The term 'Nature' is well acquainted to all of us. But we have distinct notions about it. I am not saying that we have no proper idea about nature, but the idea is abstract one. So we understand separate meanings of this term as per our thought which varies culture to culture or man to man.
We often say 'Mother Nature' when we perceive one side of it. Everything in this world have born into the lap of nature including us -- I mean the Human being. each and every species of animated world as well as the material things of inanimate world begin their journey and reach at their final destination inside the nature. Nature gives birth to us, gives us food to survive, and at the end of a certain period ends us to create a new space for newcomers. That is why generally we think nature as 'mother'.
But when we face the natural evils like disasters, plagues etc. we don't consider it as 'mother' anymore. We then use a term 'Evil Nature' instead of it.
Sometimes we consider mountains, rivers, oceans, forests, birds, beasts, insects, reptiles etc. as nature. When we become pleased after enjoying a pleasant view, we say it 'beauty of the nature'. But when we perceive a bare truth of food-chain, we may not think in same way.
In some cultures people think nature as God, while others think it as creation of God. According to theist interpretation, God has created nature to nurture the animal kingdom and He maintains the balance of it. But atheists are not eager to accept this view. They deny the existence of God and admit the rules of nature which work by themselves.
Some people think that, man is the best creation of nature and nature is the reign of Great Human Race. No need to mention that this point of view is called as 'anthropocentric ecology' or 'shallow ecology'. On the other hand, the view point of 'non-anthropocentric ecology' or 'deep ecology' is quite opposite.
From prehistoric period men have started to think about nature. Obviously not to satisfy their 'thirst for knowledge'. When wildfires used to burn their habitation, when the storm or the rain ailed them, when dreadful thunders terrorized them, they worshipped those horrible powers of the nature. Because they were helpless like other animals. But human being is not just like other species. We have not any natural weapons like sharp horns or claws or canines or physical strength or velocity or so on, to protect ourselves in the food-chain. We don't need those. Because we have 'human brain', nature's most valuable gift to us. Though it was not much evaluated in prehistoric period, it was even so, the 'human brain'. They did not escape the problems, instead became curious about those and tried to understand them in their own way. As the consequence of that curiosity the Great Human Race became superior in this planet. Along with the evolution of human mind, this curiosity towards the nature has increased and 'most probably' we have solved a few mysteries of this mysterious nature.
I think, still now we don't know the nature properly as we don't know much about the human mind. We do experience our surroundings with the help of five sense organs. But these sense organs are not helpful to attain proper knowledge about the mysterious nature. Just like, we have set out in an endless ocean which is an 'extreme jeopardy' with the help of five broken compasses. Whatever we know today as 'true' tomorrow it will be proved as 'untrue'. Nothing in nature is 'ultimate truth'.
There is an interesting illustration in Jain School of Indian Philosophy about 'truth'. According to Jain epistemology, general people (who have not achieved liberation) perceive the world partly. They never have entire knowledge or the 'truth' about world. So their knowledge is partly true. For example, when four blind men are describing an elephant after feeling it with their hands, one of them says, "The elephant is just like a pillar" ---- he only could feel just one leg of that elephant, while the another says, "The elephant is just like a radish" ---- he could feel only one tusk of that creature. They are not completely wrong but partly true. When we try to know the nature, we only can know a side of it. When we go to the another side, it appears in a different way to us.
Neither I am a scientist nor a philosopher. I don't know who is right and who is wrong. I have a notion of nature in my mind. I like to observe everything, try to understand all the events with my pure intuition. I don't accept any hypothesis until it is not clear to my reason, to my logic. I have keen interest about Nature as well as Human Mind. I think there is a connection between two.
I am going to share my thoughts with you.
If you don't like the way of my thinking, then you can scold me in comment (if I deserve your time and attention)
If you do like it, please encourage me.
Thank You.
No comments:
Post a Comment