What is Nature? What is Human compatibility with Nature?
Opinion from the Internet on Nature’s system, is evolutionary plan and our Human role in it:
“Of course it all depends on what you mean by ‘nature’. That word has been used in so many mutually contradictory senses down the centuries that it is hard to know whether it has a determinate meaning at all. Humanity is a product of ‘the natural world’ in some sense, but we also have a naturally evolved consciousnes, which gives us some ability to comprehend our world and to plan ahead. We emerge from nature but we also stand outside it and in some sense opposed to it. We use our natural forces purposefully to regulate and control our interactions with it. And by changing it we change ourselves. That’s pretty much Marx’s view, which is about the most coherent I have come across to date.
As you say, we have a dual nature: we are both of nature but also opposed to it. And yes through social learning we are capable of overcoming our instinctual natures, at least to some degree. (I, like all motorcyclists, had to learn how to identify and overcome an instinct to target fixate in the presence of an perceived threat. On a motorcycle you tend to hit anything you fixate upon and that’s not good for survival. This is an interesting piece of social learning which is capable of overcoming a biological instinct.)
Where we part company, I think, is on this question of whether nature has a plan. I am a methodological naturalist so I don’t have a teleological concept of the world. I’m also uncertain about your belief that we have to follow ‘nature’s laws’. Once again that depends on what you mean by ‘nature’. We are bound by biological and physical law, of course, but the world we have created stands to some degree outside that as a product of human purpose and planning, I would say that we have first to understand the structures and movements of the societies we have created, and then, by acting upon that understanding, we have to recreate ourselves by recreating our social world.”
Yes, the expression “Nature” is confusing. I mean by it the actual system, “reality” we can sense, perceive around us, the “place” where our life unfolds.
This system is based on laws that facilitate development, life, and these laws are unchanging, all together we could call them the laws of integrality.
We already revealed some of these laws, some of the forces acting in the system, scientists are trying hard to assemble them into a comprehensive system, into a “theory of everything”, or “standard model”, so far unsuccessfully.
I just saw the news on a completely new understanding about the Universe, that it is more homogenous than previously thought and this might require a completely new physics to model, approach. At the same time, quantum physics also hints that how we see reality right now is completely different to how reality actually is.
But going back to the “laws of integrality” to make them a bit more accessible we can use it own biological body as an example.
The body is a connection of myriad of diverse, seemingly incompatible cells, organs not to mention the trillions of microbes that are also part of our biological system.
For the body to live and be healthy am overall mutuality, constant, mutually complementing cooperation is required between all the cells, organs, microbes.
And in that cooperation, they all make their calculations - of course instinctively, without actual “Human-like” awareness - for the sake of the collective, above any “individualistic” calculations. The moment such individualism overtakes the collective behavior, sickness, cancer develops.
Humans are different. Although we also exist in a closed, integral, Natural system - within Humanity and humanity within Nature - our interest calculations are primarily individualistic, moreover we mostly succeed, survive at each other’s expense.
The Human bubble progressed, survived like this until now, but we have gone beyond the limit “Nature” can tolerate. As a result the perpetual crisis situations, social divisions, threat of war increase.
In this respect we are on schedule to repeat the usual vicious historic cycles, plunging into our own Great Depression and predictable world war only 80 years after the last one.
The “purpose” of our consciousness is to recognize our incompatibility with “Nature’s” integrality and purposefully, methodically develop, acquire compatibility. And this is the same purpose for which we were born opposite, outside of the system with the initial incompatibility.
Of course, this is where we remain “theoretical” as long as we don’t have an “upgraded consciousness, perception that can view Nature’s system “as it is”. Until then we don’t have the ability to research the system “from within” to see if indeed there is such a person developmental plan.
Though there has been a few, unique, empirical scientists through history who achieved that upgrade and they write about the purposeful, deterministic evolutionary plan and it own role in it.
The true duality we are capable of is not a given, that is something we need to methodically, actively acquire, by obtaining the conscious similarity with the system’s integrality in contrast to our initial individualistic incompatibility.
Through a different example - since you mentioned Marx - we could say that our inherent nature is raw Capitalistic, while Nature is Communistic. We have to find adaptation to Nature’s Communism without oppressing, erasing our innate Capitalism through a very special, scientific method.