After reading The Natural Contract, I believe it is important to preserve the nature and protect the environment. Man-made disruptions such as land explorations, resource extractions… have caused serious environmental changes as well as climate change. Air pollution and global warming are one of the serious environmental issues countries need to deal with. These are all threatening our nature and life. I like the way Serres uses “Parasite” to describe human beings. “ The parasite would destroy the host without realizing it. Neither use nor exchange has value in its eyes, for it appropriates things---one could say that it steals them… The parasite is always abusive”. Serres guides us to reflect on the pernicious impacts we have done
…show more content…
With religion, love exists and human beings would love the nature. I think Serres’s thinking is way too ideal. Serres suggests religion helps to reflect, to exist as a whole, which leads to a true bond. Serres does not explain what kind of religion we need to have and does love really exist when there is a religion? I think Serres needs to further explain how to bring law, philosophy, religion, love, human beings, and nature into balance. Is nature identical with religion or technology? Could human beings and nature be set in the same unit? Could we really negotiate and maintain a reciprocal relationship with nature through the natural contract? What are the ways to show our love to nature and is it possible to let nature shows its love to human beings too? I am not saying what Serres suggests are unreachable. There are still ways to go before we establish the natural contract. I believe it is important to spread the idea of being environmentally friendly and like what Serres said, love our nature. However, I am not sure whether Serres’s natural contract could really give human beings and nature a clear rule and regulations to solve the environmental changes issues. I believe amendments have to be made and all the above questions need to be addressed before we sign the natural
With religion, love exists and human beings would love the nature. I think Serres’s thinking is way too ideal. Serres suggests religion helps to reflect, to exist as a whole, which leads to a true bond. Serres does not explain what kind of religion we need to have and does love really exist when there is a religion? I think Serres needs to further explain how to bring law, philosophy, religion, love, human beings, and nature into balance. Is nature identical with religion or technology? Could human beings and nature be set in the same unit? Could we really negotiate and maintain a reciprocal relationship with nature through the natural contract? What are the ways to show our love to nature and is it possible to let nature shows its love to human beings too? I am not saying what Serres suggests are unreachable. There are still ways to go before we establish the natural contract. I believe it is important to spread the idea of being environmentally friendly and like what Serres said, love our nature. However, I am not sure whether Serres’s natural contract could really give human beings and nature a clear rule and regulations to solve the environmental changes issues. I believe amendments have to be made and all the above questions need to be addressed before we sign the natural