Key Takeaways
1. Anthropology Must Think Beyond the Human.
If jaguars also represent us—in ways that can matter vitally to us—then anthropology cannot limit itself just to exploring how people from diff erent societies might happen to represent them as doing so.
Beyond human perspectives. Encounters with nonhuman beings, like jaguars who see humans as either fellow predators or prey, force anthropology to move beyond studying only how humans represent the world. Other beings also represent, and how they see us changes things. This requires an anthropology that can analyze interactions where seeing, representing, and thinking are not exclusively human affairs.
Rethinking the human. By attending to relations with beings beyond the human, we challenge our assumptions about what defines the human. The goal is not to discard the human but to open it up, recognizing that human distinctiveness is entangled with a broader world of life. This necessitates new methods and scope for anthropological inquiry.
Expanding ethnography. Traditional sociocultural anthropology uses human-specific traits like language and culture as both its tools and its object. Expanding ethnography to include nonhumans breaks this circularity, revealing how humans are connected to a wider living world and how this connection reshapes what it means to be human.
2. Representation and Thought Extend Beyond Human Language.
All life is semiotic and all semiosis is alive.
Signs beyond symbols. Contrary to common assumptions, representation is not limited to conventional, linguistic, or symbolic forms. Nonhuman life forms also represent the world using iconic (likeness-based) and indexical (correlation-based) signs, which humans also share. These nonsymbolic modalities have properties distinct from symbolic language.
Life is semiotic. What differentiates life from inanimate matter is that life forms represent the world, and these representations are intrinsic to their being. We share with nonhuman creatures the fact that we live with and through signs, using them as "canes" to represent parts of the world, which in turn constitutes our being.
Provincializing language. Social theory often conflates representation with language, assuming all representation works like human language (conventional, systemic, arbitrary). Recognizing that signs exist and function beyond the human, and that nonhuman semiosis is not context-dependent in the same way, requires us to "provincialize" language and rethink our assumptions about context and reality.
3. Life Itself Is Semiotic: All Living Beings Think.
Wherever there are “living thoughts” there is also a “self.”
Life thinks. Because life is constitutively semiotic – the product of sign processes – life and thought are deeply intertwined. All living beings, from bacteria to plants to animals, represent the world in some way, and this capacity is a form of thinking, albeit not necessarily conscious or symbolic.
Self as semiotic locus. A "self," at its most basic level, is the product of semiosis – the locus where signs represent the world to a "someone" who emerges through this process. This means "we" are not the only kind of self; the world is animate, filled with emergent loci of meaning and purpose that do not originate solely from humans.
Enchanted world. Meanings (means-ends relations, significance, purpose) are not just human impositions but constitutive features of the living world. This inherent animacy and meaning-making capacity of nonhuman life forms is what is meant by saying the world is "enchanted."
4. The World Is an Ecology of Selves.
Th e world is thus “animate.”
Interacting selves. The tropical forest is a complex web of interacting and mutually constituting beings, all of whom are semiotic selves with points of view. This dense network of living thoughts forms an "ecology of selves," where how different kinds of beings represent and are represented by others defines the patterns of life.
Beyond human sociality. Human sociality is entangled with this broader ecology. Runa interactions with forest animals, spirits, and even historical figures like colonists are all part of this single ecology. Understanding this requires moving beyond analyzing human relations solely through human-specific social or cultural lenses.
Multispecies relations. The specific forms life takes, like the distribution of plants on different soils, are shaped by the interactions among various semiotic selves (e.g., plants, herbivores, predators). This demonstrates how the world's patterns emerge from the relational dynamics within this ecology of selves, amplifying differences and creating new kinds.
5. Nonhuman Thinking Embraces Confusion and Indistinction.
Th inking is forgetting diff erences.
Productive confusion. Nonhuman thinking, unlike human symbolic thought which often focuses on clear distinctions, can operate through confusion and indistinction. Examples like ticks not differentiating between mammal species, or walking sticks blending into twigs, show how not noticing differences can be a powerful, form-generating process.
Kinds emerge from confusion. Generals, like biological "kinds" or classes, can emerge in the world not just through human categorization but through the ways beings relate to each other by failing to distinguish. This challenges the idea that difference is the sole foundation of relationality and categorization.
Life's reliance on forgetting. The life of thoughts and selves depends on a constrained form of "forgetting" or indifference to certain differences. This counterintuitive aspect of nonhuman thinking is central to how living thoughts relate and how selves emerge and persist.
6. Human Language Emerges From, But Is Not Separate From, Life's Semiosis.
Symbolic reference, that which makes humans unique, is an emergent dynamic that is nested within this broader semiosis of life from which it stems and on which it depends.
Nested emergence. Human symbolic thought, while unique, is not radically separate from the iconic and indexical semiosis shared by all life. Symbolic reference is an emergent dynamic, arising from complex configurations of indexical relations, which in turn arise from iconic relations. This creates a hierarchy where symbols depend on indices, and indices on icons, but not vice versa.
Continuity despite novelty. Like a whirlpool emerging from flowing water, symbolic thought has novel properties (e.g., detachment from immediate referents, capacity for abstraction) but remains continuous with and dependent on the more basic semiotic and physical processes from which it emerges. This explains how human thought can be both distinct and connected to the world.
Beyond dualism. Understanding symbolic reference as emergent helps overcome the Cartesian dualism that separates human mind/culture from nonhuman matter/nature. It shows how human thought, language, and culture are nested within a broader semiotic field, allowing us to recognize their unique qualities without severing them from the rest of the world.
7. Trans-Species Communication Reveals Hierarchies and Power.
Th e power-laden hierarchical relationship between dogs and humans that this attempt at communication reveals is analogous to that between humans and the spirit masters of animals.
Communicating across kinds. People in Ávila attempt to communicate with nonhuman selves (dogs, spirits) using strategies that navigate the boundaries between kinds. This involves recognizing the other as a self ("You") while simultaneously maintaining distance to avoid losing one's own distinct selfhood ("It").
Trans-species pidgins. Communication across species often involves simplified, hybrid forms, like the "canine imperatives" used to address dogs. These "trans-species pidgins" blend human linguistic elements with nonhuman communicative modalities (like barks or indexical actions), reflecting the constraints and possibilities of cross-species understanding.
Hierarchies of understanding. Communication reveals inherent hierarchies in the ecology of selves. "Higher" beings (spirits, humans relative to dogs) can more easily understand "lower" ones, while lower beings may need special means (hallucinogens, dreams) to access the perspective of higher ones. These semiotic hierarchies are entangled with social and colonial power dynamics.
8. Form: A Non-Living Reality Shapes Life's Patterns.
Form is precisely this sort of invisible phenomenon.
Patterns beyond life. Beyond living semiosis, the world exhibits non-living patterns or "forms," like the distribution of rivers or the shape of whirlpools. These forms are emergent, arising from constraints on possibility, and possess properties distinct from the matter or energy involved.
Form's effortless efficacy. Form propagates through self-similarity and redundancy, often in an "effortless" manner, distinct from cause-and-effect. Examples include walking sticks blending into twigs or the way river networks structure landscapes. This mode of efficacy is crucial for how living beings harness resources and navigate their environments.
Harnessing form. Humans and nonhumans alike harness these forms. The Amazonian rubber economy exploited the formal similarity between river networks and rubber tree distribution. Hunters recognize and utilize the spatial patterns of animal congregations. This demonstrates how form, though not alive, is central to the dynamics of life and thought.
9. The "All Too Human" Entangles With Nonhuman Lives.
Th e realm of the spirit masters superimposes ethnic, pre-Hispanic, colonial, and postcolonial hierarchies on the landscape because all of these various sociopolitical arrangements are subject to similar constraints regarding how certain biotic resources can be mobilized across space.
Morality and power. While value is intrinsic to life, morality is distinctively human, emerging with symbolic thought. However, human moral worlds and power dynamics (the "all too human") are deeply entangled with nonhuman lives, affecting their flourishing and shaping the ecology of selves.
Colonial legacies. The spirit realm of the forest masters, where animals are seen as domesticates owned by powerful figures, superimposes historical hierarchies (pre-Hispanic, colonial, postcolonial) onto the landscape and its nonhuman inhabitants. This realm reflects how human power structures become embedded within and shape the broader ecology.
Entangled hierarchies. The hierarchies observed in trans-species relations (e.g., human/dog, human/spirit) are not solely biological or cultural but emergent from the entanglement of formal semiotic properties with specific historical and political contexts. This shows how the "all too human" is woven into the fabric of the wider living world.
10. The Living Future Is Haunted by the Weight of the Dead.
Th e realm of the masters, then, is like a language.
Being in futuro. Life is characterized by "being in futuro" – the capacity for the future to affect the present through the mediation of signs. Selves are loci of sign interpretation, constantly creating future possibilities that shape their present being. This is a unique causal modality of life.
The weight of absence. Life's continuity is intimately related to what it is not – the absent lineages, the dead, the possibilities not realized. These constitutive absences leave traces, an "imponderable weight," that shapes the living present and the potential future.
Haunted futures. The spirit realm of the masters amplifies this living-future logic. It is a virtual, emergent reality located deep in the forest, housing the specters of the past (dead ancestors, historical figures, discarded objects) and the potential futures created by the forest's semiosis. This realm is both a product of and an influence on the living.
11. Spirits and Afterlife Are Emergent Realities Beyond Life.
“Supernature,” continues Viveiros de Castro, “is the form of the Other as Subject”.
Beyond nature and culture. The spirit realm of the masters is an emergent reality that is neither reducible to nature nor culture. It arises from the particular ways humans engage with the nonhuman semiosis of the forest, creating a "supernatural" domain with its own properties.
Generals are real. Spirits, like other forms and generals, are real. Their reality is not that of existent objects but of potential recurrence and influence. They are not merely human constructs but emerge from and are sustained by the broader dynamics of the living world.
The You of the Self. This spirit realm is where one can be called into being by a higher-order "Other as Subject" – a "You" that is both strange and familiar. This "You" is the latent echo of the "I" in futuro, a realm of continuity and possibility that sustains the self and is marked by terms like "amu" (master), which denote a relational subject position across species and realms.
12. Survival Means Navigating a Complex, Relational Cosmos.
Th e fractured and yet necessary relationship between the mundane present and the general future plays out in specifi c and painful ways in what Lisa Stevenson (2012; see Butler 1997) might call the “psychic life” of the Runa self, immersed and informed, as it is, by the colonially infl ected ecology of selves in which it lives.
Living beyond life. Survival is not just about continuing to live but about living beyond life, in relation to its many absences and potential futures. It involves navigating the complex ecology of selves, which includes the living, the dead, and the spirits, all entangled with historical power dynamics.
Becoming with others. To survive, one must constantly negotiate one's position within this ecology, becoming-with other beings (puma, white, master) while maintaining a distinct selfhood. This requires harnessing the logics of form and the living future, often through shamanic practices that bridge different realms.
Flourishing in entanglement. The possibility for flourishing lies in actively engaging with the many kinds of real others that populate this thinking forest. This involves recognizing the value and agency of nonhuman selves, understanding the complex interplay of form, history, and future, and cultivating ways of thinking with the forest's thoughts to create a living future for a greater "Us."
Last updated:
FAQ
What is How Forests Think: Toward an Anthropology Beyond the Human by Eduardo Kohn about?
- Anthropology beyond humans: The book explores how anthropology can move beyond a human-centered focus to include the thoughts, representations, and agency of nonhuman beings, especially in Amazonian forests.
- Forests as thinking entities: Eduardo Kohn argues that forests and their inhabitants—plants, animals, and spirits—engage in semiotic processes that constitute forms of thought and communication.
- Ethnographic foundation: The work is grounded in long-term ethnographic research with the Runa people of Ecuador’s Upper Amazon, examining their relationships with jaguars, dogs, and other forest beings.
- Interdisciplinary approach: Kohn combines anthropology, semiotics, philosophy, and ecology to develop a framework for understanding life and thought beyond the human.
Why should I read How Forests Think by Eduardo Kohn?
- Challenges human exceptionalism: The book questions the assumption that only humans think and represent, opening new ways to understand society, culture, and the world.
- Innovative anthropology: It proposes an “anthropology beyond the human,” including nonhuman beings as active participants in social and semiotic worlds.
- Interdisciplinary insights: Readers gain a rich, nuanced view of life and thought in the Amazon, blending ethnography, philosophy, and ecology.
- Ethical and political relevance: The book addresses the moral complexities of multispecies entanglements and the politics of power in human-nonhuman relations.
What are the key takeaways from How Forests Think by Eduardo Kohn?
- Beyond anthropocentrism: The book expands anthropology to include nonhuman semiotic selves and their modes of communication and thought.
- Ecology of selves: It reveals a complex world where humans, animals, spirits, and forms co-constitute each other’s existence through semiotic processes.
- Ethical and ontological implications: Kohn challenges conventional notions of morality, selfhood, and reality, emphasizing the living future and the role of form in sustaining life.
- Invitation to rethink: Readers are invited to think with forests, embracing images, forms, and relations that transcend human-centered perspectives.
How does Eduardo Kohn define “anthropology beyond the human” in How Forests Think?
- Inclusion of nonhumans: Anthropology should study not just humans but also the semiotic lives of animals, plants, and spirits as active agents.
- Semiotic processes: The focus shifts to how all living beings engage in sign processes—icons, indices, and symbols—to represent and interpret their worlds.
- Distributed agency: Agency and selfhood are not exclusive to humans but are distributed across species and forms of life.
- Ethnographic evidence: Kohn’s fieldwork with the Runa demonstrates how multispecies relations shape social and ecological realities.
What does Eduardo Kohn mean by “forests think” in How Forests Think?
- Representation beyond humans: All living beings, not just humans, represent the world in some way, making thought intrinsic to life itself.
- Semiotic life: Thinking is a semiotic process involving signs; forests and their inhabitants engage in these processes through their interactions.
- Living thoughts: Life and thought are inseparable, with plants, animals, and even spirits possessing “living thoughts” that shape their being and relations.
- Ethnographic examples: The Runa’s interactions with jaguars, dogs, and plants illustrate how forests and their creatures embody forms of thinking beyond human cognition.
What is the “ecology of selves” in How Forests Think by Eduardo Kohn?
- Multiple selves coexist: The “ecology of selves” refers to a world inhabited by many kinds of selves—human, animal, spirit—each with their own perspectives and communicative modes.
- Relational and semiotic: These selves are connected through semiotic processes (signs, symbols, icons, indices) that enable communication and mutual influence.
- Challenges human exceptionalism: The concept challenges the idea that only humans have selves or moral agency, emphasizing distributed and interconnected life.
- Ethnographic grounding: Kohn’s work with the Runa shows how humans, animals, and spirits interact as semiotic selves in the Amazon.
How does How Forests Think by Eduardo Kohn explain communication between humans and animals?
- Trans-species pidgins: Kohn describes simplified communicative forms that combine human language and animal vocalizations, used to communicate with dogs and other animals.
- Canine imperatives: Special grammatical constructions are used to address dogs obliquely, balancing subjectivity and objectification to maintain human dominance and avoid “soul blindness.”
- Partial understanding: Communication involves provisional guesses and partial translations across species boundaries, often involving dreams and altered states.
- Ethnographic examples: Stories of dogs’ dreams, hallucinogenic rituals, and hunting practices illustrate the complexity of multispecies communication.
What is the significance of Charles Peirce’s semiotics in How Forests Think by Eduardo Kohn?
- Three types of signs: Peirce’s categories—icons (likeness), indices (causal connection), and symbols (convention)—are used to analyze how representation works beyond language.
- Signs as living processes: Signs are not just human linguistic symbols but are processes intrinsic to life, enabling living beings to represent and interpret their worlds.
- Semiotic selfhood: Peirce’s idea that selves emerge as loci of interpretants (signs interpreting signs) helps explain how humans and nonhumans alike are semiotic selves.
- Foundation for multispecies anthropology: Peirce’s semiotics provides the conceptual tools to rethink representation, agency, and relationality in a multispecies world.
How does How Forests Think by Eduardo Kohn redefine the concept of “self” and “Runa”?
- Self as semiotic locus: A self is an emergent product of semiosis, a living dynamic where signs represent the world to a “someone” who is also a sign.
- Distributed and multiple selves: Selfhood is not confined to a single body or species; it can be distributed across bodies and even shared among beings.
- Runa as relational subject: “Runa” means “person” and functions like a pronoun marking a relational subject position in a cosmic ecology of selves.
- Continuity and hierarchy: The Runa have always been Runa, embodying continuity and relationality with other beings, and the term “amu” reflects hierarchical relations and colonial histories.
What is “soul blindness” in How Forests Think by Eduardo Kohn and why is it important?
- Loss of relational awareness: Soul blindness is the inability to recognize other beings as selves, leading to alienation and disconnection in the ecology of selves.
- Multiple manifestations: It can occur in hunters losing their ability to detect prey, animals losing awareness of predators, or spirits becoming dangerous ghosts.
- Life and death paradox: Soul blindness reveals the intrinsic tension between life and death, presence and absence, selfhood and objectification.
- Anthropological insight: Understanding soul blindness helps rethink how selves dissolve, become objects, or transform in multispecies relations.
What role does “form” play in How Forests Think by Eduardo Kohn?
- Form as emergent pattern: Form refers to constraints on possibility that create patterns or regularities in both living and nonliving worlds, such as river networks or rubber tree distributions.
- Effortless efficacy: Forms propagate themselves without direct intention, shaping living dynamics and ecological relations.
- Beyond mind and mechanism: Form challenges dualistic metaphysics by being neither purely mental nor purely physical, existing beyond life and thought.
- Shamanic engagement: Understanding and entering the logic of form is central to shamanic practices and accessing forest power.
How does How Forests Think by Eduardo Kohn address time, the future, and the afterlife?
- Living futures: Life and semiosis are oriented toward possible futures, which affect present behavior and selfhood.
- Spirit masters’ realm: The realm of spirit masters in the forest is an emergent, timeless domain where selves continue beyond death, embodying a living future that transcends linear time.
- Indebtedness to the dead: Living selves are always connected to absent histories and futures, creating a complex temporal ecology.
- Survival and continuity: Survival involves inhabiting this living future, maintaining continuity of self across disjunctures, and relating to the imponderable weight of the dead who make life possible.
Review Summary
How Forests Think received mixed reviews. Some praised its innovative approach to anthropology and semiotics, exploring non-human perspectives and challenging anthropocentrism. Many found it intellectually stimulating but dense and difficult to comprehend without prior knowledge of semiotics and anthropology. Critics argued it failed to deliver on its promise of explaining forest cognition, instead focusing on abstract theory. Some appreciated Kohn's ethnographic insights about the Runa people, while others felt the book was too disconnected from actual forests and scientific ecology.
Similar Books
Download PDF
Download EPUB
.epub digital book format is ideal for reading ebooks on phones, tablets, and e-readers.
