View of Nature and Humanitys Relationships - Essay Example

View of Nature and Humanity’s Relationships Views of Nature Nature as Instruments. Implicating nature as an instrument was evident in Bacon’s repetitive verb-referral of the term “use.” For instance, the term “use” appeared thrice in the paragraph illustrating the Lower Region. This frequency is enough to reflect and substantiate the view of nature as instruments. Instrumentation purposes vary from burial to horticulture, medicinal or treatment purposes, harnessing of raw materials, et cetera. The same view was described by Linnaeus; “when we follow the series of created things, and consider how providentially one is made for the sake of another, the matter comes to this, that all things are made for the sake of man” (3). While Bacon recognized nature as an instrument to human needs, Linnaeus furthered this by pointing out how every aspect of nature was designed to be made useful for humans. Nature as Local. Interestingly, Bacon implicated that nature’s instrumentation was largely determined by location. While burial was done in the Lower Region, observatories were situated in the Upper Region. Thus, nature presents a limit by which instrumentation is permissible or not advisable, and this fact was respected by the people of Salomon’s House. The same fact was implicated by Carolus Linnaeus in his The Economy of Nature. His recognition of the co-location of habitat and particular species of flora and fauna was expressed through his acknowledgement of the dissimilar patterns of seasons, as well as the variance in soil composition (Linnaeus 2). Moreover, Linnaeus explicitly expressed this: “How wise, how beautiful is the agreement between the plants of every country, and its inhabitants, and other circumstances!” (2). Nature as the Framework of Imitation. Bacon’s view suggested that the workings of nature served as the mold by which humans replicate certain processes for the desired output. This imitation was explicitly detailed: “We use them likewise for the imitation of natural mines...,” or “We have heats in imitation of the sun’s and heavenly bodies’ heats, that pass divers[e] inequalities...” (Bacon 3-5). Thus, it is safe to assume that early processes that were said to be ‘invented’ by early humans were probably forms of mimicry out of the observable natural processes. Nature as Something to be Improved. The recognition of nature’s imperfection was prevalent; yet, this imperfection was viewed by Bacon only in the context of the human’s desired output. This was pronounced in the field of horticulture wherein the practice of grafting, inoculating, and growing de-seeded plants was common (Bacon 4). Moreover, the pursuit of understanding the effects of flora and fauna on humans, whether good or bad, was inherent in designed structures or enclosures (Bacon 4). The same view was perceived by Linneaus; he went on to explain that by virtue of human reasoning, humans are able to propagate aspects of nature (i.e., vegetables), and asserted that if nature was “left to herself, could scarcely effect” (3). Thus, Linnaeus, just like Bacon, saw human intervention as the necessary means to enable nature to become fully or wholly purposeful. Nature as an Unending Cycle of Life and Death. Linnaeus depicted this cycle through the vegetable-to-mold and mold-to-vegetable analogy. His main point was that vegetation is comprised of the same composite -- the black mold; thus, he asserted, “So that the tallest tree is, properly speaking, nothing but mold wonderfully compounded with air and water...” (Linnaeus 3). Consequently, this view implicates how inevitable and normal death is. Moreover, death is viewed a necessity for a fresh beginning in the cycle of natural creation. Nature as Designed to be Biodiverse. The implications of nature’s biodiversity were successfully presented by Linnaeus. He proffered biodiversity as the solution in controlling the population of species, the probability of passing abnormalities, and its consequent threat to human existence (Linnaeus 3). In other words, Linnaeus viewed nature’s biodiversity as the ultimate balancing factor in the scale between life’s existence and extinction. Humanity’s Relationship with Nature According to Bacon, nature is part of meeting their (i.e., people of Salomon’s House) ends. These ends consist of acquiring knowledge and further extending the capacity and scope of human effectuation (Bacon 3). This type of human-nature relationship was founded by the popular and common view of nature as instruments. Another aspect of the human-nature relationship was based on human subjectivity. Bacon assessed the biodiversity, which was proffered by nature, as entirely subject to the qualms and appetite of humans. This was strongly expressed in horticulture wherein some plants were made to undergo ‘artificial’ processes to yield the desired taste: “We make them also by art greater much than their nature; and their fruit greater and sweeter and of differing taste, smell, colour, and figure, from their nature” (Bacon 4). While both Bacon and Linnaeus emphasized humanity’s relationship with nature as more utilitarian, Linnaeus went on to extend nature’s role as something to be discovered, admired, and as the means by which the Creator extends His Providence to humans. In other words, Linnaeus saw nature as the divine expression of the Creator and suggested that human’s responsibilities with regard to nature lied on the border of piety (Linnaeus 3). Significant Difference While both Bacon and Linnaeus centered the features of nature according to the human’s quantifying mind, Bacon’s work was considered as more human-catered, stating that almost every aspect of nature was designed to cater to human needs only. Linnaeus, on the other hand, mentioned living beings as benefactors to nature’s bounty. For instance, in describing how the parasitical plant, tillandfia, provides water through its pitcher-structure, Linnaeus proceeded to say that the collected rainwater is “preserved for thirsty men, birds, and beasts” (2). An indication here of the human’s top hierarchy as nature’s benefactor was the sequence; ‘men’ was mentioned first and ‘first’ predominantly meant top priority. Additionally, emphasis created a differing tint for each view. While Bacon’s narrative induced human creativity in maneuvering nature, Linnaeus painted his view as dominant, religious color. However, these distinctions can be so easily dismissed as both Bacon and Linnaeus founded their views to nature’s utilitarian role and human’s rein over nature. Works Cited Bacon, Francis. New Atlantis, 1627. PDF file. Linnaeus, Carolus. The Economy of Nature, 1759. PDF file. Read More