Page 498 - Cultural Studies of Science Education

39 Ecodemocracy and School Science 473

For the sake of argument, if humans did not privilege survival and reproduction,
there would be no need for cultural studies and environmentalism the way it is
supposed. It might be argued that Morrison’s (1999) argument is essentially eth-
nocentric and anthropocentric, and yet cultural mysticism is used to justify human
progress and growth, which legitimize some narratives over others. The cultural
narrative of renewing and revitalizing the commons, which is based on the cer-
tainty of “ecological crisis” (another mental disorder) is aligned with the cultural
imperative to protect the survival and reproduction of the species. It does not matter
how the story is told (i.e., genetic or cultural), the ending is plausible, and yet it
remains highly uncertain.
It is counterintuitive that ecodemocracy would support cultural thinking
patterns and behaviors that accelerate ecological declines. A difficult yet
necessary focus should be on the mentalism that legitimizes human rights to
survive and reproduce at the expense of others in the Earth’s ecosystems.
The ecological crisis is the eco/environ mentalism that drives accelerated
ecoinjustices for Gaia because it legitimizes anthropocentric tendencies for
survival and reproduction. Chet Bowers (2001) fails to recognize the schizo-
phrenia implicit within these disorders of the metanarratives in his own
work, which tends to also support the idea that cultural myths disguise
anthropocentrism (i.e., human survival and reproduction). Interesting that he
warns against scientism, yet the same caution is now stern for environmentalism.
For Bowers, the destructive metanarratives that perpetuate accelerated
ecological impacts developed concurrently with the Enlightenment and
Industrial Revolution, but the roots of these metanarratives also have been
traced to the ancient Greeks (Abram 1996). The ancient Greek metanarrative
that led to the decaying relationship between humans and the natural world
has been firmly established by philosophers. However, it may be too easy to
blame the ancient Greek dichotomy between humans and nature for the cultural
roots of today’s “ecological crisis.” The ancient Greeks did not make the
connection that humans could negatively impact their natural surroundings.
They could not know that the Earth’s resources were finite when so few people
lived on the Earth and their standards of living were insignificant compared
with today’s.
Nevertheless, the desire to think with certainty for the ancient Greeks led to
the creation of a cultural metanarrative that later developed into the sciences. In
particular, Aristotle privileged rationalizing a world “out there”; he privileged
the construction of cultural metanarratives that inadvertently disguised the
Earth’s uncertain natural history (Barnes 1982). These things were thought to
make the Earth more predictable, precise, and certain. Adversely, the process of
rationalizing the Earth’s history is the very contemplation trap that is inclined
to be absolutely certain in the face of the ecological unknown. Perhaps this
contemplation trap is the imperative to protect anthropocentric tendencies. The
cultural residue of the ancient Greek metanarrative of thinking the Earth in
certainty still permeates today’s environ/mental sciences.