Getting Along With Nature:

First and foremost, there is a distinction/idea that must become prevalent within any discussion of environmental philosophy or ethics. This idea, stated specifically by Berry, reads as such:

"Pure Nature, anyhow, is not good for humans to live, and humans do not want to live in it...It is equally true that a condition that is purely human is not good for people to live in..."

Thus, we have a necessary dichotomy between the natural world and the human world that exist both separately but, as Berry argues, co-dependent from each other. We live, quite happily, in a position of one foot in nature and the other within the techno-sphere. It then becomes apparent that we, as humans, hold a conscious responsibility to "get along with nature".

According to Berry, this is not only the correct thing to do but it is necessary thing to do. Necessary in the sense that we as humans have achieved a point/stance where nature not only surrounds us but has become an integral part of living as a sentient being. As Berry so aptly states, "people cannot live apart of nature. And yet, people cannot live in nature without changing it". This idea is not so similar to the idea that humans come from nature and have always existed within nature and therefore become malevolent to the nature around them through their destructive tendencies. Instead, the idea of nature has become a source of inspiration, positivism, and hopefulness within the human psych. The result is a psychiatric need for a source of virgin nature that comes to represent both escape and something that is wonderful and exists outside the realm of human perception. We need nature for this purpose. It stands as a shining beacon within our psych that the techno-sphere has not over-enveloped our consistent call back to pure nature and that there exists a place of primeval essence and origin.

Thus, it is necessary, at a our core, to get along with nature. Recently, however, a new phenomenon has seemed to have emerged within the natural world in that nature is getting along with us. Berry makes a reference to the book The Desert Smells Like Rain and explains that there are instances where nature is left to it's own devices and, because of its consistent connection within the human realm, begins to drastically decrease. This, at least for me, prompts a few questions/concerns...

If we are at the point where nature has now become dependent upon our actions, do we now have dominion/authority in deciding its fate within our world?

Additionally, if we hold such a symbiotic/co-dependent relationship with nature, is it proper for nature to rely on us? Would it be morally/ethically better to insure that nature becomes an independent entity (non-dependent on our actions) or is it just a repercussion of human nature that nature must "learn" to cope with us to insure its own survival?