This article discusses the Mekrijärvi boreal lake system in North Karelia, Finland, and the Koitajoki river. It traces historico-cultural interactions with the lake, from its role as an epicenter of Karelian rune singing and traditional practices, to the natural and cultural disruptions caused by large-scale natural resource extraction that shattered forests, peatlands, and waterbodies, and on into a new era of restoration. In the 2000s a community-driven NGO began to document oral histories and scientific evidence of the lake’s condition. In the 2020s, this effort evolved into a landscape-scale eco-cultural revitalization effort. Habitat for endangered whitefish and degraded peatlands are being restored and traditional knowledge has become a central force in rebuilding and re-imagining traditional northern societies. Snippets of personal memories and oral poetry offer a window into a unique boreal world which, though once thought to be lost, is in a state of re-discovery and healing.

Building upon recent studies in new materialisms and feminist critical posthumanism with a focus on human and more-than-human relationships, this paper examines how the posthuman paradigm, by postulating the queering of identit(ies) via entanglement with the more-than-human (including technology), and by offering a critical examination of diverse modes of existence within a broader ecological context, can foster more inclusive and ethically sound ways of being in the world. Although posthumanism encompasses a wide range of perspectives and theories, including transhumanism, at its core, it challenges traditional notions of humanism, blurring the boundaries between what is human and what is more-than-human, while calling for a revaluation of anthropocentric, onto-epistemological, and ethical frameworks. This paper mobilises the framework and methodology of composting-with-care as an analytical tool to foster epistemic diversity, from quantum field theory to speculative fabulation, in the examination of the issue concerning human identity. It concludes by proposing a view where the self is not confined to the individual human but emerges through interactions (and intra-actions) with the world(s) of which the human is part, acknowledging the agency and influence of actors beyond the human on identity formation.

The paper re-examines the work of Jakob Böhme (1575–1624) through the lens of environmental ethics. Specifically, it delves into the concept of dwelling (wohnen) as articulated in Six Theosophic Points (1620), The Six Mystical Points (1620), and On the Early and Heavenly Mystery (1620). To illuminate the significance of this concept for environmental ethics, the paper will juxtapose it with Martin Heidegger’s idea of dwelling. This comparative approach not only sheds light on the environmental-ethical implications, but also allows for a broader exploration of methodological considerations inherent in such a scholarly endeavor. The paper raises questions about the potential constraints in reinterpreting the intellectual legacy of past thinkers, that is, their identity over the course of the history of philosophy.

Humans tend to seek their identity as entities existing over a period of time by making narratives. The paper argues that seeking diachronic self-identity through narratives or stories results in the self-experience being one of separation or alienation from the real world. This happens because language is primarily a form of secondary representation, and the means by which we attempt to find identity often appear in the form of narratives. The dominance of the metaphor of life as a journey shows this. The remedy is to reduce the hold of narrativity by making self-experience fundamentally episodic.

I propose a reconsideration of the role that ‘interpellations’ play in the dynamic process of identity construction. ‘Interpellation’ is a quasi-technical term introduced by Louis Althusser (1969) that I reinterpret using the lens of contemporary social ontology. I therefore look at it as an identity proposal that the individual can either accept, reject, negotiate, or outright ignore. In the original text, Althusser mentions the fact that the individual’s acceptance is the essential moment of an interpellation, but he does not elaborate on the other options available to the individual. I believe it is important to analyze the individual’s options and the factors that may influence whether the individual’s freedom of choice is fully exercised in such contexts. I further discuss the human vulnerabilities that cause ‘interpellations’ to be adopted without much reflection, even in the absence of a repressive system that would try to enforce a mainstream ideology.

This paper aims to examine what is called “diasporic identity.” The complexity related to this research arises due to the inherent uncertainty and indefinability of identity itself, which is further compounded by the additional layer of uncertainty introduced by the concept of diaspora. The diaspora is not a ready-made, indisputable reality; establishing its existence demands substantiating the claim that it possesses a distinct identity. However, merely demonstrating a shared geographical distance from the homeland raises pertinent questions: Why should the negative circumstance of being distanced from one’s homeland serve as a unifying factor, and does this dispersion give rise to an identity transcending national boundaries? Answering these questions involves looking at the historical context of identity and diaspora and introducing concepts that help understand them. The central thesis posited herein asserts that the manifestation of diasporic identity primarily assumes a narrative form, elucidated through both disciplinary discourse and literary works. With specific reference to the Armenian Diaspora, this exposition contends that, in certain instances, reliance solely on academic discourse proves insufficient in establishing a comprehensive comprehension of diasporic identity. It is asserted that literature, with its metaphoric language, emerges as an essential instrument, providing access to the profound layers inherent to the domain, thereby facilitating a more nuanced and comprehensive understanding of diasporic identity.

The main objective of this article is to analyze the reasons behind Thomas Ligotti’s recognition of Peter Wessel Zapffe as an anti-natalist. Specifically, I argue that Ligotti’s focus on Zapffe’s early essay The Last Messiah (1933) alone results in some misunderstandings of Zapffe’s views, which make room for coining him an antinatalist. These misunderstandings ground associated dichotomies of the type, Ligotti’s misinterpretation versus Zapffe’s theory, such as the dichotomy of self-deception versus heterotelic metaphysical activity of phantasy, as embedded in that of illusions versus fixations, and the dichotomy tragedy versus necessary tragic. Comparing and contrasting Ligotti’s analysis of three examples of Zapffe’s works including The Last Messiah and Fragments of an Interview (1959), as well as choosing one more example – that of Zapffe’s monograph On the Tragic (1941) – I aim to demonstrate why reducing Zapffe’s ideas of the necessary tragic and multifrontal conflicts to anti-natalism per se simplifies the unique philosophical background in which these ideas occur.