The Nature of Nature

 The Nature of Nature

 

There are times in our quest for better, longer lives where we find ourselves challenging some of our pre-conceived notions of what makes us who we are.  In these times, we are often faced with concerns regarding a general unwillingness to interfere with “nature” or the “natural order”[1].  This argument is based on the assertion that ‘artificial’ and ‘natural’ are mutually exclusive processes, an assertion that I endeavour to show to be false. 

 

What we must overcome is the separation of “us” (humanity) and “everything else”.  We are guilty of inappropriately placing humanity above nature and its processes.  Although this view is bolstered by the biblical accounts of reality where all of “creation” was made for us, it certainly wasn’t religion that invented the anthropocentric worldview.  In fact, as is shown by the work of Jean Piaget and Lawrence Kohlberg (who studied cognitive and moral development), it is perfectly reasonable for any individual or species with a burgeoning consciousness and intellect to initially imagine itself to be ‘special’, or even ‘chosen’.  Just as the cure for a child’s egocentrism is through learning and experience, the cure for a human’s anthropocentrism is a proper education.

 

Day after day, evidence supporting evolutionary theory is mounting, and the holes that creationists continually attack are being filled (just as the gaps in the periodic table of the elements eventually were since its inception in the 19^th century).  Molecular and archaeological evidence shows how all species, including humans, emerged through a slow evolutionary process[2].  From this perspective, one is not only exposed to the various (and impressive) ways in which we differ from other species, but also on the many important ways in which we are alike.  So alike, in fact, that it seems inescapable that while we may be lesser slaves to our environment than other species, we are still very much an inseparable part of it.

 

Being a product of the natural process of evolution (though no species is ever a final product, always a “work in progress”), it is safe to say that as the actions and behaviours of the birds or the beavers are “natural” occurrences, so to are the actions and behaviours of humans.  While we often use the term ‘artificial’ to describe any result of human activity, and while such a term can be a useful label, there is no reason for “artificial” to mean “unnatural”.  The way in which we use and manipulate our environment to suit our lifestyles differ only from other animals only in scope and sophistication.  Although that power makes us more dangerous to the sustainability of the ecosystem as we know it, it does not make us, in any way, less “natural”.

 

I would say instead that artifice, rather than being completely separate from nature is actually, due to our own “naturalness” a particular category of nature. This use of ‘artifice’ is not only more accurate to reality but it is also closer to the origins of the word, which means simply, “to make”. So when we say that an apartment block is artificial, let it mean no more than when we say that a dam is beaver-made – differing only in scope and sophistication.

 

From this, it follows that everything we do or create, being borne of a creature of nature, must be considered “natural” (effectively rendering the term “unnatural” obsolete).  Without the ability to judge actions or behaviours to be good or bad based on their “naturalness”, we are left with no alternative but judge them on their own merits.  If replacing organs with ones created in a lab (by using stem cells or any other method) is ultimately undesirable, then it must be deemed so due to the consequences of the process, not due to falsely labeling it as “unnatural”, as there is no such thing.

 

 

 

 

References/Further Reading:

 

Kohlberg, L. (1981). ‘The Philosophy of Moral Development’, San Francisco: Harper & Row

 

Piaget, J. (1977). ‘The Essential Piaget’ ed. by Howard E. Gruber and J. Jacques Voneche Gruber, New York: Basic Books

---

[1] There are also questions regarding interfering with “God’s plan”, but as “He” has never fully laid out such a plan, one cannot assume to know what it is/if there is one and I must therefore ignore it, barring divine clarification.

[2] For more on the varieties of evolution responsible for the diversity of life on Earth, see my essay, “The Evolution of Evolution”