规训人类新世

IF 1.1 2区 历史学 Q1 HISTORY
Ian Hesketh
{"title":"规训人类新世","authors":"Ian Hesketh","doi":"10.1111/hith.12267","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>In this review essay, I examine Julia Adeney Thomas, Mark Williams, and Jan Zalasiewicz's <i>The Anthropocene: A Multidisciplinary Approach</i>. As indicated by the book's subtitle, the authors stress the necessity of approaching the Anthropocene from a multidisciplinary perspective as opposed to an interdisciplinary one. I consider how the authors do this by analyzing the different disciplinary approaches they adopt from fields ranging from geology and Earth system science to anthropology and history. What will become clear is that, rather than seeking to synthesize the relevant knowledge that is produced by these disciplines, the authors envision the Anthropocene as an analytical lens through which multiple forms of knowledge can be produced. Given the disparate timescales and complex phenomena that are implied by the Anthropocene, this multidisciplinary approach avoids many of the epistemic problems that have beset certain attempts to situate the Anthropocene within a grand synthetic framework that is governed by a singular theory and linear historical narrative. In addition to showing that the Anthropocene must be viewed from a range of different disciplinary perspectives in order to be understood, the book illustrates how it is possible to bring into conversation diverse forms of knowledge from the sciences and the humanities without undermining the disciplinary differences and methods that produced those forms of knowledge in the first place.</p>","PeriodicalId":47473,"journal":{"name":"History and Theory","volume":"61 3","pages":"482-491"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/hith.12267","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"DISCIPLINING THE ANTHROPOCENE\",\"authors\":\"Ian Hesketh\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/hith.12267\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>In this review essay, I examine Julia Adeney Thomas, Mark Williams, and Jan Zalasiewicz's <i>The Anthropocene: A Multidisciplinary Approach</i>. As indicated by the book's subtitle, the authors stress the necessity of approaching the Anthropocene from a multidisciplinary perspective as opposed to an interdisciplinary one. I consider how the authors do this by analyzing the different disciplinary approaches they adopt from fields ranging from geology and Earth system science to anthropology and history. What will become clear is that, rather than seeking to synthesize the relevant knowledge that is produced by these disciplines, the authors envision the Anthropocene as an analytical lens through which multiple forms of knowledge can be produced. Given the disparate timescales and complex phenomena that are implied by the Anthropocene, this multidisciplinary approach avoids many of the epistemic problems that have beset certain attempts to situate the Anthropocene within a grand synthetic framework that is governed by a singular theory and linear historical narrative. In addition to showing that the Anthropocene must be viewed from a range of different disciplinary perspectives in order to be understood, the book illustrates how it is possible to bring into conversation diverse forms of knowledge from the sciences and the humanities without undermining the disciplinary differences and methods that produced those forms of knowledge in the first place.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47473,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"History and Theory\",\"volume\":\"61 3\",\"pages\":\"482-491\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-08-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/hith.12267\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"History and Theory\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/hith.12267\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"历史学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"History and Theory","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/hith.12267","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在这篇评论文章中,我研究了Julia Adeney Thomas, Mark Williams和Jan Zalasiewicz的《人类世:多学科方法》。正如书的副标题所示,作者强调了从多学科的角度来研究人类世的必要性,而不是从跨学科的角度来研究。我通过分析作者从地质学和地球系统科学到人类学和历史学等领域采用的不同学科方法来考虑作者是如何做到这一点的。将变得清晰的是,作者不是寻求综合这些学科产生的相关知识,而是将人类世设想为一个分析透镜,通过它可以产生多种形式的知识。考虑到人类世所隐含的不同的时间尺度和复杂的现象,这种多学科的方法避免了许多认知问题,这些问题一直困扰着某些试图将人类世置于一个由单一理论和线性历史叙事控制的大综合框架内的尝试。除了表明人类世必须从一系列不同学科的角度来看待才能被理解之外,这本书还说明了如何在不破坏产生这些知识形式的学科差异和方法的前提下,将科学和人文学科的各种知识形式引入对话。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

DISCIPLINING THE ANTHROPOCENE

DISCIPLINING THE ANTHROPOCENE

In this review essay, I examine Julia Adeney Thomas, Mark Williams, and Jan Zalasiewicz's The Anthropocene: A Multidisciplinary Approach. As indicated by the book's subtitle, the authors stress the necessity of approaching the Anthropocene from a multidisciplinary perspective as opposed to an interdisciplinary one. I consider how the authors do this by analyzing the different disciplinary approaches they adopt from fields ranging from geology and Earth system science to anthropology and history. What will become clear is that, rather than seeking to synthesize the relevant knowledge that is produced by these disciplines, the authors envision the Anthropocene as an analytical lens through which multiple forms of knowledge can be produced. Given the disparate timescales and complex phenomena that are implied by the Anthropocene, this multidisciplinary approach avoids many of the epistemic problems that have beset certain attempts to situate the Anthropocene within a grand synthetic framework that is governed by a singular theory and linear historical narrative. In addition to showing that the Anthropocene must be viewed from a range of different disciplinary perspectives in order to be understood, the book illustrates how it is possible to bring into conversation diverse forms of knowledge from the sciences and the humanities without undermining the disciplinary differences and methods that produced those forms of knowledge in the first place.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
History and Theory
History and Theory Multiple-
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
9.10%
发文量
36
期刊介绍: History and Theory leads the way in exploring the nature of history. Prominent international thinkers contribute their reflections in the following areas: critical philosophy of history, speculative philosophy of history, historiography, history of historiography, historical methodology, critical theory, and time and culture. Related disciplines are also covered within the journal, including interactions between history and the natural and social sciences, the humanities, and psychology.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信