Yang Bin: "No need to fear nature" is a lie.
He Xiuxiu: Humans don't have to be afraid of nature.
The biggest lesson of the Indian Ocean earthquake and tsunami is that we need to deepen our understanding of the relationship between man and nature.
Here, I want to sharply raise a theoretical question: should we pursue people-oriented, environment-oriented and ecology-oriented when dealing with the relationship between man and nature? This is a profound philosophical problem. I think it should be people-oriented. I have never opposed the protection of the environment and ecology, but we need to understand a concept that the purpose of protecting the environment and ecology is for people. Sometimes we need to "destroy" the environment and ecology and change the environment and ecology, but it is also for people.
The tsunami gave mankind another enlightenment: in the face of natural disasters, human beings can't do nothing, but still have to do something.
I want to severely criticize a slogan, that is, the so-called "man should fear nature"-the view of doing nothing about the relationship between man and nature. In my opinion, the defense is the defense and the stop is the stop. We should try our best to reduce the losses caused by natural disasters, but this does not mean respect and fear. In particular, this view was put forward at the time of SARS epidemic. How do humans respect and fear SARS? This view actually ethicizes the relationship between man and nature. This slogan was put forward by an associate professor in an article published in the Central News. In fact, it is a criticism of scientism. It is believed that human beings should not use science to make a difference, which reflects the relationship between man and nature, that is, respect and fear, and should not always try to transform nature. This is actually moving towards "anti-science." (detailed)
Yang Bin: "No need to fear nature" is a lie.
From the perspective of human history, whenever human beings encounter irresistible natural disasters, there will always be people who are at a loss, people who doubt their own abilities, and people who are in awe of nature. In fact, the essence of human confusion is not the natural disaster itself, but the limited understanding of its causes and movement mechanism. All scholars, especially those engaged in natural science research, are inevitably at a loss when facing the unknown world.
The history of modern human science is only 400 years, and in this 400-year history, new hypotheses and new disciplines are constantly emerging. In the words of Academician He, "From Galileo to now, the development of scientific standards is extremely rapid." With the rapid development of science, the original theories are constantly updated and eliminated. Even so, facing the universe, facing the ecosystem on which we live, facing ourselves, such as our brains, we are still at a loss. Under the banner of science, blowing the horn of conquering and transforming nature, have we done less stupid things? If you really want to adhere to the "people-oriented", you should do your own study in a down-to-earth manner and don't talk nonsense.
The survival and development of human beings depend on a good environment and a harmonious and balanced ecosystem. Environmental orientation and ecological orientation are people-oriented and all mankind-oriented. Nature has created mankind, and the future of mankind still depends on nature. Obviously, the relationship between man and nature is a logical problem first. The so-called "when dealing with the relationship between man and nature, is it people-oriented, or environment and ecology-oriented?" This is a profound philosophical problem. In my opinion, it should be people-oriented. This is a statement that splits and opposes the relationship between man and nature. If it is not intentional, it is a simple logical error. (detailed)
Related comments
In the process of human evolution, we still have many unknown things, such as some things and phenomena, other animals instinctively perceive, but human beings know nothing. Therefore, even if we pursue anthropocentrism, we should be in awe of nature and listen to its advice anytime and anywhere.
★ A so-called scientific and technological worker doesn't know how to respect the laws of nature and make them obey people's subjective initiative. This is obviously putting the cart before the horse, giving a green light to man-made disasters and exposing an idealistic trend of thought. Only by respecting nature and objective laws can human beings ensure their own safe survival and development. This is Scientific Outlook on Development.
★ CSI: You are a famous scientist. Don't forget that scientists like you often play a leading role in the process of destroying nature. All the anti-natural behaviors of human beings will be retaliated by nature. It's just the duration of revenge, some of which we can meet when we are alive, and some of which we can't meet. An important principle of Marxist philosophy is that the laws of nature can be found, but they cannot be changed. We should find and avoid natural disasters, not change nature.
★ Mr. He Lao is also a master of nature. People-oriented, what about other life on earth? People should be modest, not condescending, and do whatever they want. Respect for nature and other life is what human beings should do most.
★ SARS, tsunami, global warming ... In the face of frequent disasters, whether it is human's own fault or not, we should reflect, not shirk!
★ He Laoshi still speaks well. Everything in nature is to serve mankind. Trees can be cut down, and some animals can be killed if necessary, and rivers can be cut off if necessary. Only when doing these things, people should think more about environmental protection, take a long-term view and minimize side effects. In short, it is impossible for people not to get something from nature, and they will continue to get it in the future. At the same time, with the development of science and the progress of thought, it will also give more protection to nature. Don't worry.