Anthrophomorphising much?

(dealing with the impossibility of not to anthropomorphise as humans and to the extreme of human supremacy we act out constantly. )))


But the elephant question in the room is, what is not anthropomorphised? we are always playing god on this planet, and our ignorance to describe it, is one thing inexplicably tackled by the work, if the visitors allow these thoughts to result from their own process. 
 
"By the end of the nineteenth century, a great variety of people had taken up the study of insects, and for equally varied reasons. These people included travelers, landowners, farmers, government employees, colonialists, doctors, psychiatrists, psychologists, engineers, schoolteachers, missionaries, sociologists, zoologists, gentlemen, and ladies. Each chose a di=erent kind of insect, the instantiation of a particular interest."
​
The names you have given us are diverse.- In some languages you refer to us as the folk. -the settlers.- or as states. in some as ant ethnicities. -crowds. -nests. in others as ...-colonies…
.....These names you gave us often say more about you than about us. -they speak of times, paradigms- in sciences or societies. you have related to us differently over time. why do you keep hanging onto dated words, -originating from times you want to overcome? your scientists have tried to perceive us in the "light of their days"... their perception is sometimes questionable or even un-applicable! --and that’s not just because most of our world is smell...
...One of your scholars, Charlotte Sleigh has investigated how, you have perceived us over time. She says it started in your 19th century, when- “travelers, landowners, farmers,- -government employees, colonialists, doctors, -psychiatrists, psychologists, engineers,-- schoolteachers, missionaries, sociologists, zoologists,-- gentlemen, and ladies got interested in insects for extremely varied reasons.” so what could scientists model after us? did we represent social ideals to strive for, ...or something that you would want to avoid at all cost?
...She says that we where perceived first as psychological, then sociological, then informational entities, -which apparently successively models your progression of research from human mind, to society and communication. She elaborates on 3 main people of influence for the different eras, who established, for each case the appropriate “scientific-way” to see us. She says that they did not merely adopt us instrumentally, as vehicles for social and political agendas... “Yet neither could they step outside the cultural frames within which they operated.”...
...For the era of psychological modelling, she points out the psychiatrist Auguste Forel, who lived 1848 to 1931 and combined taxonomy - with our behaviour for the first time.- He hoped this naturalist starting point could lead towards the modelling of the natural history of the human mind and ultimately to derive a form of internationalist utopia for you..
...For your sociological era she points out the academic William Morton Wheeler who lived 1865 to 1937 and who coined the therm myrmecology, the way you call your science about us...
...For your "information-era" she points out the sociobiologist Edward O. Wilson, who lived 1929 to 2021. Wilson apparently became known because of his book Sociobiology in which he established us as the exemplar for his “new-synthesis” of “all biology”, now a cybernetic science... Wilson was the one of you to finally find out that most of us are bout "Smell", not sight or hearing. He proved to you -how we tap the back of our bodies to the ground to leave trails of different chemicals, pheromones -which are used as markers to lead towards food or warn from danger. describing this to you becomes almost pointless sadly, as you really cant smell well, and in this our worlds are entirely different...