8/13/2019 Human Nature Interactions

1/3

PARADISE LOST

Rhine SamajdarIndian Institute of Science, Bangalore - 560012.

SR. No. 11-01-00-10-91-12-1-09939.

The perception of nature as the non-articial is, in essence, inherently anthropomor-phic with the existence of an unambiguous distinction between notions which regardhuman presence necessary for the consummation of natures perfection and ideas that

recognise human intervention as detrimental to the environment. Parallels may be drawnbetween the ancient belief systems of the Indian, Chinese and Greek civilisations, whichunanimously emphasised the necessity of peace and harmony with the environment,albeit through diverse practices establishing reverence towards nature and its laws. Al-ternatively, analysis from a Darwinian perspective portrays human beings and theircorresponding technological ascendancy as but another component in the evolutionaryhistory of life and the struggle for survival on Earth. Similarly, the physicalist outlookwould regard nature as merely a deterministic set of processes, the meanings to whichare ascribed only by ourselves in processes of anthropomorphisation human inuenceon nature, being in accordance with these underlying laws, is thus devoid of any innatemeaning per se.

The Out of Africa theory, which corroborates the recent African origin of humans,provides an insightful glimpse into the role of nature in the determination of the spatio-temporal distribution of our species. Physical anthropology and genetic reconstructionsbased on mitochondrial DNA and Y-chromosomal analysis suggest the evolution of ar-chaic yet anatomically modern Homo sapiens in Africa approximately 200,000 yearsago and their outward migration towards Asia and the Americas thereafter, between125,000 to 60,000 years ago. The vagaries of climate along with the continuous compe-tition between Natures wrath and repopulation (as exemplied through disasters akinto the eruption of Mt. Toba) constrained and determined the regions of settlement for

the migrants based on their adaptive abilities. Lack of interbreeding was resultant inthe reproductive isolation of these individual subpopulations (which replaced the Homonenaderthalensis and Homo erectus hominids) and their subsequent diversication intodifferent races.

The carrying capacity of nature, perceived as the maximal sustainable load in termsof food, habitat, water and other resources [1], was respected by primitive modes of livelihood involving the rearing of bovine livestock and hunting-gathering. Such as-sociations sufficed for mans subsistence and were non-exploitative in the absence of possessive accumulation in excess of necessity. The advent of wet-rice agriculture in pre-

modern technology altered not only land utilisation patterns but also social structures

1

8/13/2019 Human Nature Interactions

2/3

and labour organisation. The sustainability of traditional agriculture is aptly reectedin ancient texts such as the Asvalayana Grihyasutra , the Parasara Smriti and the Krishi Gita , which served as repositories for indigenous knowledge. However, modernisation,induced by a colonial economy and accompanied by ineluctable industrialisation, hasnegatively altered both the techno-economic and socio-cultural absorptive carrying ca-pacities. Atrocities like gross deforestation perpetrated in the name of development andglobalisation only serve to substantiate the incompatibility of urbanism and unfetteredtechnological growth to ecological support systems.

Modernity encompassed the expansion of a global capitalist economy and industrial-ism in addition to a division of labour ensuing from the transfer of authority to electedgovernments from feudal systems and monarchies. Owing to capitalist stimuli, scienticand technological developments were avariciously oriented towards the harnessing of na-tures bountiful assets and abridged relations between the worker and the capitalist tomere economic transactions. The social sciences were initially modelled on the archety-pal objectivity epitomised by Physics but eventually, the transition to post-modernitywas greatly educed by the loss of certainty in the same, due to the advent of the proba-bilistic eld of quantum mechanics. Postmodernity is typied by economic globalisationand more exible and diverse forms of production and consumption with the focus onlocal situations as opposed to macroscopic grand narratives. Nevertheless, the con-sequent techno-capitalist expansion simultaneously annihilates foliage and freshwaterresources alike with utter disregard for time-honoured sapience and further marginalisesand impoverishes the economically weaker sections of the society in a ceaseless viciouscircle.

Percipience of natures immanent carrying capacity is imperative in the context of hu-man development since it, in conjunction with entropy, ultimately denes the insuper-able limits to growth. Although immeasurable, carrying capacity may be qualitativelycomprehended to be an amalgamation of survival resource capacity, techno-economiccapacity and socio-cultural capacity, each of which is comprised of absorptive and gen-erative capacities. The former determine natures faculty to absorb the pernicious im-pacts of mankinds activities and the adventitious products generated therein whereasthe latter are essential for the regeneration and sustenance of the natural capital thatis a sine qua non for survival. Moreover, augmentation of techno-economic rather thansocio-cultural capacities often counterpoises the natural carrying capacities. Hence, so-cial empowerment and knowledge dissemination are more efficacious in remediation of environmental problems as compared to escalated production or waste treatment units,which would again generate their share of contaminating effluents. Mans deeds thusescalate the universes predestined decay towards absolute entropy as ordained by thesecond law of thermodynamics.

Human ecology serves to investigate the multifarious aspects of the relationship be-tween human beings and their environment in a merger of demographic, economic andevolutionary perspectives. The epoch of the Anthropocene coincides with the alterationof the biosphere and the creation of new biomes (anthromes) [2]. The correspondinghuman impact on the ecosphere is a focal question in human ecology, which also studies

2

8/13/2019 Human Nature Interactions

3/3

mans effects on the common-pool natural resources and ecosystem services since theecosystems are associated with both human environments and well-being. In a similarvein, human geography studies the anthropogenic creation of new spaces and spatialmodications of natural geography that may be attributed to social and cultural inu-ences. Economic development as well as social change forms the cynosure of research forhuman geographers. Human ecology explicates the role of resources in conservation-with-development and advances human geographys explanatory capacity, its scienticcredibility and its policy contributions [3].

The unsustainability of a capitalist economy is palpable in the progressive accrual of discards, atmospheric degradation, social disparities and the presumptuous commodi-tisation of the biosphere. In his critique, Marx apprehends capitalisms prerequisite of inexpensive labour and the subsequent implementation of policies favouring high birthrates that inescapably lead to overpopulation and environmental collapse as prescribedby Malthus law. Moreover, capitalism is inherently expansionist and not amenable tolimits to growth it must constantly expand its production and hence consumption,thereby inevitably degrading the environment. The alternatives envisioned by bothMarx and Gandhi are fundamentally similar with the emphasis being on a harmoniousequilibrium between ethicality, economic expansion and collective social responsibilityin the Commune or Gramswaraj leading to the elimination of exploitation, emergence of small-scale technologies and self-help systems. Gandhis views also reect the ecologicaldimensions of nature evinced by Ecospirituality and Deep Ecology, which recognise an inherent worth and interdependence of all living beings, regardless of their instrumental utility to human needs [4]. Indeed, these may be the lone ways for mankind to recoverthe last remnants of the paradise that he has lost.

References

[1] Hui, C. (2006). Carrying capacity, population equilibrium, and envrionments max-imal load. Ecological Modelling 192: 317320.

[2] Ellis, E. C. (2011). Anthropogenic transformation of the terrestrial biosphere.Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A 369 (1938): 10101035.

[3] Zimmerer, K. S. (1994). Human Geography and the New Ecology: The Prospect

and Promise of Integration. Ann. Association of American Geographers 84 (1):108125.

[4] Drengson, A. and Y. Inoue, eds. (1995). The Deep Ecology Movement: An Intro-ductory Anthology. Berkeley: North Atlantic Publishers.

3