In my previous article, I tried
to trace the historical account on how people viewed man’s nature in relation
to environment. Ancient Greeks viewed
man as a “spectator” of the flux of nature.
Medieval men viewed man as a “steward” of nature, the creation of
God. With these ideas of “spectatorship”
and “stewardship,” ancient Greeks and Medieval people never viewed man as a
“master” of nature/ environment. By
“master” of nature, I mean he does not have to subject nature/environment to
his dominion or control.
This paradigm on nature of man
develops an attitude among ancient Greeks and Medieval people to take
responsibility of the environment. They
never have the attitude to abuse nature/environment to advance human
self-interests or the attitude to actively intervene the natural process of
nature forcing it to secrete its laws.
However this paradigm changed
during the Scientific Revolution roughly about 1550-1700. Scientific Revolution is marked by shifts in
perspective specifically in how people view the world. For example, Copernicus introduced the idea
that the sun is the center of the universe[1],
which contradicted the long-held belief of the medieval scientists and church
authorities that the earth is the center of the universe. This paradigm shift is now known as the
Copernican revolution –a 360-degrees shift in perspective. To have it was really a challenge on the part
of Copernicus, owing to the fact that it is a long-held belief and the church,
which propounded that idea, was considered infallible in her teachings and
doctrines during those times. In doing
so, Copernicus was not only introducing a new idea (or a revolutionary idea)
but also construing that the infallible authority of the church as a magistrate
can be questioned or can be put into doubt.
It is in this scenario that we
can understand the philosophy of Rene Descartes who lived in the middle part of
the period known as the Scientific Revolution.
Descartes, a French philosopher, toyed the idea that everything can be
doubted –even those ideas held by the church as teachings, dogmas or
doctrines. Yet, there is only one thing
that he cannot put into doubt –and that is, he is doubting. For Descartes, everything is dubitable,
except his own doubting. If he doubts,
he thinks. If he thinks, he exists. Thus, Descartes is famous of his dictum “I
think therefore I am.” (In Latin phrase,
cogito
ergo sum.) What essentially is
his philosophy is capsulized in saying that “man, by nature, is a thinking being.” As a thinking being, he has capabilities to
constitute other beings’ existence and its knowledge of them. In the words of Francis Bacon, “with reason,
we can put nature on a rack.”
This philosophical claim that man
is a “thinking being” is not something new, or not a revolutionary idea. Descartes’ predecessors have similar
affirmation, for example Plato, Aristotle, St Thomas to name just a few. What is revolutionary in this claim is that
“as thinking being, man can become the master of nature.” In the words of Descartes, man can constitute
his knowledge of the world, which is entirely different from the way Greeks
think of the world. For the Greeks, the
world is naturally “constituted.” But,
since the world can be doubted, it loses its foundation to be the source of
knowledge. Thus, man has to constitute
his knowledge of it. Or, in the words of
Bacon, “with reason, we can put nature on a rack,” which is again a
contradiction of what ancient philosophers think of nature/environment. For the medieval people, for example, the
world is something “entrusted” to them by God, so they are stewards of it, not
masters of it.
This modern philosophy[2]
revolutionizes our view of nature/environment.
In the framework of modern philosophers, experimentation is the key to
know the secrets of nature. If we “put
nature on the rack” to study it, which is done in scientific experiments, we
force nature to secrete its laws. If we
know nature’s laws, we can control or manipulate it. Thus, we say, “knowledge is power.” He who is knowledgeable is powerful –in the
sense that he is able to control or manipulate nature. For example, we know how egg cells and sperm
cells work during ejaculation in sexual intercourse of two partners. Conception starts when egg and sperm cells
combine in the uterus. If there is no
meeting of the two cells, there is no conception that will happen. With this knowledge, we are able to
manipulate the behavior of egg and sperm cells, like the use of contraceptives during
sexual intercourse hinders the meeting of the cells. From active experiments, we are able to
intervene and even manipulate the process or workings of nature, which we
consider as natural or say, “the
nature’s way.” Thus, the difference between
natural and man-made or artificial is clearly drawn. Man’s intervention to processes of environment
is considered man-made or artificial. At
the outset, we come to believe that what is man-made is easier and faster, and
what is natural is slow-paced. Today’s
motto is “the faster, the better.”
[1] Of
course, we have to remember that their idea of universe is not the same
idea that we have today. Maybe, medieval
people had only some planets, a moon, and a sun in mind when they talked of
universe, and these heavenly bodies are revolving around the earth. Today, universe is as immense as we can
imagine and we think it as boundless.
[2]
The philosophy of Rene Descartes is generally regarded as “modern
philosophy.” In fact, Descartes is
considered as the Father of Modern Philosophy.
