It is not uncommon to hear phrases such as “…take a walk in nature.” or “…to be in nature”. These are often used when describing a certain place like the countryside or a place where wildlife in the form of animals or plants and trees still exist, in other words “Wilderness”. When we use these expressions, we point to the underlying belief that we are distinct and separate from Nature. As though somehow we have sufficient knowledge to control or manipulate the progress of the natural world.
Humans as separate to Nature
The thought that humanity is separate from Nature and can consider “it” in some kind of objective way is questionable. I’m arguing here that our behaviours, the behaviours common to all humans in the same circumstances i.e. “Human-nature” is a subset of Nature overall. Like genres of movies, “Action” might be different from “Romance”, but they’re all movies. In the same way, different types of nature, grouped according to species for example, are all (types of) Nature.
It is perhaps the biggest tragedy in this whole play of life, that from the perspective of Humanity, we have internalised this belief. It is why there remains a disconnect between our efforts to be more sustainable and the effects, which usually end up having negative consequences. It is also why the belief that consumption and its impacts can be separated i.e. decoupled still remains at large.
The truth of the matter is that everything we do, individually and collectively, has an impact that is greater than the sum of its apparent parts. Some things are products (effects are multiplied) and some things are cumulative (effects are added), and some things we have no idea how, or why they behave the way they do.
A price to pay
Energy must always be conserved, which in other words means that there is an energy cost to everything. The cost can be paid upfront e.g. burning fossil fuels there and then. Or, the cost can be paid in advance, e.g. Mining and manufacturing renewable energy infrastructure. Why is this important to note? Well it means that for everything that we wish to do, make or own, someone or something, somewhere, must pay the energy price required. This cost of energy can be converted into cost to the biosphere or cost to society, but all being a function of the energy cost. It cannot be deleted from the books, or transferred to another planet. Rent is due and Nature always comes to collect.
Understanding that fundamentally, we must always impact the environment in some way. Opens up space for discussions of a wider context, discussions that question what activities and things are “worth” damaging the environment for. Worth being derived from Value.
“Why are we causing an impact?” or “For what purpose are we causing this impact?” Finding answers to these questions will show us what we choose to value. Maslow’s hierarchy of needs might need updating…
Final comments
The truth of it, or at least in my reality, is that our behaviours stem from our core beliefs. And our beliefs are largely formed from where we (society and individual) see our position in the greater web of life. If we understand and act on the fact that we are Nature and must obey its fundamental laws, if we are to thrive. Sustainability then would be integrated vertically in both our internal and external worlds.
It just seems that “human-nature” likes to break things up into little pieces to make things easier to understand. But a sustainable world with unsustainable thought patterns and behaviours doesn’t work.
In psychology, there is a school of thought which says that our realities are seen through the lens of our own projections. If this is in any way true of human psychology, we may all need a trip to Specsavers.
