Gaia and Religious Pluralism in Bruno Latour’s ‘New-Materialism’
In his works on ecological philosophy, Bruno Latour develops an interesting perspective on religion and pluralism. He proposes a new worldview, in which religion is reinterpreted in view of a Gaian philosophy. He extends ‘pluralism’ beyond the anthropocentrism that dominates modern humanism. In his...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
MDPI AG
2023-07-01
|
| Series: | Religions |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.mdpi.com/2077-1444/14/8/960 |
| _version_ | 1797583361849425920 |
|---|---|
| author | Fernando Suárez Müller |
| author_facet | Fernando Suárez Müller |
| author_sort | Fernando Suárez Müller |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | In his works on ecological philosophy, Bruno Latour develops an interesting perspective on religion and pluralism. He proposes a new worldview, in which religion is reinterpreted in view of a Gaian philosophy. He extends ‘pluralism’ beyond the anthropocentrism that dominates modern humanism. In his book <i>Facing Gaia</i> Latour includes nonhuman beings in a larger community and works towards a larger concept of eco-humanism. In this paper, I try to reconstruct his position by showing that the philosophical foundation for his interpretation of religion could be called ‘terrarism’ and is to be classified as a form of new materialism. This new interpretation of materialism has postmodernist origins (inspired by Gilles Deleuze), but it is not identical to it, because Latour distances himself from ‘postmodernism’. He wants to positively contribute to a new ontology. My point is that Latour’s ‘terrarist’ grounding of religious pluralism obstructs any foundation of transcendence and, finally, congests a really pluralistic ecumene because he still adheres to the postmodernist idea that we should renounce to a unitary principle of being. His ideas on eco-humanism and pluralistic ecumene could gain momentum if we opened ourselves to a more holistic and spiritual way of thinking, retaking Lovelock’s conception of Gaia. However, Latour’s new-materialistic interpretation of ‘animism’ can be seen as a positive contribution to a new perspective of the world that definitively sets ‘materialism’ aside. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-10T23:37:49Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-9f1684760e23463a941d7eb4e62ca3b9 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2077-1444 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-10T23:37:49Z |
| publishDate | 2023-07-01 |
| publisher | MDPI AG |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Religions |
| spelling | doaj.art-9f1684760e23463a941d7eb4e62ca3b92023-11-19T02:50:12ZengMDPI AGReligions2077-14442023-07-0114896010.3390/rel14080960Gaia and Religious Pluralism in Bruno Latour’s ‘New-Materialism’Fernando Suárez Müller0Department of Philosophy, University of Humanistic Studies, 3512 HD Utrecht, The NetherlandsIn his works on ecological philosophy, Bruno Latour develops an interesting perspective on religion and pluralism. He proposes a new worldview, in which religion is reinterpreted in view of a Gaian philosophy. He extends ‘pluralism’ beyond the anthropocentrism that dominates modern humanism. In his book <i>Facing Gaia</i> Latour includes nonhuman beings in a larger community and works towards a larger concept of eco-humanism. In this paper, I try to reconstruct his position by showing that the philosophical foundation for his interpretation of religion could be called ‘terrarism’ and is to be classified as a form of new materialism. This new interpretation of materialism has postmodernist origins (inspired by Gilles Deleuze), but it is not identical to it, because Latour distances himself from ‘postmodernism’. He wants to positively contribute to a new ontology. My point is that Latour’s ‘terrarist’ grounding of religious pluralism obstructs any foundation of transcendence and, finally, congests a really pluralistic ecumene because he still adheres to the postmodernist idea that we should renounce to a unitary principle of being. His ideas on eco-humanism and pluralistic ecumene could gain momentum if we opened ourselves to a more holistic and spiritual way of thinking, retaking Lovelock’s conception of Gaia. However, Latour’s new-materialistic interpretation of ‘animism’ can be seen as a positive contribution to a new perspective of the world that definitively sets ‘materialism’ aside.https://www.mdpi.com/2077-1444/14/8/960LatourLovelockGaia philosophynew materialismpostmodernismnew idealism |
| spellingShingle | Fernando Suárez Müller Gaia and Religious Pluralism in Bruno Latour’s ‘New-Materialism’ Religions Latour Lovelock Gaia philosophy new materialism postmodernism new idealism |
| title | Gaia and Religious Pluralism in Bruno Latour’s ‘New-Materialism’ |
| title_full | Gaia and Religious Pluralism in Bruno Latour’s ‘New-Materialism’ |
| title_fullStr | Gaia and Religious Pluralism in Bruno Latour’s ‘New-Materialism’ |
| title_full_unstemmed | Gaia and Religious Pluralism in Bruno Latour’s ‘New-Materialism’ |
| title_short | Gaia and Religious Pluralism in Bruno Latour’s ‘New-Materialism’ |
| title_sort | gaia and religious pluralism in bruno latour s new materialism |
| topic | Latour Lovelock Gaia philosophy new materialism postmodernism new idealism |
| url | https://www.mdpi.com/2077-1444/14/8/960 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT fernandosuarezmuller gaiaandreligiouspluralisminbrunolatoursnewmaterialism |