Science And Human Nature Essay
Science, a field that involves various subjects including math, biology, chemistry etc, is one of those most influential aspects of human history. Merriam-webster dictionary defines it as: “such knowledge or such a system of knowledge concerned with the physical world and its phenomena: Nature Science” (“Science”, Merriam-webster Dictionary). What it studies is alway related to our nature, ourselves. It is a field that requires sophisticated knowledge and skill, as well as long-term devotement. Hence, whenever there is major breakthrough, it possibly can change the entire course of mankind. Take steam engine as an example, it took James Watt decades to study the prototype of the original steam engine and then successfully modified it for commercial use. Such tremendous breakthrough in mechanical science became the key to the first Industrial Revolution, and a page-turn to a new chapter of human history. However, such scientific innovations always have to take another aspect of mankind into consideration—the moral question: whether one invention is against human nature and the principle of our physical world or not. It is a crucial concern because as long as an invention is abnormal to what we believe in, or works in an opposite way contradicting our nature, it might have a disastrous consequence. In Mary Shelly’s Frankenstein and Robert Louis Stevenson’s Strange case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde, both authors have expressed their opinions on such concern. In their novels, they present two different stories about two scientists and their unordinary creations, and the aftermaths of such inventions, both to themselves and to the society. In my point of view, I argue that with the use of first person point of view, detail description on the creatures the two scientists have created and the reinforcement of other side characters and social background, both authors have built up a dark side on their character’s ambiguities, revealing a fact that any scientific study that goes against human nature, will not be helpful but harmful to both the scientist himself/herself and others.
In these two novels, both authors have used their main characters, the two scientists, as the narrators of their stories. With first person point of view, the inner world and thoughts of the characters can be delivered in a more direct way. And by hearing the stories from the characters directly, readers will have a stronger impression on them, making it easy for the authors to deliver their themes. At first, both scientists have revealed their initial intentions of their inventions, in their “own” words. From Dr. Frankenstein’s “Many happy and excellent natures would owe their being to me...” (Shelley, pp.48) to Dr.Jekyll’s “It was the curse of mankind that these incongruous faggots were thus bound together...” (Stevenson, pp.77), the reasons are told directly. It is more convincing for the readers, as if these two scientist are sitting right in front of us and telling what...
Loading: Checking Spelling0%
Human and Nature Essay1490 words - 6 pages Human and Nature Robert Frost’s poem, “Stopping by Woods in a Snowy Evening,” explicates the journey of a man in the woods. The man is admiring the natural scene; although, he knows his personal goals have been neglected. He admires the cold evening and wants to stay in woods. However, he realizes that he has to go to fulfil his desires. So, he neglects his wish of watching the beautiful scene of a snowy evening. Fagan states: “The poem is not...
Science, Technology, and Human Values Essay1086 words - 4 pages Science, Technology, and Human Values in Sigmund Freud's Civilization and Its Discontents, Henrik Ibsen and Arthur Miller's An Enemy of the People, and Kurt Vonnegut's Slaughterhouse-Five Technology has advanced to the point where it touches our lives in nearly every conceivable way-we no longer have to lift a finger to perform the most trivial tasks. The wealth of information and science we have learned in the last few centuries have made our...
Comparing History and Human Science1435 words - 6 pages Historians use sources and knowledge to piece together the history of the human existence while Human scientist study the human behavior as well as the lifestyle we live in. They indeed focus on these areas and provide information to each other. However, a historian will also look to the future and foretell using his or her knowledge of the past. In the same way, a human scientist might look at human behavior today and compare it with the past....
Science Today and Human Cloning843 words - 3 pages Science Today and Human Cloning Nowadays, we are being constantly fed with the prophecy that molecular biology is the next revolutionary "wave" replacing information technology which has changed the way we live in the past 50 years. The past decade has seen scientists making significant breakthroughs in this field to start the current biotechnology hype. One defining achievement was the cloning of a sheep named Dolly by Dr. Ian Wilmut of...
Capitalism Destroys Nature and Human Nature1899 words - 8 pages Following the development of capitalism, the 19th century’s industrialization brought a new era to the human society. Factory electrification, mass production and the production line ran to human civilization with their powers. While people were excited about the innovations of capitalism, Herbert Marcuse gave his argument, which capitalism destroyed nature and the human nature. Edward Hopper (1882-1967), a prominent American realist painter and...
Wordsworth Human Mind And Nature1071 words - 4 pages In many of William Wordsworth's poems he shows a correlation between the human mind and outer nature. In the following essay the question of what he believes exists between the two ( human mind and nature)will be examined. Quotations from his work will be used to exemplify the philosophy of this essay.Wordsworth through his...
On Evil and Human Nature858 words - 3 pages When prompted about the true nature of the human race, a great majority assumes “survival” instead of “good”. What this assumption leads to is a study of weather the human race is in fact “good” as people would like to think. In fact the one think that has allowed our race to survive is praying on the weaker, so are we morally “evil” by allowing our nature to dominate over us? If so is this nature a true evil? Many philosophers have studies...
Human Beings and Nature: The Scientific Revolution1834 words - 7 pages Human Beings and Nature: The Scientific Revolution The Scientific Revolution, perhaps one of the most significant examples of human beingsí relationship with the natural world, changed the way seventeenth and eighteenth century society operated. The power of human knowledge has enabled intellectual, economical, and social advances seen in the modern world. The Scientific Revolution which included the development of scientific attitudes...
The Atomic Bomb Human Beings and Nature1898 words - 8 pages The Atomic Bomb Human Beings and Nature With the surrender of Germany on May 1, 1945, the United States and its allies were well on their way to winning World War II and resuming peace in Europe. Japan was the only country still in their path. American forces soon began capturing islands off the coast of Japan including Iwo Jima and Okinawa. Since the Japanese refused to surrender, the United States began planning a ground attack on...
Human Nature And The Declaration Of Independence1487 words - 6 pages Human Nature and the Declaration of Independence I would like to show that the view of human nature that is shown in The Declaration of Independence is taken more from the Bible and that that view is in disagreement with two of the three esays given in class. The Biblical perspective of man is that he was created by a divine Creator with a specific plan in mind and made in the image of his Creator. Men are...
Human Nature and the Declaration of Independence1510 words - 6 pages I would like to show that the view of human nature that is shown in The Declaration ofIndependence is taken more from the Bible and that that view is in disagreement with two of thethree esays given in class. The Biblical perspective of man is that he was created by a divineCreator with a specific plan in mind and made in the image of his Creator. Men are entitled to thepursuit of happiness but also required by the...
Earth as we know it is an incredibly complex and fragile network of interconnected systems that have developed slowly over the last 4.5 billion years or so. From the ashes of the Big Bang this planet emerged as a mass of energy and elements. From that newly born mass of energy and elements evolved structured, dynamic systems of solids, liquids, and gases. The evolution of this planet continued to unfold over billions of years in such a unique way that eventually conditions arose with the ability to foster life.
From the smallest microorganisms to the largest animals, all life on Earth has a common ancestor. Everything is connected to everything. So how is it that our species has come to dominate the landscape in such a short period of time? Furthermore, what gives us the right to do so? In 3.5 billion years of life on Earth everything has followed a natural course of evolution. However, our rapid success as a species has begun to affect this natural order. With our population at seven billion and climbing, we have played a tremendous role in the disruption of the Earth’s natural systems. As we continue to grow and have a greater impact on the Earth’s systems, it is imperative that we address our role and relationship with nature.
The ability of humans to manipulate the landscape and recognize the consequences of doing so puts us in a peculiar position. As a species we are assigned the duty to provide and proliferate. Our goal is to achieve stability for ourselves and our kin. However we also have an obligation to maintain the environment, as we depend on the resources and services it provides. The question then becomes: what is our role in nature? Do we have the right to manipulate the land, factory farm animals, and pollute waterways? Or do we have an obligation to reduce our numbers and merely subsist? In order to answer these questions we must rely on our knowledge of Earth, evolution, and our influence on the environment.
Our relationship with nature has historically been one of imbalance and overuse. Nearly every step in human history has unfortunately been accompanied with a leap in environmental degradation. At first, humans were incredibly in-tune with their surroundings. Nomadic hunter-gatherer tribes used to roam the lands, following the ebb and flow of the seasons. These tribes had a measurable impact on the environment, but their influence was relatively manageable due to their population size. With advancements in technology and agriculture though, humans began to find more efficient ways of sustaining themselves. These advancements allowed for more permanent settlements, which led to rapid population growth and a distancing from nature.
As society evolved, populations grew and more and more resources were required to fuel the expansion. With breakthroughs in agriculture, settlements became more permanent and cities began to take shape. This shift to city life inadvertently led to a distancing from nature. While many people were still in-tune with nature on a subsistent level, the need for more and more resources began to change our regard for nature.
Although our distancing from nature began several thousand years ago with advancements in agriculture and social order, it is the age of industry to which we owe our modern regard for nature. The growth of cities allowed for a separation between people and nature and our obsession with convenience and efficiency beckoned a new perspective on the environment. With technological advancements, nature became something we were no longer apart of and entirely subject to, but something that we could control and profit off of. The growth of industry enabled humans to truly dominate the landscape and disrupt the natural systems that have been in place for billions of years.
As we have removed ourselves further and further from nature, we have developed a willing ignorance of our role and relationship within it. With the growth of cities and trade we have moved from a subsistent, sustainable economy to one of greed and exploitation. Humans have always had an impact on the environment, but with the age of industry that impact has been ultra-magnified. Population growth has been exponentiated, cities have become the primary place of residence, and the majority of the world is now out of touch with the workings of nature.
Although every species plays a unique role in the biosphere and inherently has its own impact, not every species has the cognitive ability to measure their influence or the capacity to change it. Humans are unique in that respect, which is the root of the problem. We are capable of understanding our influence over nature, but we tend to ignore the Earth’s reaction to our presence. I am not arguing that we purposefully degrade nature, but that environmental degradation is an inherent trait of our population’s perpetual progression. We know we are crippling the environment. We have the ability to do something about it. Therefore, we should make change where change is necessary.
The size of our population and its incessant desire to expand has an obvious impact on the environment. However, that impact is magnified with the demands of industry and capitalism. In his book, Regarding Nature, Andrew McLaughlin identifies industrialism and the capitalist mindset as being especially influential on our regard for nature: “The economic systems that we construct and live within are, I suggest, the primary immediate causes of our relations between society and the rest of nature” (Regarding Nature, P. 12). Further causing a perceived division from nature is the economic structure we have allowed to infect most of the world.
Capitalism is an especially destructive force in our regard for nature as it encourages a monetary-driven social hierarchy based on the encroaching exploitation of our world’s resources. Our relationship with nature has now become purely economic. We do not associate ourselves as a part of nature because we use it for profit. Forests are cut down for the profits of the lumber industry and to make room for livestock. Animals that we are undoubtedly related to, that have senses and the ability to socialize are slaughtered by the billions to feed an increasingly carnivorous population. Resources such as oil and food are all unevenly distributed throughout the world and therefore used as a platform for profit. All the while the environment bears the grunt of our greed.
We not only encourage a division amongst ourselves through the commoditization of the world’s resources, we encourage a division between man and nature. In order to reconstruct our views of nature and understand our place within it, it is important to reconsider our relationship with each other and our surroundings. As Aldo Leopold puts it, man “…has not learned to think like a mountain” (A Sand County Almanac, P. 11). We have to consider ourselves as part of a bigger picture. Industry and capitalism rely heavily on ignorance and individualism. However, the reality is that we are all dependent upon each other in one way or another.
IV. Time for Change
Humans play a vital role in nature just like everything else. What separates us from nature though, is the ability to understand our place within it. This cognitive capacity of ours has historically been the cause of a perceived division between man and nature. However, in order to achieve a sustainable future in which humans assume a more natural role and have less of an impact it is imperative that we reconsider our role and relationship with nature. A change in the way we regard nature has obvious political, economic, and social repercussions, but our cognitive ability obliges us to reevaluate our position in the world rather than continue to degrade it.
There are a number of ways in which we can begin to reconsider our relationship with nature, but all of which require an enormous effort. Through a universal education curriculum, it is possible to encourage people everywhere to consider themselves as part of a larger picture. By teaching people about the environment, evolution, and ecology, we can provide them with the tools for change. Lewis Mumford imagined a social revolution brought about by a change in values through educational reform: “The humanizing of technology and the protection of diversity were both contingent on a fundamental change in values” (Minding Nature, P.219). In order to bring about necessary change it is critical that people take action. Through a universal environmental education program it is possible to galvanize people into forming new ideas and opinions of the world and to understand their place within it.
A universal education program would go a long way in encouraging change in how we view each other and our environment. Changing attitudes are a primary component in achieving a sustainable future – one in which nature is allowed to run its course without human intervention. Gregg Easterbrook discusses a similar future in his The Ecorealist Manifesto: “…the long-term purview of nature might be combined with the short-term insights of the genus Homo in ways that allow people, machines, and nature to work together for each other’s mutual benefit” (The Ecorealist Manifesto, P. 1). In order for the Earth to retain its balance, it is important that we not overstep our bounds as a species. This requires a universal effort to reevaluate our relationship with nature and make adjustments as needed.
After thousands of years of societal evolution, we find ourselves at the peak of technology and pollution. We are already seeing the effects of our industrial ways through the extinction of species, the melting of glaciers, and the destruction of the landscape. As we continue to disturb the world’s natural systems we are recognizing a rippling of consequences. Our recognition of these effects suggests that our role in nature is far more influential than it should be. Therefore it is necessary that we make major changes and that we make them soon.
Our role within nature should be one of subsistence rather than commercialization. We have exploited the world for too long and the consequences of doing so are everywhere. As everything is related to everything, we have no right to infringe on the livelihood of any other species. In fact, our cognitive ability and understanding of nature obliges us to maintain the integrity of the environment. So we must change how we influence the land. We must respect the natural order of things and find a way to live accordingly.
Although a change in attitudes would require a complete overhaul of our current economic and political structures, it is something that must be done. As history shows, if we continue to encourage expansion and development it is very likely that we will see major effects in climate and ecology. We have seen the destructive nature of industrialism and capitalism. We can predict and measure the effects of our actions on the environment. We know we are headed in the wrong direction and we are expecting major consequences. So why don’t we do something about it?
- McLaughlin, Andrew. Regarding Nature: Industrialism and Deep Ecology. Albany: State University of New York, 1993. Print.
- Leopold, Aldo, Charles Walsh Schwartz, and Aldo Leopold. A Sand County Almanac. With Other Essays on Conservation from Round River. New York: Oxford UP, 1966. Print.
- Macauley, David. Minding Nature: The Philosophers of Ecology. New York: Guilford, 1996. Print.
- Easterbrook, Gregg. “The Ecorealist Manifesto.” The Atlantic. Atlantic Media Company, 1995. Web. 13 Apr. 2014.