After concluding my reading of part one I was still very drawn to the chapter The Nature of Nature. I think this chapter asked a lot of really important questions that I had not been enlightened enough to ask myself. This chapter explained may different view points of nature including the one I began believing in. It explains how Western nature can be divided into 5 different subcategories or definitions The one definition that I initially believed in is ” nature as a physical place… unmodified by people”. This to me was nature. However, I also agree that we as humans are just another species on this planet so why do I not consider us a part of nature? This question bothers me because it causes me to feel like a contradiction. Therefore, I further looked into this chapter for an explanation.
The first question I asked myself to hopefully help myself understand was ” What draws us to the pure and untouched nature?” Do we only want to preserve it and protect it because seeing it untouched evokes such emotions? If emotions are what drive us to feel like nature should exclude us and our “things” then emotions are what separate us in general is what I took from this chapter. Yet, in the chapter it is referred to as the separation of nature and culture. I took this Coates way of saying that because animals do not have culture they are part of nature but because we have culture, e.g religion, we can not be part of nature. Yet, at this point I am starting to change my views of what I believe is considered natural and and nature. Are they two things different? Humans as part of nature to me is natural. This includes the things we do naturally such as making shelters and creating culture.
Over all, my views and thoughts are confused at the moment. I thought this part of the book had interesting perspectives and alternate ideas that I had not yet explored.