The term more-than-human has emerged as a critical concept in discussions about ecology, philosophy, and cultural studies. Coined in the late 20th century and popularized by theorists like David Abram in his influential book The Spell of the Sensuous (1996), the term represents a shift away from anthropocentric thinking. It encourages us to rethink the human-centric lens through which we have traditionally understood the world. Instead of viewing the world as dominated or defined solely by human beings, more-than-human emphasizes the intricate networks of life, matter, and agency that exist beyond humanity. This concept includes not only animals and plants but also ecosystems, geological forces, and atmospheric phenomena, highlighting the multiplicity of non-human actors that shape our world.

The idea of the more-than-human serves as a conceptual and philosophical tool to move beyond the constraints of human-centered thinking. It invites us to recognize that the world is not solely about human desires, needs, or dominion but is shaped by various other forces and entities that have their own forms of agency. In this framework, human beings become part of a vast web of interconnected lives and processes, rather than standing outside or above them.

Etymology and Conceptual Shifts

The etymology of more-than-human seeks to transcend traditional terms such as nature or environment, both of which have historically maintained a division between humans and the non-human world. The word nature, from the Latin natura (meaning birth, character, or essence), has often been used to refer to a passive, external world—something to be observed, studied, and controlled. Environment, with its roots in the French environner (to surround), similarly implies something external to human life, as if the environment were a mere backdrop or setting in which human activities occur.

In contrast, the term more-than-human avoids these divisions, emphasizing interdependence and connection. It positions humanity not as the pinnacle of evolution or culture, but as part of a much larger and more complex system. This challenges Enlightenment-era ideas of human exceptionalism, a worldview that placed humans at the center of knowledge, progress, and power. During the Enlightenment, human beings were often seen as the highest form of life, with culture and reason being the ultimate goals of evolution. In this framework, nature was something to be subdued, studied, and ultimately mastered.

The more-than-human perspective challenges this framework by asking us to reconsider our relationships with the world around us. Rather than being exceptional, humans are one species among many, enmeshed in a network of actors that includes animals, plants, weather systems, and even inanimate objects. The notion that non-human entities have agency—whether it be a river carving a canyon, a tree sustaining a forest ecosystem, or even an animal co-shaping human life—fundamentally alters our understanding of how the world operates.

Philosophical and Social Influences

The concept of the more-than-human owes much to post-humanist and new materialist philosophies, both of which seek to break down rigid boundaries between the human and the non-human. Philosophers such as Bruno Latour, Donna Haraway, and Jane Bennett have been pivotal in shaping this discourse. Latour’s actor-network theory, for example, proposes that all entities, human and non-human alike, have the capacity to act and influence outcomes. Whether these entities are technologies, animals, or ecosystems, Latour argues that they participate in networks of interaction that shape the world just as much as human beings do.

Haraway’s concept of companion species focuses on the ways humans and non-human entities—particularly animals—co-evolve and influence each other’s lives. Haraway challenges the notion that humans are separate from or superior to the rest of the living world. Instead, she emphasizes the interdependent relationships that define life on Earth. Her work highlights how human lives are inextricably linked to the lives of animals and other beings, who co-shape our identities, cultures, and futures.

Jane Bennett’s idea of vibrant matter explores how even inanimate objects—such as rocks, metals, or plastics—can exert forces and participate in shaping the world. Her work encourages us to see the agency in things we typically consider inert or lifeless, challenging the anthropocentric tendency to attribute significance only to human or biological actors. Bennett’s work, along with that of Latour and Haraway, has been instrumental in building the philosophical foundation for more-than-human thinking.

Literary and Romantic Traditions

The concept of the more-than-human also marks a departure from earlier Romantic ideas of nature, which, while deeply engaged with the non-human world, often framed it as a passive or idealized backdrop for human experience. Romantic poets such as William Wordsworth and Samuel Taylor Coleridge wrote about nature with profound reverence, but their work often portrayed it as something that existed primarily for human emotional, spiritual, or aesthetic benefit. For Wordsworth, nature was a teacher, a source of solace, and a reflection of human emotions. Coleridge, similarly, saw nature as imbued with the sublime, a powerful force that inspired awe in human beings.

While Romanticism was groundbreaking in its celebration of the non-human world, it still operated within a human-centric framework. Nature was often valued for the ways in which it could enrich human life—whether through contemplation, inspiration, or spiritual healing. The more-than-human, in contrast, emphasizes that the world is not merely a resource or aesthetic experience for humans. Instead, it acknowledges that the myriad entities that make up the world—animals, plants, ecosystems, even weather patterns—exist in their own right and have their own forms of agency, independent of human needs or interpretations.

The More-than-Human Aesthetic

The aesthetic appeal of the more-than-human lies in its ability to expand the boundaries of human perception, pushing us to appreciate the intrinsic value and agency of non-human entities. Rather than viewing landscapes, animals, or ecosystems solely through the lens of their utility or beauty for humans, the more-than-human approach encourages deeper engagement with the life and energy inherent in these entities.

This shift in perspective is evident in contemporary ecological art, environmental philosophy, and nature writing. Writers and artists are increasingly exploring themes of entanglement, coexistence, and multispecies flourishing. The more-than-human aesthetic invites us to consider the world in terms of interconnected relationships, rather than as a series of isolated, human-dominated spaces.

A major influence in this area is Aldo Leopold’s land ethic, as articulated in his landmark work A Sand County Almanac (1949). Leopold proposed a more holistic way of thinking about land and its inhabitants, calling for an ethical relationship that recognizes the interdependence of all living and non-living entities. Leopold’s vision predates contemporary more-than-human discourse, but it resonates deeply with its principles. He moved away from viewing land as property to be managed and exploited and instead emphasized land as a community to which humans belong. This ethical stance reflects a profound shift in the way we understand our relationship to the natural world—one that mirrors the core ideas of more-than-human thinking.

Similarly, David Abram’s phenomenological approach invites us to engage sensuously with the world, encouraging a reciprocal relationship with non-human entities. Abram challenges the linguistic and cultural barriers that separate humans from the more-than-human world. He argues for a more embodied, experiential understanding of our place in the world, one that recognizes the vibrant, living qualities of the non-human.

The More-than-Human and Climate Change

In contemporary social and environmental discourse, the more-than-human has gained significant traction, especially in the context of climate change and ecological crises. The Anthropocene—our current geological epoch, marked by the dominant impact of human activity on Earth’s ecosystems—has sparked urgent debates about the need to rethink human relationships with the planet. The concept of the more-than-human becomes essential in this context, as it reframes our interactions with the Earth from one of domination and exploitation to one of mutual influence and shared vulnerability.

As environmental crises intensify, the more-than-human aesthetic critiques human-centered views that have historically neglected or marginalized the non-human communities that share our spaces. Much like the nostalgic, pastoral ideal of the countryside, which romanticizes rural landscapes while overlooking the complexities and labor of rural life, human-centric perspectives can reduce non-human entities to passive objects. The more-than-human aesthetic, in contrast, calls attention to the vitality and agency of non-human entities, encouraging us to see them as active participants in shaping the world.

Conclusion

In sum, the concept of the more-than-human challenges us to rethink how we inhabit and engage with the world around us. It asks us to see beyond narrow, human-centered definitions of nature and environment, and instead to recognize the interconnected, multispecies relationships that constitute our shared planet. This expanded perspective honors the agency, vitality, and interdependence of all beings—human and non-human alike—and encourages us to approach the world with a renewed sense of responsibility, respect, and wonder.