Issue |
Nat. Sci. Soc.
Volume 31, Number 3, Juillet/Septembre 2023
|
|
---|---|---|
Page(s) | 374 - 380 | |
Section | Regards – Focus | |
DOI | https://doi.org/10.1051/nss/2023049 | |
Published online | 26 February 2024 |
Pourquoi la conservation de la biodiversité ne devrait pas être un but. Note sur l’hétéronomie des possibles
Why biodiversity conservation should not be a purpose. Epistemology and the heteronomy of possibilities
Anthropologie, MNHN, UMR Éco-anthropologie, Paris, France
* Auteur correspondant : Leo.mariani@mnhn.fr
Dans deux textes datés de 1967 et 1968, l’anthropologue, psychologue et biologiste américain Gregory Bateson forme une critique des raisonnements finalistes, qu’il confronte au fonctionnement systémique de l’esprit humain et de son écologie. Si les premiers ont une structure linéaire, souligne-t-il, ce n’est pas le cas des deux autres. Ainsi, se fixer des buts conscients, ce serait toujours nier le caractère systémique de l’environnement et, dans une certaine mesure, aggraver les pathologies que l’on veut combattre. Cet article confronte cette proposition à l’objectif de conservation de la biodiversité. Il se demande comment répondre à l’urgence si les buts conscients contribuent à l’aggraver. Pour ce faire, il revient sur un exemple dans lequel de la biodiversité est produite sans être recherchée, avant de poser des jalons pour une approche hétéronome et mieux intégrée de l’action.
Abstract
In two texts dated 1967 and 1968, the anthropologist, psychologist and biologist Gregory Bateson offers a critique of finalist reasoning, which he contrasts with the systemic functioning of the human mind and its ecology. While the former has a linear structure, he points out, this is not the case for the latter two. Thus, to set conscious purposes would be to deny, by definition, the systemic character of the environment and, to some extent, to aggravate the pathologies that one wants to combat. This article confronts this proposal with the objective of biodiversity conservation. It wonders how to respond to the present emergency if the conscious purposes contribute to making it worse. To do so, it looks at an agricultural example from Malaysia in which cultivated biodiversity is produced without being sought, through a “systems effect” in which human populations participate but do not aim at. It suggests that this effect is related to a heteronomous conception of action, a model in which a subject chooses to give his/her partner an autonomous power of determination over the relationship. Finally, the article proposes to draw inspiration from this functioning to think about conservation with the aim of making it less artificial, in other words to think first about its integration into the worlds it seeks to change.
Mots clés : biodiversité / agriculture / épistémologie / action / anthropologie
Key words: biodiversity / agriculture / epistemology / action / anthropology
© L. Mariani, Hosted by EDP Sciences, 2023
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License CC-BY (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, except for commercial purposes, provided the original work is properly cited.
Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.
Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.
Initial download of the metrics may take a while.