No matter how hard naturephobes try, I don’t think they’re up to the task of outliving or destroying the ant.
[Def’n - naturephobe, noun, (one who is) not fond of nature, (person) disliking or fearing, e.g., most of or all the outdoors, Russians, nature. Okay, not Russians; that would be a Russophobe.]
Why would they even try? Ask a naturephobe.
In my humble opinion, I think human beans needs to work a bit harder at appreciating their natural surroundings more along with all that lives in it. Can we live more with nature, not against it?
(Certainly, the argument can be made that large dinosaurs should be kept in sturdy cages. What else? I’m a good listener).
This from The Sacred Balance by David Suzuki -
From his work studying ants, Edward O. Wilson offers this humbling perspective:
If we were to vanish today, the land environment would return to the fertile balance that existed before the human population explosion. But if the ants were to disappear, tens of thousands of other plant and animal species would perish also, simplifying and weakening the land ecosystem almost everywhere.
In the end, the crucial change is attitudinal; we have to see ourselves in a different relationship with the rest of nature. (pg. 225)
The monuments we build for ourselves and our economy have a short life span and are perhaps less important to the Earth than an ant hill.
Live small.
***
Notice I stopped just short of saying, be one with the ant. But tread lightly upon this home of ours.
Please click here for more a related post about naturephobes.
.
No comments:
Post a Comment