|
Home>News Center>Life | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
To be or not to be before nature
Editor's Note: There have been endless debates in the academic circles over the relationship between man and nature. The opposing ideas of He Zuoxiu, a theoretical physicist and academician from the Chinese Academy of Sciences, and a renowned environmentalist Liang Congjie from the Friends of Nature organization have by and large led and highlighted the ongoing discourse in China. In the following articles, each elaborates on his opinion.
Recently, the viewpoint that they should lead a life in harmony with nature, has rightly prevailed. But times of conflict will inevitably occur. Neglect of this fact and a lowering of vigilance will lead to disastrous consequences, as was demonstrated by last year's tsunami. During its early development, mankind had limited power to protect themselves from the forces of nature. This gave rise, eventually, to those who encouraged attempts to conquer it. Rapid development of science and technology strengthened mankind's power to fight against, and to some extent, refashion nature. It also curbed the impact of nature and natural disasters and in some instances even prevented them. But some people are worried that with the growth of human power to transform nature, they will ultimately destroy it and therefore themselves. Their appeal is for human beings to strive to live in harmony and not conflict with nature. It is essential that we protect the environment and ecosystem which has been seriously damaged in some areas by unnecessary human activity. However, some environmentalists and ecologists have gone too far in this regard, holding that nature should remain untouched and opposing all activities which could transform it. Such a view is injurious to the interests of the human race. In dealing with the relationship between mankind and nature, we need to make clear what is more important - the interests of human beings or protection of the nature? In my opinion, the interests of human beings should come first. Environment and ecological protection is for the good of mankind. Transforming, sometimes even "destroying" nature, is also motivated by a desire to bring about better living standards for humans. This is an important issue, since it will influence decision-making. For example, the country is now facing severe electricity shortages. Hydropower stations need to be constructed, which will inevitably harm or even destroy the local environment and ecosystem where they are built. Therefore there is a need to weigh the relative importance of easing the pressure of demand for power supplies with protection of the environment. Here the interests of human beings should take precedence when it comes to decision-making. Another lesson the tsunami taught is that when natural catastrophe strikes, the human race should and can do something positive, instead of being afraid to act. I want to challenge the contention that people ought to respect and be in awe of nature, advanced by one professor. He asserts that mankind should not use science and technology to transform nature, but maintain an attitude of respect and awe of it. I hold the opposite view. The human race should develop science and technology, and use them to fight against nature and try their best to prevent and reduce losses incurred in natural disasters. Modern development of science and technology has only been around 400 years or so. However, even in that time, many achievements in these fields have contributed greatly to improving our living environment. Human beings should believe in the power of science and technology and be confident of its future development. Mankind is still in the primary stages of understanding the laws of nature. The tsunami highlighted how superficial our knowledge of nature remains. Although human beings are still unable to give complete and accurate earthquake forecasts, some early-warning systems and preventative measures can reduce the impact of losses, such as building quake-resistant housing. The civil defence system ought also to be adjusted to cover more issues, such as coping with natural disasters, not only focusing on warfare. Liang Congjie: Human beings should respect and be in awe of nature. Before the start of modern civilization, the people's activities to change or mould nature were limited by a lack of science and technology. At that time, the impact of human activity on nature was limited. Today, however, mankind has mastered science and technology in many areas, which have impacted irreversibly on nature. If mankind treats the nature as something to be trampled and exploited freely, the Earth will eventually exacts its revenge on the human race. This is the law of nature. People need to be very cautious when they try out the fruits of science and technology on nature. Already there have been many salutary lessons from previous actions that have gone against the laws of nature. Without a respectful attitude towards nature, who can ensure that mankind will not continue to act in a way he will come to regret? As for fear of nature, surely this is no more than a healthy respect for its power and a nature's way of instilling a survival instinct in mankind when faced with natural disasters. Science and technology are a kind of two-edged sword. When we use it to profit human beings, we should take a rational attitude. Otherwise, we may ultimately be harmed. Take two cases for example - the toxic gas leak in Bhopal, India and the nuclear accident in Chernobyl, in the Ukraine. The two constructions were once proud edifices to human ingenuity which for some time boasted of mankind's ability to transform and harness the power of nature for his good. Their catastrophic legacy is history. The human race still has but limited ability to predict the long-term influence of his activities. This being so, human beings ought to maintain an attitude of respect and awe
of nature. We should not take ourselves as the core of nature and should not put
our interests first in our dealings with her.
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
