Embracing Nature's Carbon Cycle: A Dilemma of Progress
Written on
Chapter 1: The Dichotomy of Existence
How do we reconcile the idea that everything is interconnected, as many mystics and thinkers propose, with the evident diversity we see in the world? If a divine presence pervades everything, as monotheistic beliefs suggest, why does evil exist? Likewise, if all things are natural, as science posits, how does humanity endanger Earth’s ecosystems?
We have a tendency to identify patterns in differences, leading us to form comprehensive categories like "substance," "God," "nature," and "universe." Yet, we also focus on these differences, dissecting wholes into parts to gain a clearer understanding of the world, often overlooking the broader context.
As Iain McGilchrist argues in The Master and His Emissary, this duality may stem from the distinct functions of our brain's hemispheres. This tension between holistic and analytical views is illustrated in the documentary "Carbon: The Unauthorized Biography," an episode from David Suzuki's series The Nature of Things.
Section 1.1: The Carbon Cycle Explained
This documentary features prominent scientists, including Neil deGrasse Tyson, with narration by Sarah Snook, who embodies a carbon atom. The central thesis asserts that we often misinterpret carbon. When discussing hazardous CO2 emissions, we tend to vilify carbon as though it is intrinsically harmful. The documentary urges us to recognize the marvels of the carbon cycle and its role as a building block of life. Rather than being our adversary, carbon is portrayed as a remarkable element.
Tracing back to the Big Bang and the formation of stars, the documentary highlights the unique nature of carbon atoms, which, due to their instability, are capable of bonding with various other atoms. This very adaptability made the emergence of life possible.
Photosynthesis plays a critical role in the carbon cycle, as plants capture sunlight, water, and CO2 to synthesize glucose—a vital energy source for themselves and the herbivores that rely on them. The Great Oxygenation Event, occurring over two billion years ago, transformed our atmosphere, allowing for a balanced coexistence between flora and fauna.
Animals exhale CO2, which plants utilize, while plants release oxygen as a by-product, essential for animal respiration. Furthermore, plants sequester atmospheric carbon through their roots, preventing dangerous accumulations of carbon dioxide.
Thus, carbon is akin to any beneficial element; it is essential for life within certain limits, but excessive amounts become toxic. The carbon cycle has achieved a delicate balance over millions of years, sustaining life for both plants and animals, including humans.
A biologist featured in the documentary poetically states, "We are embodied sunlight," emphasizing that our existence stems from the fruits of photosynthesis. She boldly claims, "We are not separate from nature. We embody nature, as do all things," from our physical forms to the plastics we create.
Section 1.2: The Paradox of Human Progress
Yet, this assertion raises a paradox as the documentary shifts focus from plant life to human society. Snook, as carbon, expresses to us, "Like magicians, you manipulate the world at astonishing speed."
A scientist on the show elaborates on the peculiar and perilous nature of our actions: humans manufacture vast quantities of materials—plastics, steel, and more—exceeding the total mass of all living organisms combined.
Carbon warns us, "You may think you control me, but remember, I have reshaped your world before. I will do so again."
The environmental issue arises from our naive interpretation of progress, resulting in an alarming increase of carbon in the atmosphere, contributing to global warming and jeopardizing ecosystems. This is exacerbated by industrial emissions and deforestation, disrupting the carbon cycle and the equilibrium that has existed for eons.
Chapter 2: The Incoherence of Environmentalism
The challenge I pose is understanding how this imbalance exists if, as the biologist claims, "We are not separate from nature."
There appears to be a contradiction here. Materially, we are composed of carbon atoms, and since those are natural, we are too. However, in another sense, we diverge significantly from nature. No other species has surpassed the total biomass of the planet. When the documentary emphasizes carbon’s uniqueness due to its electron structure, it subtly suggests that carbon itself is not entirely natural.
Consider this perspective: if something consistently evolves, what purpose does it serve to generalize about its nature? We may claim nature is creative, but if that creativity includes self-destruction, then labeling it as "creative" becomes meaningless. If all forms of creativity are natural, then so too is our anthropogenic warming, undermining the argument for environmentalism.
This illustrates how holistic and analytical perspectives clash. Scientists aim to highlight the unity of natural processes to counter pessimistic views about modern knowledge. This holistic view posits that all life is interconnected through carbon.
Yet, they also recognize the severe threat humanity poses to the balance of evolution. While we are intertwined with nature, we risk the survival of numerous species, including our own, necessitating a sustainable approach to carbon. This analytical viewpoint distinguishes between what we might call nature and humanity, or wilderness and civilization.
The documentary struggles with this distinction, often coming off as contradictory, by personifying carbon. The repeated characterization of carbon as "the life of the party" allows viewers to connect with nature more easily, but scientists typically regard such personification as a simplistic tactic to engage the audience.
Ultimately, while we depend on carbon, the desire to assert our independence creates tension. Nature's creation of carbon has facilitated life’s evolution, inadvertently giving rise to personhood, culture, and the quest for progress. Human advancement includes a unique form of creativity—intelligent design—which seeks to enhance what nature has provided. While nature remains untamed, we seek refuge from its blind processes.
As we confront the consequences of our advancements, we must consider how to express our creativity without disrupting the delicate balance of our planet.
The existential revulsion towards nature is rooted in a rejection of wildness by modern, culturally shaped individuals who aspire to civility and freedom. Despite their attempts to humanize nature through personifications, scientists inadvertently reinforce this alienation by elaborating on nature's mindlessness and brutality.
Why do we shun nature while simultaneously relying on it for survival? This divide may stem from our journey toward a cultural existence, yet there is an existential component as well. In striving to define ourselves as unique beings, we often judge nature harshly for its difference.
Nature indeed exhibits unparalleled creativity, yet we possess a distinct advantage: our ability to create with intention. We can envision ideals and rationally pursue goals, distinguishing ourselves from nature's random processes.
This conscious creation sets us apart, allowing us to reject mediocrity and strive for greater achievements. Our cultural evolution, rooted in animism, led us to see nature as filled with spirits, distancing ourselves further from wilderness as we built complex societies.
This transition signifies a departure from nature’s raw essence toward a humanized version of existence, which we deem superior to nature's indifferent reality. Our pride in human achievement often manifests as a disdain for nature’s rawness, highlighting an existential conflict that questions whether we can remain human while respecting nature's equilibrium.
What might it mean to yield to nature, relinquishing our imaginative capacity and the drive to innovate? Would this not lead to a regression into a state of mere survival, jeopardizing our very existence?
I publish my writings in both paperback and eBook formats available on Amazon. My latest work, Questing for Epiphanies in a Haunted House, includes 99 diverse articles spanning 600 pages.