Introduction: The chapter discusses, first, the Anthropocene as an ambiguous and contested construction of scientific knowledge. I note that this scientific construction has no one single or simple message; the Anthropocene involves a sort of ‘double opening’: The fecund aperture of this new geological epoch (in contrast to previous epochs) is itself opened to irreconcilable meanings. Second, the paper considers the on-going disagreements over the meaning and implications of the Anthropocene. It might be legitimately argued that the extent and depth of human impact signalled by this term demands profound transformation of human civilisations. Yet positions over what this transformation actually entails, and the role of scientific knowledge in this transformation, differ profoundly. Third, it explains that although the Anthropocene can thus open up disagreement, tendencies within its very formulation point to the simultaneous closing down of disagreement; the double opening is prematurely sutured.

I assert, in line with an agonist approach that this closure should be resisted, and that disagreements in and over the Anthropocene are important in enlivening and sustaining democratic interaction. In short: I discuss the existence of the Anthropocene as an ambiguous term, which both introduces disagreement but at the same time forestalls it, and I argue that the opening of this new epoch should itself remain open. I conclude that while scientific knowledge is crucial in understanding the problems of the Anthropocene, it cannot, and should not overcome the disagreements that are generated through the emergence of this trans-disciplinary category.