writhing like the magical dragon Taksaka who was angered because his forest was destroyed. One thing that cannot be denied is the awesome power of nature.
SARAS DEWI, Lecturer of Philosophy at the University of Indonesia
