It's crucial here to separate the descriptive and the prescriptive theses. It may or may not be delusional to say we ought to use our limited freedom to transform nature. If our creations are unsustainable, as many of them appear to be, this Faustian project will prove to be foolish.

But that prescriptive thesis is different from the mere observation that, historically speaking, our species has limited autonomy that makes us people rather than animals. Language, reason, imagination, creativity, ambition or hubris--the ingredients of our autonomy are real and they make for the Anthropocene.

So I'd want to know whether you deny that personhood emerges from animality, like EO Wilson might, or whether you're talking about the foolishness of a certain use of our autonomy.