Meta Post

Whether or not humans can successfully and feasibly coexist with nature (or with the rest of nature, if we accept Marris's argument that humans are a part of nature) is a question that has been raised by several of this week's launch and query/extension posts. More specifically, several posts suggest that coexistence is either complicated or made less feasible by our current reliance on technology and infrastructures that damage the environment.

Several launch posts offer examples of ways in which humans have harmed the natural world - by destroying forests to build shopping malls and condominiums, by polluting the ocean, by introducing invasive species, and so on. Some posts take these examples as evidence that harmonious coexistence with the natural world is impossible or at least unlikely in this day and age, suggesting that our current relationship with the environment is more one of exploitation.

Other examples, however, are given to support the idea that people are concerned about and interested in coexisting with nature. Climate conferences, green energy, and other technological advances aimed at reversing environmental damage or at least lessening future impact have been mentioned. Several of the posts that touch upon the issue take the middle ground by acknowledging that humans have done serious damage to the environment but express hope that our understanding of and concern over this damage will help us to coexist more conscientiously with the natural world. Nature's ability to regrow and restore itself, if given the opportunity, is also cited as reason to hope that humanity's current relationship to the environment has not damaged it beyond repair.

Several posts also suggest potential strategies for building a healthier relationship between people and the natural world. Some involve specific actions, such as planting trees. Many imply, however, that changing people's attitudes toward nature is important as a first step. Several of these posts seem to refer back to Marris's argument about nature being all around us by suggesting that we need to interact with nature and to acknowledge that we are a part of it in order to better appreciate it. Overall, most posts seem to agree with aspects of both Marris's and McKibben's argument; in general, most members of the class suggest that we should acknowledge the damage that humanity has done to the environment that McKibben describes, but most also agree with Marris's point that nature is all around us, not just in places that we regard as separate from human civilization.