Search This Blog

Friday, October 8, 2010

Separation

After thinking about all of our current events and past readings there is a lot to think about. Right now, I feel like I am growing father and farther away from understanding what "nature" is. There are so many ideas from Tocqueville's arrogance, Emerson's transcendence, and Abbey's not-so-solitary solitaire, all of which not only contradict each other, but contradict the realities of the environment that we face everyday (in a world post-industrial revolution).
The idea of "nature" therefore differs in so many ways with each passing author, environmentalist, and generation of the both.
However, will we ever truly understand the essence of the natural world? Can we? Is it a truth that we can never understand because of our humanity? Nature does not have humanity (if I can assume). Therefore, we cannot perceive it from our own interpretations - because are interpretations are invalid as humans.
Stemming off of that, with our lack of validity, we may not even be able to interpret each other. Humans live in their own reality that varies from each individual. If we all live in separate realities, then it may be impossible to actually connect with anyone or anything. Its as if we are in separate realities to each other, then "nature" is a different universe to all of us.
Essentially we don't understand nature, we don't understand each other, and barely understand ourselves.

This is pretty much what the last lecture left me with.
If that made sense.

1 comment:

  1. I like your thought process here. Especially this part: Nature does not have humanity (if I can assume). Therefore, we cannot perceive it from our own interpretations - because are interpretations are invalid as humans.

    I agree, but must be devil's advocate. I cannot help but always returning to the same: it is not possible that we are NOT also nature. But as far as understanding any of it, with this I submit that I being but a fraction of it can neither comprehend the whole.

    ReplyDelete