We are currently experiencing a period of unparalleled ecological disruption, increasingly identified as “the Anthropocene.” As this designation gains traction, my objective as a psychologist and dedicated environmental advocate is to articulate why I find it a problematic characterization of our current global predicament.
Initially conceived by atmospheric scientists and subsequently adopted by geologists, the Anthropocene has emerged as a potent, albeit enigmatic, framework for discussing our present epoch. This era is distinguished by the unprecedented fact that, for the first time in its history, the planet’s trajectory is being profoundly reshaped by a single species: humanity.
The term Anthropocene signifies the notion that humanity has fundamentally altered Earth’s geological record. Derived from the Greek word Anthropos meaning “human,” coupled with ‘-cene,’ signifying a significant geological epoch within the current 65-million-year-old Cenozoic era.
It is noteworthy how rapidly this concept has permeated broader discourse. It has transcended academic treatises and symposia to become a subject of discussion in artistic, literary, periodical, travel writing, poetic endeavors, and even an operatic production, in addition to scholarly volumes.
While acknowledging the significance and timeliness of this conceptualization, I wish to pause and critically examine whether the Anthropocene narrative accurately reflects our circumstances and future possibilities.
A substantial body of critique already exists concerning the Anthropocene concept.
Alternative terminologies, such as Capitalocene, which aims to underscore the damaging influence of capitalism, and Plantationocene, emphasizing the historical roles of colonialism, the plantation system, and enslaved labor, have been proposed. These terms seek to attribute responsibility more precisely to specific historical drivers of ecological crises, rather than encompassing all of humanity collectively. However, my focus here will be on the conceptualization of time itself.
Geological Epochs
“Deep time” refers to the vast expanse of geological history, utilized to delineate the chronology and interrelationships of events throughout Earth’s existence. This timeline spans an astonishing 4.54 billion years.
Comprehending the immense scale of such profound temporal depth presents a significant cognitive challenge. Various analogies exist to aid in grasping this immensity, such as the 24-hour cycle, within which human existence is compressed into a mere 19 seconds.
I find the analogy presented below particularly effective due to its visual simplicity, easily conceptualized by extending one’s arm.
If Earth’s formation is visualized at the shoulder, approximately 4.54 billion years ago, animal life emerges within the palm, with more recognizable life forms appearing at the first knuckle. Subsequent movements along the fingers represent subsequent periods, including, for instance, the Jurassic period.
And humanity? The Holocene, spanning the last 11,700 years, marks the global proliferation of Homo sapiens—”a microscopic sliver at the tip of a fingernail.” The commencement of the proposed Anthropocene, whether posited at approximately 400 years ago, 70 years ago, or at some intermediate point, represents an infinitesimal fraction within this sliver.
Therefore, has Homo sapiens indelibly marked a new geological epoch? On a superficial level, there is a basis for this assertion. The geological record provides ample evidence of human influence, including markers of anthropogenic climate change, nuclear testing, and numerous other impacts.
However, a more profound understanding of deep time should engender caution regarding the “Anthropocene” designation, perhaps even prompting a reassessment of our self-perception and our role on Earth during this epoch. The reasons for this are as follows.
Mass Extinction Events
Approximately 66 million years ago, the planet experienced a cataclysmic mass extinction event that eliminated an estimated three-quarters of all species. The prevailing scientific consensus attributes this event primarily to the impact of a colossal asteroid, a conclusion supported by the identification of a distinctive, thin sedimentary layer from that period in the geological strata, rich in elements characteristic of asteroids.
This mass extinction paved the way for the ascendance of mammals as the dominant life forms, heralding the Cenozoic (“new life”) era. This ephemeral stratum of extraterrestrial dust within the rock record signifies a brief yet pivotal transition between the substantially thicker geological layers that preceded and followed it.
Yet, no designation such as “Cometocene” is applied to the period following this extinction event. Such a label would be illogical; the impact was a singular occurrence, significant in the grand narrative of deep time solely as the catalyst for new biological foundations that persisted for millennia.
Could a similar perspective apply to our current impact? Is it plausible that, despite the well-documented consequences of what is termed the Anthropocene, our human influence constitutes merely a transient phase within the vast timescale of deep time?
This is a highly probable scenario. The expansion of industrialization has been characterized by the aggressive and rapid depletion of finite resources. The inherent limitation of these resources, juxtaposed with unprecedented ecological degradation, fundamentally constrains the long-term viability of any era dominated by humanity.
This perspective is articulated by the American author John Michael Greer, who posits that all manifestations of industrial civilization, when viewed within the context of geological time, are of remarkably brief duration and inherently “self-terminating”—serving merely as transitional phases between epochs.
Consequently, he advocates for the Holocene-Neocene transition, or H-N transition, as a more accurate descriptor, with “Neocene” serving as a provisional term for the subsequent geological epoch.
Our enduring geological footprint will likely resemble the comet dust—”a slightly anomalous transitional stratum, a quarter of an inch in thickness.” As a species demonstrating remarkable adaptability, humans may indeed discover ecological niches enabling survival and prosperity in this distant future; however, dominance will likely not be a feature.
A New Psychological Framework
This perspective does not imply an impending singular cataclysm, akin to another extinction event. Rather, it suggests that we are presently navigating such a period of profound transformation.
Instead of being remembered as a grand and portentous era, such as the Anthropocene, it is more probable that future species will perceive our epoch as what historian Stephen Kern describes as “a parenthesis of infinitesimal brevity.”
Within the grand tapestry of deep time, Earth will continue its course irrespective of our presence, hardly registering our departure, much as it scarcely acknowledged our arrival.
This contemplation of deep time is not intended to evoke despair or resignation or to diminish hope or the acknowledgment of the harm humans have inflicted.
Its psychological utility, I contend, lies in offering a profound reminder of existence itself as something to be approached with reverence and wonder; of our species as inherently interdependent and interconnected, rather than distinct; and in dismantling any lingering hubris associated with the Anthropocene concept.
Situating humanity within a more expansive historical narrative may initially seem daunting. However, it also possesses the potential for liberation. For numerous global cultures, this perspective is not novel; many Indigenous worldviews intrinsically embrace nature, hold it in high regard, and possess a profound awareness of time and place.
Although historically displaced from these ancestral lands by the forces of colonialism and industrialization, these perspectives are frequently overlooked.
The trajectory of our distant future, should one exist, will be defined by our capacity to recognize and foster interdependence with the natural world and with other species. Ultimately, this journey is about redefining what it means to be human.
As the late environmental philosopher Val Plumwood cautioned: “We will proceed into a different mode of humanity, or not at all.”
Matthew Adams, Principal Lecturer in Psychology, University of Brighton.
