Nature as ‘Abject’, Critical Psychology, and ‘Revolt’: The Pertinence of Kristeva

Abstract

Today nature is put under tremendous pressure through human, including technological, activities — so much so that some haveraised the question of nature's (and all living creatures') survival. It seems as if the world is on a slippery slope, sliding towards its own destruction. Even critical thought and practice seem powerless to affect those in power, whose leadership seems: to bear decisively on whether the current situation can be improved or not. This tends to induce pessimism. On the other hand, Heidegger's philosophy of technology, and especially Kristeva's psychoanalytical thought, inspire hope that, whatever the odds may be against such a possibility, at least it is conceivable that humankind may resurrect the culture of ‘revolt’. This could recuperate nature from the periphery of human concerns where it has, arguably for a considerable time, occupied the non-position of what Kristeva calls the ‘abject’, and restore it to the formerly revered realm that has engendered (and still does) the emergence of all life on earth. A critical psychology that situates individual subjects in the encompassing context, not merely of technophiliac society but of a society crucially dependent on nature, can contribute substantially to nature-sensitive social practices.