In this paper, I have tried to answer how we might understand the human as a species considering the Anthropocene. To this end I have used theories on time, or more precisely temporalization/temporization. Here I have use Baird Callicott’s theory of nature’s boundaries as timescales from the paper “Lamarck Redux”, as well as Timothy Clark’s analysis of this with the use of deconstruction. I have used Jacques Derrida’s theory of differance to show how not only language, but textuality as such is always at play in relation and differentiating elements in the world, and that it is through these “movements” that things become themselves: the relation as the condition for the boundary. Through the paper this is used to describe both how scales differentiate from each other, and how the human is differentiated nature. Clark and Callicott argues that what separates human from nature is the timescale, that our processes operate on; and that what is destructive about the human is this scale. However, this seems to deconstruct itself, as not all human beings take part in the Anthropocene but stay on ecological timescales. Through María Puig de la Bellcasa’s analysis on human-soil-relations, I have tried to show, that the scale Clark describes cannot be adequately described with the Lamarckian evolution. Lamarckian or cultural/technological evolution could be understood without it resulting in this timescale. Instead, we must look at the situated cultures as they relate to their landscapes: and understand the Anthropocene as a result of a specific historical way of being human, that not only has technological and cultural innovation, but that the way this innovation is part of a specific cultural narrative of progress, that “pull time forward” as Bellacasa puts it. Rather than settling on one conception of the human being, we should be open to where and how the human deconstructs itself with/through its relations to nature(s) as well as other human beings. I argue that humans must be understood as situated in more-than-human networks, and that one single account of the human might not be the best way to account for the Anthropocene. Rather than trying to change our situation (climate change and mass extinction) through technological innovation, we should stay alert to the networks that they come from and reinforce them; and what other timescales, they interact with, encourage or destroy.