The Pros And Cons Of Biophilia

As a child, I unraveled nature’s beauty and existence. Each new experience brought me feelings of excitement and joy, sparkling my imagination and igniting my curiosity. It all seemed so large back then. Oceans appeared endless as they reached towards the horizon. Treetops seemed to make friends with the puffy-looking clouds as they soared to the sky. Over the years however, as I have grown older and life has become more complex, I am beginning to think less and less about the natural world around me. I glimpse sunset stuck in rush-hour traffic trying to return school after debate practices and only listen to the pitter-patter of the rain when there’s a storm outside. Forests and oceans seemed less appealing as they became intertwined with the urban development. In a way, I was becoming more and more distanced from the so-called nature. So, with an overwhelming desire for adventure and to escape the masses, my family and I drove to Big Bend National Park in Southwest Texas last summer.

Albert Einstein once said, “Look deep into nature, and you will understand everything better”. The Call of the Wild, a novel by Jack London, shows exactly this. People must live in harmony with nature, or it will destroy them.

The biological approach states that “all thoughts, feeling & behavior ultimately have a biological cause” (Simply Psychology). This approach says that we are affected by biological factors. Biological factors are “anything which affects the function and behavior of a living organism. Internally, this factor can be a physical, physiological, chemical, neurological, or genetic condition

As human beings we’re all affluent to live on this fascinating place called earth. We live everyday normally just as every other human, animal or insect. But we eradicate insects and animals as if they aren’t as important as we are. Nature is being inherently demolished by humans who are oblivious to know that all living things on the earth have a purpose . However, Annie Dillard, well-known for her ambiguous nonfiction books help support the importance of nature and why we shouldn't intrude upon it. For example, Dillard’s excerpt from “The Fixed” about a Polyphemus Moth uses countless rhetorical strategies to construct a compelling message about the peace and beauty of nature, but it also illustrates how easily mankind can destroy it. Therefore, a part of nature is to be naturally

As reading this “journal” the topic that has come to my attention is how a lot of these “nature writers” are looking at nature either as a positive or negative experience. Most of these shorts journals are looking at nature for not only for what it is, but what it offers, for example in the short “The Marginal World written by Rachel Carson she portrays “"The Shore is an ancient world, for as long as there has been an earth and sea there has been this place of the meeting of land and water. Yet it is a world that keeps alive the sense of continuing creation and of the relentless drive for life. Each time that I enter it, I gain some new awareness of its beauty and its deeper meanings, sensing that intricate fabric of life by which one creature is linked with another, and each with its surroundings."(481). Based off this quote, we can see that a lot of these authors did not only see nature as something that could be touched, but rather seen as a spiritual entity.

‘The sheer popularity’ of stimulating nature or using nature as ad space ‘demands that we acknowledge, even respect, their cultural importance,’ suggests Richtel. Culturally important, yes. But the logical extension of synthetic nature is the irrelevance of ‘true’ nature— the certainty that it’s not even worth looking at. (Louv lines 9-19)

The topic of sexual orientation is both sensitive and controversial. This is evident in events, such as the Pride Parade, and also in media, where authoritative figures preach against it and speak of its “sinful nature” (Emmanuele, Blanchard, Camperio-Ciani, & Bancroft, 2010). Sexual orientation exists in various forms, it differs in the way it is viewed by different cultures, and researchers propose different perspectives to explain the emergence of an individual 's sexual orientation. In the discourse of sexual orientation,

These are issues that I often ponder. I realize this consciousness is atypical of many of my compatriots. However, the roots of my compulsive musings are not wholly random because I was subjected to much similar thinking from an early age. Having grown up in a region where civilization and development were slow in coming, and where trees outnumber cornstalks and coal mines corn silos, we had ample opportunity to reflect on man’s relationship to nature. My parents are two well-educated, biologically trained individuals with an almost obsessive need to be outdoors. They met, so the story goes, in a graduate school class when my mother asked my father for his pocketknife to scrape moss from a tree trunk. It was love amongst the bryophytes. They spent several years trekking all over the U.S. on vacations to national forests and monuments and deserts and mountains, and my arrival on the scene did not cease their wanderings. Though I did restrict the locale. There are numerous pictures of one of my parents standing on some wooded ridge with the peak of my red hat sticking up over their shoulder.

Since the beginning of time, mankind has depended on nature for survival. Although, throughout the years society has learned to manipulate nature for their own selfish advantages. In the passage written by Richard Louv, he utilizes rhetorical questions, repetition, and a tone of nostalgia to stress that sad truth about the separation of mankind and nature.

The interconnection between the human race and nature is complex, and can be interpreted an infinite amount of ways. Mark Jenkins’ ‘King of the Dirtbags’ and Wendell Berry’s ‘An Entrance to the Woods’ are both very similar in the ways they represent philosophical ideas regarding the relationship between the modern man and nature. Both literary pieces discuss the benefits of simplicity, and explain how mankind has a tendency to overcomplicate much of what they develop. The two authors also share the idea in their writings that the ability to adapt to different environments is a crucial trait in evolution and progression as a society. Another major concept that is prevalent in both of the author’s pieces is that man must be able to reach beyond his comfort zone to understand nature’s consistency throughout time.

Humans are animals. Even as developed, personalized, and intelligent as we are, we share a deep connection with every living thing. However, many of the problems in the world result from the human belief that technology is more powerful and can replace the serene, perfect essence of nature. I believe that a connection with nature can heal wounds and help humans find balance in their lives.

The sad injustice to nature is that man has forgotten the biotic connection between the natural world and humanity. Whether protecting nature is a spiritual experience or simply a means for survival, nature is as much a part of human life as the human themselves. The separation created by modern environmentalism between human and non-human entities can only be reunited if people learn to view life as a part of nature. The scary part about that thought, however, is will that be enough now? Only time can

Hypothesis: “We propose that affiliating with nature affords us the opportunity to be fully flourishing human beings.”

Since the beginning of civilization humanity has adopted a subjugating stance toward nature. Ecological exploitation has become the de facto standard, contributing to the illusion of self-subsistence provided by modern society. This mindset is untenable given humanities reliance on the natural world, as best demonstrated by the critical importance of various parts of the environment to humanities continued existence. This includes the importance of biodiversity to medicinal advancement and climate adaptation, the role of insects in the renewal of the biosphere, and the importance of the environment for humanities psychological health.

Despite what mankind would like to believe, humans are animals. As multi-celled organisms, we consume other organic matter, change the land for own uses as a beaver would build a dam, and as other mammals, we are all fed breast milk from our mothers when we were young. Yet there is this disconnection and alienation of the human race towards other species. Moreover, through fear of taking action, the convenience provided to us if we simply choose to ignore the environment, and the alienation of other species that are endangered by our actions, the hostile and uncaring attitude of humans towards nature is the core reason for many of the problems in our environment today.