A creature adapted for wonder

"Religion functions at the boundary where the knowable faces the unknown and the unknowable," says Bruce Deverell, in this "guest" contribution. This post is written in response to Dan Rhoads' post on his Migrations blog, Religion and Ethnocentrism: Is Religion Adaptive?

Religion and Ethnocentrism
Is Religion Adaptive?

Mechanisms by which religion
may have positively impacted
adaptive fitness

How might they have occurred?

A response

Dan, I hope you don't mind me joining in the discussion. Our son John Bryden shared your blog site with me. I have been a bit slow to respond. My brain has not adapted to sending well thought out arguments in quick time on the internet which blogging seems to require.

I am conscious of dealing with someone from a different tribe!

My response is based on my experience of living and working in the Pacific Islands for most of our working lives (as a Protestantminister). Recently I have renewed my involvement in interfaith dialogue and have visited a Moslem Mosque and attended the combined annual meeting of the Council of Christians and Jews and the Council of Christians and Moslems in Auckland with a woman from each faith talking about preparing food for special celebrations. This involvement will keep me in touch with the religious side of the discussion.

I am also drawing on the five books that I have been reading in thepast year or two including my introduction to the book Pacific Rituals: Living or Dying (details below). I do not normally read widely on asubject but select a book which may reflect original thinking in aparticular area and stay with that over a period of time. These five books provide me with different perspectives that may be more or less pertinent to the issues you raise.

But first I try to identify clarify my understanding of religion and religious experience in a series of assertions about religion and religious experience that I have called 'thesis' statements. This is followed by some definitions of religion. (It is not clear to me from your first article what your understanding of religion is).

Religion and Religious Experience

WONDER

God does not die on the day when we cease to believe in a personal deity,
but we die on the day when our lives cease to be illumined by the steady radiance,
renewed daily, of a wonder, the source of which is beyond all reason.

Dag Hammarskjold, former General Secretary of the United Nations, in Markings p64

Theses

Human beings have always lived in a known world surrounded by the unknown. “Scientific knowledge is like an island in an ocean of the unknown” (statement by a bioethicist in a BBC interview).

Religion functions at the boundary where the knowable faces the unknown and the unknowable. The boundary changes with the increase of knowledge but a boundary remains. The boundary can also be thought of as a horizon. (Rosenberg)

The response of awe, fear, wonder, dread in the face of events and experiences which transcend normal knowledge, explanation and understanding is at the very heart of human experience that may be called religious. This experience is not confined to 'religious' people.

Human communities have special places, people, times, events... which are believed to be sacred (tapu) and filled with a special kind of holy power (mana). These sacred places,objects, times, words...must not be lightly played around with as they seem to have a fundamental function of giving order and meaning to society over a period of time.

Rituals are the means by which these events and experiences are symbolised, remembered and relived from generation to generation and recognised as sacred. Rituals are a focal point for understanding religions. (Pacific Rituals)

Humans are conscious beings with the ability not only to know but to know that they know (the capacity for conscious reflection), and to know that they are known. This capacity gives humans knowledge of their world involving recognising, reflecting, remembering , imagining, naming, symbolising, ritualising...

From the beginning of history humans sought to name in a personal way these difficult to understand and explain events and experiences which impinge on their daily lives. Such events seem to reveal some kind of intervening living presence and intention. Human beings want to give names to these experiences that are personal, whether they be regarded as spirits, gods, some kind of supreme being or simply forces of nature.

When religious people or scientists lose the sense of wonder they begin to find it hard to adapt – they die (Hammarskjold above).

Some Definitions of Religion

Some definitions of religion from the The Oxford Shorter Dictionary in historical order:

• religion (Latin): an obligation (as of an oath), a bond between man and the gods, reverence for the gods;
  

1. A state of life bound by monastic vows; the religious life
2. Action or conduct indicating a belief in, reverence for, and desire to please, a divine ruling power; the exercise or practice or rites or observances implying this.
3. A particular system of faith and worship.
4. Recognition on the part of man of some higher unseen power as having control of his destiny, as being entitle to obedience, reverences, and worship; the general mental and moral attitude resulting from this relief, with reference to its effect upon the individual or the community; personal or general acceptance of this feelings a standard of spiritual and practical life.

A tribe is a territorial social organisation of people descended from a common ancestor. Territorial boundaries protect the tribe but they are also places where interaction takes place with others. Since they are often places of uncertainty and dispute they are often regarded as taboo areas.

Perspectives from Books I have been Reading

In this my first response I list the five books I have been reading with a brief indication of their subject matter and a hint of potential relevance to your statement that “a more rigorous explanation of the mechanisms by which religion may have positively impacted adaptive fitness. How might that have occurred?”

Then I provide a summary of Barbour's understanding of where the theory of evolution is at now. I have also included the part of my introductory essay in Pacific Rituals which focusses on continuity and change.

In each of these books I am struggling with material that is beyond me. I am like a blind man touching different parts of the elephant and trying to make sense of it all with my limited faculties!

Pacific Rituals:Living or Dying is an edited collection of essays written by undergraduate theological students at the Pacific Theological College, Suva, Fiji. The students attempted to describe traditional rituals, most still being practised, from different their island cultures. My introductory essay raises the question implied in the title as to how rituals can and do adapt to the modern world and how they can contribute to that adaptation or stifle it. (see below for an extract)

Barbour's Nature, Human Nature, and God has provided me with the opportunity to catch a glimpse of how Darwin's theory of biological evolution is itself evolving. This raises questions about how the present thinking about the theory of evolution in biology affects our thinking about how religions evolve and how they change and adapt.

Rosenberg's Abraham: the First Biographical History has given me a whole new perspective on understanding the roots of Abram's story in the Sumerian culture. Rosenberg argues that the Sumerians were clear about the boundary between the known and the unknown and as they “pushed back the boundary of the unknowable” they “allowed religion its own realm”.

Rosenberg's careful study gives an imaginative account of how Abram's family migrated from the declining civilisation of Sumer towards a more or less unknown land and future. What were the essential elements of the Sumerian culture that they took with them? How did they respond to the gods of the new land? How did they adapt the world view of the Sumerians as they arrived in the land of promise?

Rosenberg's careful and imaginative study of the changing contexts of the writing of the different strands of the first five books of the Hebrew Scriptures, the Torah, show a process of adaptation to changing events and circumstances. In particular his study of how the name of Yahweh evolved in the story portrayed in the first written strand of the Torah (The “J” or Yahwist document) provides a fascinating picture of how the naming of this somewhat elusive and unpredictable presence named Yahweh evolved in the story of Abram/Abraham. This continued in the long process of writing the Hebrew Scriptures through critical events over many centuries.

This, as well as other recent Old Testament scholarship, makes the study of the Hebrew Scriptures an important case study of the question “do religions adapt and if so how?” What about other world religions?

The French atheistic antiphilosopher Bardiou in his book Saint Paul: The Foundations of Universalism sees St Paul as a the “militant figure” who “is a poet-thinker of the event”. The book provides an extremely important way of thinking in terms of the universal. Perhaps the focus on events and the crucial role of how the original thinker with poetic imagination can be a deciding factor as to whether the religious response may positively impact adaptive fitness.

Paul Davies' The Goldilocks Enigma: Why is the Universe Just Right for Life? puts everything in the big picture of the evolving universe. He writes: “For life to evolve, and then to evolve into conscious beings like ourselves, certain conditions have to be satisfied”. These include: a good supply of the various elements needed to make biomass, this life encouraging setting has to remain benign for a long time, the universe must be sufficiently old and cool to permit complex chemistry, it has to be orderly enough to permit untrammelled formation of galaxies and stars, there has to be the right sorts of forces acting between particles of matter to make stable atoms, complex molecules, planets and stars. If almost any of the basic features of the universe , from the properties of atoms to the distribution of galaxies, were different, life would probably be impossible....The universe seems just right for life in many intriguing ways....”. Religions too have long periods of equilibrium which may make it difficult to adapt to change when relative equilibrium is punctuated by unexpected events.

Evolution

The theory of evolution has been evolving. Barbour has written many important books on the relation of science and religion. I have been trying to grasp hold of what this means by wrestling with Ian Barbour's book Nature, Human Nature, and God. In chapter 2 he gives an account of where the theory of evolution is at now.

The following is my summary of the key points.See Barbour pp12-14

Darwin's theory

In Darwin's day, Newtonian mechanics was looked on as the form of science that other sciences should emulate. The Newtonian viewpoint was atomistic, deterministic, and reductionist. It was believed that the behaviour of all systems is determined by a few simple laws governing the behaviour of their smallest components. Change was thought to be the result of external forces, such as gravity acting on bodies that are themselves essentially passive. Darwin agreed with the philosophers of science who held that Newtonian physics represented the ideal for all sciences, and his theory of evolution shared many of its assumptions (Barbour p11).

Expansion of Darwinism

Some biologists postulate that:

• selection occurs at many levels:
• evolution has long periods of relatively little change indispersed with bursts of rapid speciation (punctuated equilibrium);
• natural selection has many different causes;
• internal drives drives and novel actions of organisms can initiate evolutionary changes;the autonomy of biology from physics.

Beyond Darwinism

Future understanding of evolution may be enhanced by recent work on chaos and complexity, evolution as a product of self-organisation as well as chance, new advances in embryology and developmental biology, how developmental patterns are constrained by hierarchical organisation and the possibility of a paradigm shift from Darwinism to something beyond Darwin's theory.

Self organisation, indeterminacy, top-down causality and communication of information need to be taken into account in evolutionary theory.

How does the present thinking about the theory of evolution in biology affect your thinking about how religions evolve and how they change and adapt?

Rituals: Continuity and Change

This excerpt from my introduction to Pacific Rituals: Living or Dying focusses on the issues of continuity and change. It puts the issue of religious change into a community rather than an individualist context.

In oral societies particularly, continuity is preserved by a special emphasis on conservation of forms, symbols, formulaic expressions and ritual structures, and a resistance to change. "All sacred things must be kept in their place" (Levi-Strauss 1970:10). Rituals keep sacred things in place. Nevertheless living rituals are changeable. They can adapt to situation, circumstance, people and a changing world. So while rituals conserve the traditions, the values, the central symbols of a people, they can also be sources of creativity and change. They are not unthinking human activities — or need not be so.

Susanne Langer (1976) puts forward the thesis that all human symbolising activity may rightly be called thinking. In this light the complex symbolical activity of rituals reflects intelligent corporate human behaviour. And intelligence can be seen as the adaptation of the inward sense of meaning, identity and understanding to the realities of the external world. Since rituals are human activities they contain within them the possibility and promise of adaptation and change. They can be changed, and they can also be sources of change.

Devilish or Divine

Rituals have a special way of making possible and nurturing creativity in human culture and society, and facilitating its expression. This is perhaps because on the one hand the ritual puts people in touch with hidden and unconscious sources of their being both as individuals and as a community,and on the other because they provide a symbol system with which to explore and express the unspeakable. So words, music and movements of a Fijian meke, or ritual dance can be dreamed up for a special occasion or event and enable people to make sense of the new by using the forms of the old. Or a Samoan orator working with the traditional structure and language forms of the formal orator's speech can creatively transcend the formal structure, and express what has not been expressed before in a way that leads people to a new level of perception and understanding that enables them to embrace the new in a memorable way. A living ritual conserves what is potentially creative.

Not all change, however, is creatively good. There is something very ambiguous about human ritual behaviour. It is difficult to talk about this dimension without using religious terminology. Rituals can be devilish or divine. They can be seen as human creations which are the gifts of the gods. But they can also be recognised as being captured by diabolical forces which distort, confuse, destroy. The word symbol comes from the Greek word symbolos meaning to throw or cast together. Symbols bring many things together in a single complex whole. They create a sense of wholeness. The word diabolical however comes from the Greek word diabolos, meaning to throw apart, to scatter. The diabolical scatters, causing fragmentation, disorder, chaos. It is a strange contradiction that symbols can become diabolical. And what is true of symbols is also true of rituals.

Susanne Langer uses the words (1953:46) "semblance" and "illusion" to indicate the transparent nature of humanly created art forms. The symbolic forms used in different kinds of art are humanly created semblances or illusions which enable the unspeakable inner experience of different kinds of reality to be known, expressed, talked about, and analysed. So rituals too are humanly created illusions which are at the same time the gifts of the gods. Their reality is not in what they are, but in what they point to, what they represent, what they convey to us, what they put us in touch with. And what they put us in touch with is not the tangible but the intangible, not the seeable but the unseeable, not the experience of the ordinary but the experience of transcendence in and through the ordinary and the physical. For example through the illusions of gesture and dance the sense of power and presence is conveyed and through music, time takes on the dimension of the eternal. Architecture creates an illusion of cultic or cultured space and drama gives an illusion of action directed towards the future out of the past (Langer 1953, Collins 1983:98ff). Through the combination of these created illusions in ritual the transcendent is experienced in indefinable but real ways, and life itself takes on a new dimension.

Since they have this character of humanly created illusions however, rituals may also delude. When the illusion is treated as the reality there is idolatry. So rituals may lead to a deeper and truer perception of reality, but they may also lead people to live in an imaginary world out of touch with reality. They may hold people in a past which can no longer exist and prevent them from facing the realities of the present. They may make a certain kind of order possible that contains the seeds of chaos and destruction; They may project an illusory hope for the future which cannot be fulfilled. They may give an illusion of power that may lead to delusions of grandeur and to paranoia. They may let loose hidden powers which can disrupt, distort and destroy. To play around with rituals and misuse them can be dangerous. But to find in them the sacred source of that which is creative of life, wholeness, healing, is to discover a transformative power in society which enables people to live into the future out of the present through the presence of the remembered past.

Some Final Comments

My background and reading has put the issues you raise into a different and broader context. I realise that I have not responded directly to many of the issues you have raised in your first article – particularly the issue of ethnocentrism in religion. That will have to wait!

But in the light of your comment that 'the capacity for religion can be described as arising from a “loose confederacy of separate modules in the human brain”' I would like to know more about what that means. What kinds of changes take place in the brains for example of birds and humans as they adapt or fail to adapt to new situations?

Bruce

References

• Barbour, Ian. 2002. Nature, Human Nature and God. Augsburg: Fortress Press
• Bardiou, Alain. 2003. Saint Paul: The Foundations of Universalism. Translated by Ray Brassier. Stanford: Stanford University Press
• Davies, Paul. 2006. The Goldilocks Enigma: Why is the Universe Just Right for Life? London: Allen Lane
• Deverell, Gweneth & Bruce John (eds). 1986: Pacific Rituals: Living or Dying. Suva. Institute of Pacific Studies, University of the South Pacific.
• Rosenberg, David. 2006. Abraham: The First Historical Biography. New York: Basic Books.

Prisoners' Elegy

Droving a plodding herd we’re getting there
Our paces crunch the gravel road we tread
A tractor engine strums the evening air
The milking plant starts humming in the shed

And there we boss the mooing cows in line
The milk-pump’s chug insists we do our task --
One task of those the waking hours assign
Whereby we meet what nature’s cycles ask

The rounds of labour raise a steady chant
That floats across the flatlands to the hills
And flowing with the fenceline’s rising slant
Arises to the sky, subsides and stills

As night comes down the world of dreams expands
Rolls out a track toward the mystic sky
Then morning places weightier matters on our hands
Sent by the rising sun, our strength we try

A man who knew in youth those sunlit ways
Between the fertile paddocks of that farm
Took casually the fortune of those days
And barely saw the threat of any harm

No foresight told there’d come a dismal time --
That he’d descend to lodge within a space
From which, for long, he could not hope to climb
Where madding burdens clamp their stern embrace

With hindsight he could warrant no surprise
To find himself enclosed in halls of grey
Where rigidly his routine hours comprise
Of chores contrived, his sanity to slay

Enraptured dreams had brought him to this state
The peaches on the trees -- were his to pluck
An apple of the eye -- would be his mate
Each juicy fruit that grows -- was his to suck

And who does not vacate their blameless youth?
Who never goes where innocence is spent?
Who ever did resist that sweet untruth --
The glamour of the world’s alluring scent?

No village makes a haven from the world
No nation gives a guarantee of peace
No idle wish can loose the snare that’s curled
Around a life, by folly’s wild caprice

No home gives certain shelter from the storm
A heart may not depend on vows of care
Where heaven’s voice finds no-one to inform
Finds scarce an ear attuned to be aware

No inmate owns a key to flee the cell
Its walls complete the circle of his view
Its forced confinement forms a living hell
Unless with vision, he through stone can hew

On tawdry walls he paints a summer land
With stubborn art creates a living scene
That takes him where his body cannot stand
In prospects beamed upon an inward screen

Not convicts all, but prisoners we are all
Inside a gilded cage that traps our flight
To gaze beyond the space in which we crawl
Equips the earthbound with empyreal sight

As if released to speed in sky at dawn
We shall attain the eagle’s awesome skill
To rise above the plane from which we’re born
And spy the darting prey we must needs kill

We shall like lions listen on the breeze
For heartbeats pulsing on the moving air
Those distant murmers that our hunger tease --
Such savoury signs must signify good fare

The flames that feed us lurk in nature’s show
They flicker on the edges of perception
They flare out in the sunset’s fiery glow --
That herald of the end of self-deception

Imagination sports a double head
Both smiling: one shows greed and one bears grace
Before the blood from all my veins has bled
My mind, I pray, the lines of grace can trace

I here pay tribute to those souls who’ve flown
And left behind the arts they made from life
Projecting back a glimpse of what they’ve known
From struggle with the world’s ignoble strife

(With appreciation to Thomas Gray)

Nature's gifts (do we need them?)

An essay on the question, "do we need nature", written in 2003. It was written as an entry for a competition by the Economist magazine, on the issues outlined by the magazine as follows:

"Do we need nature? What are the difficult choices that need to be made in politics, economics, society and public policy? And who is right…? Those whose actions (or inactions) seek to increase man's control over nature, or those who seek to reduce man's control? Those who seek to bypass nature, or those who hope to work with it? Those who put a higher value on human development, or those who value the preservation, even the reconstitution of nature?"

Synopsis

In human eyes, nature sometimes seems to have a multiple personality disorder. It is both kind and cruel; both our humble servant and the capricious master of our fate. And we humans are likewise inconsistent. We seek to exploit nature’s resources, sometimes rapaciously, yet we worship its virginal beauty. We lord it over nature, but we fear the power of its tempests. These attitudes are evidence of a troubled relationship. Arising from our lack of understanding of nature, we are causing great damage to the global environment—polluting its air and poisoning its water. Our growing technological prowess threatens further problems.

Our conflict with nature originates from our nature as intelligent beings. All creatures thrive within their natural element: birds in the air, fish in the sea, worms in the soil. However, through science and technology, humans are able to overcome the laws that govern matter and all other life forms. The natural condition of our bodies is to walk the land and breathe the air, but we make artificial wings with which to fly, and scuba gear for breathing under water. Unfortunately, many of the outcomes of our ingenuity and enterprise are harmful to the natural environment, and therefore to ourselves.

The solution lies partly in acquiring greater scientific knowledge about nature’s processes, so as to better foresee the harmful consequences of proposed innovations. However, more significantly, we need a deeper understanding of our place in the universe. Not only does nature provide us with material resources, it also provides us with experiences that touch the soul, as poets like to remind us. There is an aspect of nature that is greater than ourselves, an immanence of the Divine. Through appreciation of this aspect of nature, we will be moved to treat it better.

Essay

Nature is a chameleon, a creature of changing colours. Nature is a nurturing mother and a ravenous beast; a treasure-store to be plundered and a sacred refuge for the sensitive soul; a wild jungle to be tamed and an eden of innocence to be preserved.

Our attitudes to nature tell us a lot about ourselves. If we see nature as the provider of infinite resources, as a whirlwind of capricious forces, as a mirror of the divine, or as the domain for scientific exploration—it is because we are beings who desire, who fear, who experience wonder, and who seek knowledge. Acting on these impulses, what we ask of nature, and the degree of our willingness to care for it in return, largely determine the character of our civilisation. There are many signs that our present global civilisation is asking too much and giving too little. The relationship between humanity and nature is under great strain; and yet the relationship absolutely must be made to work. We need to reach a better understanding of—and with—that tantalizing, ever-changing creature. We need a balanced perspective.

Daily new evidence appears of serious damage occurring to the environment as a result of human activity. One recent report was from the explorer, Jean Michel Cousteau, when he visited a chain of remote uninhabited islands north-west of Hawaii. He and the crew of his research ship expected to find an unspoiled wilderness, but instead they found tons of trash. The islands are located at a spot in the Pacific Ocean where currents converge and bring in flotsam from far away. On the beaches, Cousteau and his team found plastic toys, intact vials of medical drugs, miniature whiskey bottles, and assorted products of industry from all over the world. Numerous dead seabirds on the shores had perished due to eating morsels of plastic.

Those unpleasant products of human ingenuity washing up on remote shores highlight some of the major themes of our interaction with nature. Among them: human technological prowess and its negative effects, the complexity of the ecosystem, our inadequate understanding of that complexity, the global scope of environmental problems, and the grievous impact on the environment of our use-and-discard culture of consumerism. On the other hand, our inherent love for nature is reflected in the instinctive disgust provoked in us by hearing such a graphic tale of environmental degradation. Our relationship to nature is an emotional subject because it means everything to us. Outlined in broad strokes, nature’s gifts to us are:

• Existence: our being alive is an outcome of nature’s evolutionary processes.

• Sustenance: our food, drink, shelter, clothing, and all the resources that we use for survival and enjoyment, are provided by nature.

• Intelligence: being endowed by nature with intelligence, we have the ability to understand nature’s laws and use them to our advantage.

• Immanenceⁱ: through the contemplation of the divine beauty reflected in nature, we obtain insight and joy. Nature feeds the soul as well as the body.

When nature’s gifts are described in this way, obviously a definition of nature is being used that encompasses the whole of existence. The word “nature” has 20 definitions, according to one dictionaryⁱⁱ, the broadest and most abstract being: “the sum total of the forces at work throughout the universe”. A small step down the ladder of abstraction is: “the universe, with all its phenomena”. A few rungs lower is the definition that we as human beings we are mostly concerned with, in our parochial way: “the material world, especially as surrounding humankind and existing independently of human activities”. This last definition encapsulates a crucial dilemma of the human condition: we are surrounded by nature, totally dependent on it, but somehow separate from it, for it exists “independently of human activities”.

O body swayed to music, O brightening glance,
How can we know the dancer from the dance?

—W.B. Yeatsⁱⁱⁱ

What separates us from nature is our scientific and technological prowess. Natural phenomena, in contrast to human beings, unalterably obey natural laws. Fire always burns, water always flows, plants simply go on growing. Even animals, although sentient and having freedom of movement, are limited in their range of activities. Humans, uniquely, fashion wheels to reduce distance, telescopes to augment eyesight, and vaccines to prevent disease. The human mind is a remarkable instrument, able to imaginatively project itself outward to distant galaxies, and peer down into the atom, in order to discover the secrets of nature through observation, experimentation and reason. So powerful is this instrument that we can even seriously pose the question: “do we need nature?” Of course we do, but the question is meaningful because we know that we are in some degree independent of nature. Probing just how far this independence goes is crucial for our self-understanding and progress.

To start such a probe we might ask: how did it come to be that humanity, a creature of nature, finds itself independent of it? A plausible answer is that the appearance of intelligent beings is inherent in nature itself. This theory runs along the following lines. As discovered by physics, the universe began with a “big bang” about 15 billion years ago. At that moment, the whole universe existed in the form of a single point (mathematically termed a “singularity”). All matter, space and time were compressed into this singularity, which exploded outwards and has continued to expand ever since. An observation by astronomers confirming the expansion is that the galaxies are not in fixed positions, but are rushing away from each other. Furthermore, not only is the cosmos expanding spatially, but it is also becoming more complex. The trend towards greater complexity is manifested in the evolution of life. Based on this scenario, it is argued that everything that has existed and will exist in the universe, including intelligent life (e.g., us), is an outcome of the properties inherent in the universe at the beginning. An analogy is that the pattern for the whole of a tree—its trunk, branches, leaves and fruit—is contained within the seed. If this view of the universe is correct, then it is natural for human beings to be unnatural!

As a result of our unnatural abilities, human intervention in nature has far-reaching effects. This is evident in cities, where concrete covers the soil—but in the country, nature is only relatively more liberated. The roof over our head may be of thatch or steel; our home may be surrounded by a formal garden or untamed weeds; our mode of transport may be a donkey (an animal under our control) or a Ferarri (a metal beast possibly under our control). The human interface with nature has thousands of such nuances. How may we judge that any of these variations is better or worse?

The choices we make are important because they determine our environment. We act on nature to create our environment, and in turn the environment influences our health and happiness, in a continuous loop. Although we can utilise and channel nature’s forces, we cannot dominate it. At times we have the illusion that we can, because of our ability to divert rivers, breed cattle, grow genetically engineered crops, overcome human fertility problems, and perform endless other feats. However, when nature is treated with disdain, it bites back. We know this from many examples constantly reported, of suffering resulting from things that go wrong. The poisoned air of big cities, the pollution of rivers, the destruction of rainforests, global warming, the hole in the ozone layer, and the unforeseen side-effects of wonder-drugs, are familiar stories. Clearly we need to be making better choices, based on a more realistic and holistic understanding of nature.

Poets have traditionally been sensitive nature’s gifts. In the springtime, when nature’s power is most lavishly displayed, they have often been moved to heights of eloquence. Yet T.S. Eliot’s 1922 poem, “The Wasteland”^iv, begins by saying that April, springtime in the northern hemisphere, “is the cruellest month”. It is an apt symbol for the discord between humanity and nature in modern civilisation. Similarly, Gerard Manley Hopkins, a few decades earlier, wrote of nature: “All is seared with trade; bleared, smeared with toil”.^v But Hopkins’ poem went on: “And for all this, nature is never spent; There lives the dearest freshness deep down in things”. For Hopkins, the world was “charged with the grandeur of God”. Such awe and respect for the aspect of nature which is greater than ourselves is the antidote to materialistic greed. An appreciation for the true significance of nature will empower us to rise to the best that we can be. As stated by Bahá’u’lláh:

How resplendent the luminaries of knowledge that shine in an atom, and how vast the oceans of wisdom that surge within a drop! To a supreme degree is this true of man, who, among all created things, hath been invested with the robe of such gifts, and hath been singled out for the glory of such distinction. For in him are potentially revealed all the attributes and names of God to a degree that no other created being hath excelled or surpassed.^vi

This essay has not tried to answer specific questions on the wisdom of genetic modification, nuclear power and the like. Such questions need to be weighed up in each case by taking into account a wide variety of information from the physical sciences, economics, sociology and politics. However, when a sense of spiritual principle guides the decision-making process, it is less likely that dreadful mistakes will be made. We gain a truer perspective on nature when we seek to rise to our potential as human beings and practice virtues such as justice, generosity, wisdom, and detachment. Then, when we utilise the earth’s resources, we also remember to preserve its beauty. When we seek to channel its forces, we do so with due regard for the consequences. As we seek knowledge of its processes, we experience wonder in the face of its mysteries. We see the earth as our home for a time, and as a legacy to be passed on to future generations. We need nature, and so will they.

APPENDIX

Nature’s Nest

Like birds that flit around a mountain crest
All creatures thrive within their element
Then do we humans — need nature’s nest?

Who crazed or blessed with intellectual zest
Traverse the earth in constant discontent
Like birds that flit around a mountain crest

Unceasing in our restless human quest
To shape the world as our intent is bent
Then do we humans — need nature’s nest?

Cruelly our crude aims nature will contest
And blow us on its rocky slopes all spent
Like birds that flit around a mountain crest

But when we turn our minds to seek its best
Reveals a richer realm for our ascent
Then do we humans — need nature’s nest?

Not less than a babe at the mother’s breast
We grow in a world for us most clement
Then do we humans — need nature’s nest?
Like birds that flit around a mountain crest

Footnotes

iEntry for “immanence” in the encyclopedia at www.Infoplease.com

immanence [Lat.,=dwelling in], in metaphysics, the presence within the natural world of a spiritual or cosmic principle, especially of the Deity. It is contrasted with transcendence. The immanence of God in the world is the basic feature of pantheism. Among the most important philosophies using the concept of immanence are Stoicism and the systems of Giordano Bruno and Spinoza. In general, the great monotheistic religions have held that God is both immanent and transcendent, although individual thinkers have tended to emphasize one or the other aspect.

iiThe definitions of “nature” referred to here are from the dictionary at www.Infoplease.com

iiiLast two lines of W.B. Yeats’ poem, “Among School Children”. See The Yeats Reader: A Portable Compendium of Poetry, Drama and Prose, Richard J. Finneran, ed., Scribner Poetry, 1997, pp. 90–92

ivT.S. Eliot, The Waste Land and Other Poems, Frank Kermode, ed., Penguin Books, 2003.

vFrom “God’s Grandeur” in Poems and Prose of Gerard Manley Hopkins, W.H. Gardner, ed., Penguin Books, 1963, p. 27.

viBaha'u'llah, Gleanings from the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 177