Planetary response-inability: Gaia, the Anthropocene, and the world without us.

This article examines the evolving concept of "planetary responsibility" by analyzing how different understandings of the planet shape corresponding ethical notions of responsibility. It explores three main articulations: the "-cene" debates (Anthropocene, Capitalocene, Plantationocene), which assign responsibility for ecological damage to humanity, capitalism, or colonialism respectively; speculative realism, which emphasizes the planet’s radical independence from humans and rejects moral responsibility by envisioning a "world without us"; and speculative feminism, particularly through the concept of Gaia, which frames the planet as a symbiotic, living system calling for an ethics of "response-ability" grounded in entanglement and mutual vulnerability. The philosopher Isabelle Stengers further develops this by proposing an asymmetrical ethics of "response-inability," where humans are dependent on Gaia but Gaia is indifferent to humans, creating an ethical impasse that challenges traditional human-centered responsibility. The article concludes that while "planetary responsibility" is a complex and often paradoxical ethical concept, it remains a critical horizon for political and ethical reflection amid increasing ecological uninhabitability.