Šis straipsnis yra atsakas į Philippeʼo Descola raginimą formuluoti kosmopolitikos sampratą, adekvačią daugiamasčio (multiscalar) antropoceno krizėms. Tai daroma permąstant susipynusio (entangled) sambūvio problemą iš juslumo perspektyvos. Straipsnyje pasiūloma spekuliatyvi kosminio juslumo samprata, mobilizuojanti juslumą kaip pamatinį kosmopolitikos dėmenį ir suprantama kaip reliacinis atvirumas, kurio pagrindu skirtingos esybės tampa juntamos ir suvokiamos viena kitai nepaisant jų nebendramatiškumo. Ši sąvoka plėtojama sintetinant ontologinio posūkio antropoceno studijose (Descola, de Castro, Hui), procesinės-reliacinės kosmologijos (Whitehead) ir kosmopolitikos (Stengers) bei feministinių mokslo ir technologijų studijų (Barad, Haraway) įžvalgas ir brėžiant preliminarius konceptualius kontūrus trijuose tarpusavyje susijusiuose registruose – ontoepistemologiniame, kosmopolitiniame ir etiniame. Gretinant autorius (-es), permąstančius (-ias) antropocentrines kosmoso prielaidas per santykį, kosminis juslumas leidžia konceptualizuoti susipynusį bendrabūvį kaip buvimo pusiaukelėje praktiką, reikalaujančią išlaikyti skirtumą, praktikuojant atsako-gali-mybę (response-ability) besiformuojantiems iš santykio pasauliams.
Barad, K., 2007. Meeting the Universe Halfway: Quantum Physics and the Entanglement of Matter and Meaning. Durham, London: Duke University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv12101zq
Branco, E. A., 2025. Beyond the epistemic crisis: A speculative turn for Earth Science in the Anthropocene. The Anthropocene Review 13(1): 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1177/20530196251399163
Crutzen, P. J., 2002. The “Anthropocene”. Journal de Physique IV France 12(10): 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1051/jp4:20020447
Deleuze, G., 1990. The Logic of Sense. Translated by M. Lester, C. Stivale. Edited by C. Boundas. New York: Columbia University Press.
Descola, P., 2013. Beyond Nature and Culture. Translated by J. Lloyd. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Descola, P., 2025. Cosmopolitics of the Anthropocene with Philippe Descola [video]. Uploaded by Columbia Maison Française. YouTube. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9-gsyHP8nJg [Accessed 17 March 2026].
Hamilton, S., 2017. Securing ourselves from ourselves? The paradox of “entanglement” in the Anthropocene. Crime, Law and Social Change 68: 579–595. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10611-017-9704-4
Haraway, J. D., 1988. Situated Knowledges: The Science Question in Feminism and the Privilege of Partial Perspective. Feminist Studies 14(3): 575–599. https://doi.org/10.2307/3178066
Haraway, J. D., 2016. Staying with the Trouble: Making Kin in the Chthulucene. Durham, London: Duke University Press. https://doi.org/10.1215/9780822373780
Hui, Y., 2017. On Cosmotechnics: For a Renewed Relation between Technology and Nature in the Anthropocene. Techné: Research in Philosophy and Technology 21(2-3): 319–341. https://doi.org/10.5840/techne201711876
Kleinman, A., 2012. Intra-Actions. Mousse: Contemporary Art Magazine 34: 76–81.
Latour, B., 2004. Whose Cosmos, Which Cosmopolitics? Comments on the Peace Terms of Ulrich Beck. Common Knowledge 10(3): 450–462. https://doi.org/10.1215/0961754X-10-3-450
Latour, B., 2005. Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Leddy, S., 2025. The anthropocentric sensorium: how an anthropocentric distribution of the sensible makes us human. The Sense and Society 21(1): 134–147. https://doi.org/10.1080/17458927.2025.2597727
Lemmens, P., 2020. Cosmotechnics and the Ontological Turn in the Age of the Anthropocene. Angelaki 25(4): 3–8. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969725X.2020.1790830
Sabolius, K., 2019. Antropocenas kaip vaizduotės problema. Athena: filosofijos studijos 14: 172–186.
Sehgal, M., 2014. Diffractive Propositions: Reading Alfred North Whitehead with Donna Haraway and Karen Barad. Parallax 20(3): 188–201. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13534645.2014.927625
Stengers, I. 2005a. Introductory notes on an ecology of practices. Cultural studies review 11(1): 183–196. https://doi.org/10.5130/csr.v11i1.3459
Stengers, I., 2005b. The Cosmopolitical Proposal. In: Making Things Public: Atmospheres of Democracy, eds. B. Latour, P. Weibel. Cambridge, London: The MIT Press, 994–1004.
Stengers, I., 2006. Whitehead and science: From philosophy of nature to speculative cosmology [lecture]. McGill University. Available at: https://www.mcgill.ca/files/hpsc/Whitmontreal.pdf [Accessed 3 April 2026].
Stengers, I., 2011a. Cosmopolitics II. Translated by R. Bononno. Minneapolis and London: University of Minnesota Press.
Stengers, I., 2011b. Thinking with Whitehead: A Free and Wild Creation of Concepts. Translated by M. Chase. Cambridge, MA and London: Harvard University Press.
Stengers, I., 2012. Reclaiming Animism. E-flux journal (36): 1–9.
Stürmer, M., & Bella, D., 2022. Inheriting Cosmopolitics: Pericles, Whitehead, Stengers. Theory, Culture & Society 40(3): 3–21. https://doi.org/10.1177/02632764221092300
Viveiros de Castro, E. V., 1998. Cosmological Deixis and Amerindian Perspectivism. The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 4(3): 469–488. https://doi.org/10.2307/3034157
Viveiros de Castro, E. V., 2014. Cannibal Metaphysics: For a Post-Structural Anthropology. Translated and edited by P. Skafish. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Whitehead, A. N., 1978. Process and Reality: An Essay in Cosmology. New York: The Free Press.
Woods, D., 2014. Scale Critique for the Anthropocene. The Minnesota Review (83): 133–142. https://doi.org/10.1215/00265667-2782327
Šis darbas apsaugotas Creative Commons priskyrimo 4.0 viešąja licencija.