Naturalism or Science

You could label yourself either a naturalist or a follower of science. You can’t be both. Those who wrap themselves around the “beauty” of nature, who make it their purpose for existing, who turn to the natural objects, trees, lakes, oceans, etc., and forcefully proclaim that man has no business doing any sort of business, or engaging in a pastime, that would threaten even the most microscopic, cannot point toward science and exclaim that it is the truth behind their reasoning, or it is the proof that human involvement in the world, threatens all living things. They cannot separate themselves from their visions which are visceral connections to their thoughts, their ideas, and their love of the natural wonders that surround them. They are products of their own fantasies about life. Which is not necessarily wrong, yet, will always be at odds with science. Science supplies explanations, or theories, consisting of systems that leave the adjectives out and replaces them, or tries to, with a basic truth. Its purpose is to discover and give answers to questions, to outline a schema which will prove a hypothesis. It is not an interest bound to the affinity of nature, but to the affinity of its theorems. It ventures to find a purpose behind its beliefs, a method of securing this purpose into the proper manifold, and following it up with a claim of infallibility. A mathematician, for instance, treats numbers as points in space, or symbols and figures as a basis for exploration. He or she does not have a strikingly intimate attachment to these numbers or symbols. They are only measurements with which theories are deduced or induced. Numbers, symbols, figures, etc., are not objects to be loved. They are objects that present challenges. A scientist is a rationalist which is the reverse of a naturalist. The only wish existing in his mind is one of discovering a reason behind something and not, as the naturalist would, define an object of nature as a defenseless entity prone to the destructive mentality of mankind. Therefore, naturalists cannot point to a science as a defense of their beliefs and the purpose of their agenda. Science may contradict their beliefs and ultimately lend confusion and complexity to the naturalists visceral opposition to the force of a complex and inexplicable humanity. Science cannot conceive of nature the same way a naturalist would. Scientists are explorers. Naturalists are colonizers.

Liked this post? Follow this blog to get more. 

Leave a Reply