Anthropocene: limit of our cognitive ability? (English)

It is said that the modern world is "Anthropocene."

According to Dictionary.com, "Anthropocene" is "the present geological epoch (from the time of the Industrial Revolution onwards), during which humanity has begun to have a significant impact on the environment."

Anthropocene: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/anthropocene

Then, there is an adjective "anthropocentric", meaning "1.regarding the human being as the central fact of the universe, 2.assuming human beings to be the final aim and end of the universe, 3.viewing and interpreting everything in terms of human experience and values."

Anthropocentric: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/anthropocentric?s=t

Anthropocentric mentality is sometimes criticized as being the cause of environmental degradation or destruction of ecosystem.

(Actually, the image of this blog, in which the world map is in the hand of a man, might be exactly representing the anthropocentric mentality, haha!!)

Is anthropocentric mentality problematic? Well, I dont think it is a problem of whether it is problematic or not. I think that regardless of whether it is problematic or not, we cannot get rid of anthropocentric mentality because after all, we are the ones who are thinking about this problem.

Lets deepen this problem a bit further.

Why should we protect environment? Why should we stop climate change? Because we feel sorry for the nature? Maybe not. We want to protect nature for the sake of us, humans, right? A commonly used slogan "save the earth" is missing an important part. It is, "save the earch FOR THE SAKE OF US." We want to protect beautiful view of nature because WE want to see it, right?

Or, there are people arguing that the nature has its own rights to thrive and flourish, regardless of what happens to humans. But then, what is the definition of "thriving and flourishing" for the nature? Maybe, trees want to be cut down or trimmed. We cannot hear their voice. We dont understand what they really want.

Or, what is "nature" from the first place? Lets think about the next case; "Suppose that a huge meteor is approaching the earth. Now you are sitting in front of a switch. If you push the switch, nuclear missiles are going to fly towards the meteor and destroy it. Would you push the switch?"

One could argue that If you push the switch, it means that you are protecting humanity and nature of the earth, going against the nature of universe. One could argue that letting the meteor hit the earth is the natural ecosystem of the universe.

Because of the limit of our cognitive ability, we cannot know what nature or universe really want.

Or maybe Im wrong. There might be some way to know what they really want through, for example, meditation or living in nature for a extended period.

Then, it might not be a problem of the limit of our cognitive ability. It might just be the limit of science.