Changing the Narrative of Nature: Towards Sustainability
Atreyee Mukherjee
atreyee@iitism.ac.inIndian Institute of Technology (Indian School of Mines), Dhanbad, India (India)
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4728-973X
Abstract
Nature, an ontologically dynamic entity, has been the object of different types of conceptualizations. In recent types, it has been metaphorically conceptualized as a resource. This conceptualization is problematic such that it reduces the dynamic interdependent nature to a mere store-house for materials. This leads to the conceptualization that humans can use nature up until stock lasts. On top of that, our hunting-gathering instincts have made us reckless consumers and hoarders of things we think are necessary. This non-sustainable behavior is detrimental to our nature which holds us, nurtures us, and provides for us. To change the narrative of nature in the world of sustainability, sustainable development and sustainable practices, we must change our conceptualization of nature. In the present work, we present the problematic conceptualization of nature as a resource. We also discuss certain conceptualizations and their impact in the discussions on sustainability. And finally, we provide a linguistic alternative to the metaphoric conceptualization of nature that has the potential to alter the non-sustainable practices and take society towards sustainability.
Keywords:
nature, narrative of nature, conceptualization of nature, sustainable developmentReferences
BISWAS N. G., PRAKASH G., 2022, Samkhya Philosophy, Deep Ecology and Sustainable Development, Problemy Ekorozwoju/ Problems of Sustainable Development 17(1): 288-292.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.35784/pe.2022.1.26
Google Scholar
GAILLET M., SULMONT-ROSSÉ C., ISSANCHOU S., CHABANET C., CHAMBARON S., 2013, Priming effects of an olfactory food cue on subsequent food-related behaviour, Food Quality and Preference 30(2): 274-281.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2013.06.008
Google Scholar
KARLSSON R., 2016, Three metaphors for sustainability in the Anthropocene, The Anthropocene Review, 3(1): 23-32.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/2053019615599415
Google Scholar
LAKOFF G., JOHNSON M., 1980, Metaphors we live by, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Google Scholar
LEVINSON S.C., 1997, Language and cognition: The cognitive consequences of spatial description in Guugu Yimithirr, Journal of Linguistic Anthropology 7(1): 98-131.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1525/jlin.1997.7.1.98
Google Scholar
LEVINSON S.C., 2003, Space in language and cognition: Explorations in cognitive diversity, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511613609
Google Scholar
MEADE G., LEE B., MASSA N., HOLCOMB P.J., MIDGLEY K.J., EMMOREY K., 2022, Are form priming effects phonological or perceptual? Electrophysiological evidence from American Sign Language, Cognition, 220: 104979.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2021.104979
Google Scholar
MITRA S., AHMED S., 2022, Storytelling for Behavior Change: Use of Folktales for Promoting Sustainable Behaviors, Problemy Ekorozwoju/ Problems of Sustainable Development 17(2): 243-247.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.35784/pe.2022.2.26
Google Scholar
PRINCEN T., 2010, Speaking of sustainability: the potential of metaphor, Sustainability: Science, Practice and Policy, 6(2): 60-65.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/15487733.2010.11908050
Google Scholar
SAPIR E., 1929, The status of linguistics as a science, Language 5: 207-214.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/409588
Google Scholar
WOLFF P., HOLMES K.J., 2011, Linguistic relativity, Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science 2(3): 253-265.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/wcs.104
Google Scholar
Authors
Atreyee Mukherjeeatreyee@iitism.ac.in
Indian Institute of Technology (Indian School of Mines), Dhanbad, India India
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4728-973X
Statistics
Abstract views: 283PDF downloads: 214
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
