Since fossil fuel consumption has been integral to the project of modernity, energy history offers one way of trying to understand the Anthropocene and link the histories of capital and climate.
In “The Climate of History: Four Theses,” Dipesh Chakrabarty examined the idea of the Anthropocene—the dawn of a new geological period dominated by human activities—in the context of history and philosophy, raising fundamental questions about how we think historically in an era when human and geological timescales are colliding.This volume of RCC Perspectives offers critiques of these “Four Theses” by scholars of environmental history, political philosophy, religious studies, literary criticism, environmental planning, geography, law, biology, and geology.
Chakrabarty responds to the contributors of this volume by addressing five issues he considers fundamental to discussions on climate change.
Kluiving and Hamel explore why the Anthropocene emerged. They suggest that an analysis of global changes in human niche construction using geoarchaeological data offers new perspectives on the causes and effects of the Anthropocene.
The essays in this collection explore how masculine roles, identities, and practices shape human relationships with the more-than-human world.
Jim Fleming gives an overview of the male-dominated state of climate engineering proposals and criticizes the current masculinist nature of climate intervention.
This volume explores the question of whether science should be centered in climate-change communication.
Kleemann argues that interdisciplinarity is key to successfully tackling climate change.
Walsh argues that science should be decentered in communicating about climate change.
Oomen argues that science has an important role in climate communication as a common ground and honest broker.
