Nature and Human
NATURE AND HUMAN Nature and human have always interacted throughout history, and the interaction of the two forces has evolved into a series of demands that people have put on nature to survive and develop. By contrast a minority of people have questioned the state of things and tried to figure out how humanity and nature can interact and develop together, and through their questioning they have come to define their idea as ecological cosmology. To begin with it is important to always start from the word itself, as each and every word has a meaning firstly by itself, and then it can acquire more depth through its use in a given context.
Ecological cosmology comes from the Greek ‘oikos’ and ‘logos’ , these two words define respectively a ‘dwelling place’ and a ‘discourse’ or ‘intelligible manifestation’. Ecological is something that deals with the environment in which one is, and on what can be said of that environment. Cosmology is instead related to ‘kosmos’ or order and its intelligible manifestation, thus it can be said that there is an intelligible order or a logic to how things happen.
Ecological cosmology can be seen as the order in which things happen in a given environment, and many versions of it exist, as many people with different backgrounds thought of defining the order of things depending on how themselves and their environment are shaped or are going to be shaped. “The mythological process deals not only with natural objects, but with the creative potencies whose original product is consciousness itself. So it is here that our expl anation breaks through into objectivity and becomes wholly objective (Shelling, 207). Ecological cosmology has been seen as a mythological force, of creative and positive nature, which comes to define elements of nature, and the perceptiveness of them that people come to have. Talking about nature and ecological cosmology becomes as a result part of a discourse that does not limit itself on discussing how a myth can come to be seen in nature, but also on the fact that a myth becomes an object that people can see in nature and attribute a representation to it – that can be viewed on how people see and define elements and objects within nature and how these objects happen to effect the relationship of mankind and nature. It is worth noting that no moral cause ever got very far that could not speak to religious conviction, drawing on the deeper sensibilities that guide public opinion even in our more secular era (Scully, pp. 12-13). ” Throughout the evolution of mankind, people have gone through different phases of ecological cosmology and at one point or another – ecological cosmology happened to be tied in with Christian principles to be viewed as something more approachable as a way of being within nature, rather than the sole use of nature.
For instance at one moment or the other nature has been perceived as an element of God’s creations, in which people were to live abiding the rule of God, and using nature to further man’s position on earth. It is interesting to see in fact how the evolution of Christianity has put people first as representation of God’s will on Earth and then after only at a second time, people have seen nature as something to needy of care.
Interestingly enough nature has been for most part of humanity’s history the giver in a relationship – care towards it instead has always come at a second time and out of the feeling of guilt rather than respect in a balanced environment, as solely humanity and people have seen balance in the goods generated by nature.
It is also worth noting that in times when nature got attention it has been mostly the attention of an intellectual elite, and even in cultural movement such as romanticism – attention to nature and its care have solely been regarded as a pastime, like for example when in the late 1800s the British high society started to find interest in gardening and even that has been solely related to an elite status.
Intellectuals and elites have been able to move society forward within limits, but sadly those limits haven’t been altered too much or challenged even within those circles. Results have been many compared to a level of development that mankind has obtained out of the use of the many fruits of mother nature, it is interesting to point out that those phases of interest in nature have been mostly occurring after intense industrial development’s periods – and because of that they have become the hadow after the light of successes of science and scientific research. Yet those phases have brought onto people the harsh reality and needs that follow advancements as those have a price, and results that not only affect increasing social conditions, but also that affect people with challenging bad health conditions and a state of realization to people that at any of hose junctions realize the damages in nature’s ecosystems.
Furthermore it is interesting to realize how Renaissance, Enlightenment, Romanticism, Impressionism and Expressionism have challenged the status quo on a cultural level. All those cultural, artistic and ‘elitist’ movements have allowed men to have a reality check with its contemporary community, and given they all developed a specific code in any given location in which they took place.
They have started a constant discourse that has led people to one’s realization nature and humanity need to re-balance one another – and the balance to be found is not as easy to come by as it is expected even after constant technical development in both industrial and artisanal methods, the situation people are put in front of holds many challenges, and the biggest one of them involves a change in understanding and dealing with nature all together. erably failed. But he was a humble seeker of Truth. He was a man with exceptional sincerity, honesty and truthfulness. For him, understanding meant action. Once any principle appealed to him, he immediately began to translate that in practice. He did not flinch from taking risks and did not mind confessing mistakes. No opposition, scorn or