We are facing a planetary crisis with multiple intertwined dimensions: ecological, social, political, economic, caregiving… and meaningful. According to the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services ( IPBES ), ecosystem degradation and biodiversity loss cannot be resolved solely with protectionist measures or environmental regulations. What’s really needed is a profound social transformation and the creation of a new cultural imaginary that redefines the way we perceive and relate to nature. Why is this a necessity? What’s wrong with how we imagine nature? Is it possible that this imaginary could lead us to ecological disaster? And if so, how can we change it?

The separation from nature

One of the founding myths that underpins our modern worldview is the idea that human beings are separate from the rest of nature. This conception finds its roots in religious and philosophical narratives that have influenced the history of Western thought. According to Italian writer Roberto Calasso’s interpretation of the Bible, humanity emerged as a creation separate from all other living beings. Unlike animals and plants, humans are molded in the divine image and are granted the privilege of naming all creatures. This act of naming is no small matter: it establishes the relationship between language and dominion over the environment, reinforcing the idea of ​​human superiority over the natural world. Furthermore, according to the Bible, Yahweh Elohim created Eden and placed humanity within it “to care for and cultivate it.” Initially, this act did not imply exploitation, but rather a form of protection and continuation of the work of the first gardener. However, expulsion from Paradise for eating from the Tree of Knowledge marks a definitive break with nature. This separation is later reinforced by the prohibition of idolatry. Calasso points out that the commandment to cut the link with images implied cutting the connection with the gods of nature and with the cosmos, since the gods were intertwined with all forms of the universe.

“Yahweh had created nature, piece by piece, only for someone to one day separate themselves from it. But it was a process that began anew every day, without end.”

Paradise Lost is thus set in a mythological time: the separation from nature took place in an original time, in an unattainable past that, at the same time, is happening at every moment. Over time, this separation becomes the basis of an imaginary that conceives of nature as a resource external to humanity, something that can be dominated, exploited, or modified according to the needs of progress.

The modern imaginary

Historian David Lowenthal analyzes the modern imaginary and its roots in the Enlightenment and the French Revolution. These philosophical currents established the idea of ​​human perfectibility and the improvement of nature through labor and technological innovation. Modernity, in this sense, not only proposes constant progress but also places humanity on an upward trajectory within the arrow of time: from a natural, primitive state to higher levels of civilization and progress that will bring greater well-being and wealth for all. Although the Enlightenment and scientific thought displaced the myth of divine creation and replaced it with theories of evolution and the ideal of progress, the belief in human singularity and a longing for the paradise lost in our infancy as a species persisted. The modern imagination took hold in the 19th century and placed us at a crossroads between tradition and the new, between nature and civilization, while the arrow of time offers us a promise of the future. These are the limits of our cultural horizon. Today, despite the ecological crisis and the uncertainty of the future, we remain trapped in this logic. We still conceive of progress as an inevitable process, so much so that, even in these turbulent times, we believe we are on the verge of reaching a new evolutionary stage in which we will become cyborgs or transhumans, also capable of shaping nature to our liking. While the myth of progress has been challenged, many contemporary narratives continue to operate within the modern conceptual framework. Even efforts to reconnect with nature or preserve ecosystems are framed within an ideal of pristine nature, separate from humankind.

Media representations of evolution and progress

Film and the media have helped reinforce this imagery, using narratives that reproduce the dichotomy between civilization and nature. One example is Nanook, Robert Flaherty’s 1922 ethnographic documentary about Inuit life in the Arctic. Filmed at the beginning of the 20th century, it depicts an Inuit family’s struggle for survival, contrasting with the modern life portrayed by a Western trader. The image of this encounter between two worlds reinforces the notion that modern civilization inevitably replaces the ancestral world, generating an ambivalent emotion: nostalgia for a natural life and the certainty that this way of life is doomed to disappear in favor of a bright, though unknown, future. Another more recent example is Avatar , in which James Cameron brings the current struggles of indigenous peoples to claim and defend their territories into a fictional world, questioning the greed of the capitalist system and extractive colonialism, and inverting the moral values ​​of the modern imagination. The film presents the Na’vi, a parahuman species deeply connected to their natural environment, confronting human colonizers who arrive to exploit their resources. In this case, technology is not a sign of civilization but of destruction. Unlike Nanook , in Avatar , true wisdom is not associated with civilizing progress but with the ability to live in harmony with nature. But to do so, one must cease to be human and hybridize with this new species.

New visions of nature

Despite the climate crisis, the modern imaginary about the relationship between humans and nature continues to resist. Neither ecological disasters nor growing economic inequality have managed to completely destabilize this narrative. Even attempts to transform the vision of nature, such as American philosopher Donna Haraway’s proposal on interspecies kinship or post-nature theories, have not yet succeeded in undoing it. The problem is how the arrow of time orders the world. The French anthropologist Bruno Latour proposes an alternative to imagining nature differently: we must “escape the trap set by the arrow of time” of modernity. This means modifying the temporal structure that forces us to choose between the past (the natural, the local) and the future (techno-scientific progress, the global). Instead of following the path imposed by linear progress, Latour suggests turning our gaze toward the terrestrial, as a way to reconnect with the world without relying on inherited narrative structures. This reorientation of the space-time compass does not imply a return to pre-industrial models, but rather a projection of nature into the future. Author Bio: Elisenda Ardèvol is Professor, Expert in digital culture at UOC – Universitat Oberta de Catalunya