In the contemporary world of skyscrapers, smartphones and paved streets it is easy to forget that man, despite all his adaptions and advancements, is a part of nature. The human race has come to view itself as a separate force, something fundamentally different from the rest of life on earth, however in the short essay “The Lives of a Cell” by Lewis Thomas it is explained that this is not true. In “The Lives of a Cell” Thomas explains that humans are derived from and made of the same indispensable building blocks as all other life forms teaching the reader that despite their diversity earth’s inhabitants have more than their home planet in common.
According to Thomas’ essay there is a good chance that all life on earth was “derived, originally from some single cell, fertilized in a bolt of lightning as the earth cooled” (p. 38, line 83-85). He explains that all members of the myriad of living things on our planet; the lark, the sparrow, the mountain lion, the mule deer, next-door neighbors, stray dogs and bunches of bananas on the kitchen table, can trace their ancestry back to this microscopic organism. From his writing, it becomes palpable that, though distantly, all of Earth’s creatures are related to one another, that “the resemblance of enzymes of grasses to those of whales is a family resemblance” (p. 38 line 87-89). By demonstrating this relation Thomas is able to better prove his prevalent theme - that earth is like a cell and man only a component of it, no more valuable to the whole than any other species. Thomas shows that all of the globe’s life forms share a common ancestor in cells and are connected by their DNA, much as they are connected by their existence upon the earth; that despite their diversity all species ...
... middle of paper ...
...essay “The Life of a Cell”, it is clear to see how strongly all life is interconnected. In his dissertation, Thomas explains that the cells inside living creatures are, in fact, ecosystems inhabited by microscopic creatures that, although organisms with their own with separate DNA, are very much a part of the cells system. He compares the planet Earth to a cell to show the reader that mankind is simply another part in the world’s complex ecosystem, just as the small creatures, like mitochondria are part of the cell. Reading “The Lives of a Cell” makes it conspicuous that the human race evolved as a part of nature from the same cellular origin as the rest of Earth’s inhabitants. Instead of being born as something outside the system the human race in part of a vast and exquisitely beautiful planet full of working parts and species that must coincide in harmony.
In “Life of a Cell,” the author uses rhetoric and figurtic language to reassure peoples fear of disease and to assure them the bodies system is fully capable to attacking anything that would be an issue or illness to itself. He writes about the fear of germs and bacteria; the ineveitibility of germs attacking a cell system. He writes about the many preventions and precautions others take to avoid diseases which metaphorically they “come after them for profit.” Thomas writes this in less scienfitic terms that an average person could comprehend and be assured that their fears are irritaonal to an extent. By using metaphors, similes, personification, and imagery, the reader is reassured that the human body is fully capable of handling diseases.
One can almost feel the searing penetration of Lewis Thomas’ analytical eye as it descends the narrow barrel of the microscope and explodes onto a scene of vigorous, animated, interactive little cells—cells inescapably engrossed in relaying messages to one another with every bump and bounce; with every brush of the elbow, lick of the stamp, and click of the mouse…
Our awareness, our perception within nature, as Thomas states, is the contrast that segregates us from our symbols. It is the quality that separates us from our reflections, from the values and expectations that society has oppressed against itself. However, our illusions and hallucinations of nature are merely artifacts of our anthropocentric idealism. Thomas, in “Natural Man,” criticizes society for its flawed value-thinking, advocating how it “[is merely] a part of a system . . . [and] we are, in this view, neither owners nor operators; at best, [are] motile tissues specialized for receiving information” (56). We “spread like a new growth . . . touching and affecting every other kind of life, incorporating ourselves,” destroying the nature we coexist with, “[eutrophizing] the earth” (57). However, Thomas questions if “we are the invaded ones, the subjugated, [the] used?” (57). Due to our anthropocentric idealism, our illusions and hallucinations of nature, we forget that we, as organisms, are microscopically inexistent. To Thomas, “we are not made up, as we had always supposed, of successively enriched packets of our own parts,” but rather “we are shared, rented, occupied [as] the interior of our cells, driving them, providing the oxidative energy that sends us out for the improvement of each shining day, are the mitochondria” (1).
He goes on to describe how this common ancestry means that we still have a lot in common with everything on this planet. Thomas says that "we still share genes around, and the resemblance of the enzymes of grasses to those of whales is a family resemblance" (3). Thomas relates to the reader that he has been trying to conceive of the earth itself as a type of organism, "but it is no go" (4). The earth is just too big, too complex for such an analogy. But then it came to him. The earth is most like a single cell (4).
Thesis statement: Nature is not only for the human race, but it provides habitat to millions of organisms and human race is just one of the organisms,
The difference between a rock and a human truly just comes down to a few different variations of carbon molecules. Yet this straightforward science ignores why humans, in all of their complexity, stem from such a random happenstance. Only knowing this science of life has not necessarily led to understanding its meaning. For that answer, famed transcendentalists Ralph Waldo Emerson and Henry David Thoreau look within the self, rather than in a laboratory. In his essay, Self-Reliance, Emerson hypothesizes the meaning to be in independence; whereas, Thoreau, from his nature experience in Walden, theorizes it to be in simplicity. At the least, Thoreau finds it in a life without an intrusive government, which is the reason he pens Civil Disobedience.
Charles Darwin’s theory of natural selection explains the general laws by which any given species transforms into other varieties and species. Darwin extends the application of his theory to the entire hierarchy of classification and states that all forms of life have descended from one incredibly remote ancestor. The process of natural selection entails the divergence of character of specific varieties and the subsequent classification of once-related living forms as distinct entities on one or many levels of classification. The process occurs as a species varies slightly over the course of numerous generations. Through inheritance, natural selection preserves each variation that proves advantageous to that species in its present circumstances of living, which include its interaction with closely related species in the “struggle for existence” (Darwin 62).
At the same time Thoreau often lamented science’s tendency to kill poetry. The scientific writings of others and his own careful observations often revealed life to him, but at other times rendered nature lifeless. (4) Modern-day Thoreauvians are also aware of science’s role in the imperialistic conquest of nature. We love the wild, yet science has largely become a tool for control, commodification and increased consumption, rather than for the appreciation and protection of nature. (5) The proper role of science in human society and in our own lives is thus an important issue.
Human create themselves through deliberate process, and consciousness to transform and to manipulate the nature. Engel (1975) argues the materialistic conception is determined by the production and reproduction of existing life. In which this has two characters; “first is the production of the means of existence, such as food, and clothing. On the other hand, the production of human being themselves, the propagation of species”. The social organization of human life is determined by the two kind of production; “by the stage of development of labor, and of the family on the other” (Engels, 1975: pp.71-72). However, all of the process have not done by men or women separately, but as a collective to create society (Tong, 1998: pp. 95;
Henry Thoreau’s relationship to nature underwent many changes throughout the course of his life. He especially made a much discussed shift from Emersonian Transcendentalism, to scientific data collection. Thoreau followed varied paths on his quest to understand the world in which he lived. As he grew older he managed to amass a huge collection of information about the plants and animals in the Concord region of Massachusetts. But his greatest contribution to the world is not his scientific research; rather it is the example of respect and thoughtfulness with which he approached nature. This individualistic and spiritual approach to nature differentiates him from modern day ecologists. Thoreau’s quest was to understand better and appreciate nature as a whole and the greater role it plays in connection to all things. Not only did he succeed in doing so, but he has also inspired his readers to question, observe, and appreciate the natural world. His thoughts on nature are recognized today as precursors of the conservation movement and also inspiration for the creation of national parks. Thoreau’s approach to nature varied throughout his life, but his purpose did not. His myriad approach to his work is exactly what brought about his success, and sets him apart from other nature writers and ecologists who share his quest.
To support his first premise, humans are members of the “Earth’s community of life” in the same capacity that nonhuman members are, Taylor cites the fact that we are only one species among many. Humans are subject to “the [same] laws of genetics, of natural selection, and of adaptation” (p.633) that all other livings
Both “The Clan of One-Breasted Women” and “An Entrance to the Woods,” gives a viewpoint on the human relationship with nature. Terry Tempest Williams critizes man for being ruthless when it comes to nature and other humans. Wendell Berry believes similarly the same thing. He believes that man needs nature just as much as they need civilization. However, regardless of the differences, both writers offer an insightful perspective on the forever changing relationship between man and nature. And this relationship is, and always will be, changing.
Fromm underlines a split in humans, a theme of separation that is evident. To begin with, Fromm proposes that humans have been torn away from their prehistoric union with nature because of “reason.” Fromm suggests that man is a part of nature, while being “apart” from it, this is a result of “self-awareness, reason, and imagination.” These humanistic characteristics have disrupted harmony in nature, creating this dichotomous human existence. Furthermo...
- - -. The Rise of Life on Earth. New York: New Directions, 1991. Print.
First, an organism has a basic striving to actualize, maintain, and enhance itself. Second, all persons are in the center of a continually changing world of experience (phenomenal field). Meaning the person’s perception of this field is his or her “reality.” Finally, as a result of interacting with the environment, the person develops a sense of self of self- concept, consisting of images and