By: Emilie Higgins

The idea that humanity and nature are separate, distinct entities is deeply embedded in contemporary society.  Much of the Western world has long viewed humans not only as separate from nature, but superior to it. This perspective has profound cultural, economic, and environmental consequences that have become increasingly evident in the face of the escalating climate crisis. 

The historical separation process

It is difficult to identify a single event, regime, or country in which the ideological separation of humans from nature first emerged. However, researchers, philosophers, ecologists, and others have hypothesised the divide happened gradually through several key historical shifts in the understanding of both humans and nature. 

The concept of a distinct separation of the mind and body can be traced back to ancient Greek philosophy. Plato’s theory of mind-body dualism purports that our ability to reason separates us from the imperfect world, or, in other words, Nature. This early philosophical train of thought laid the foundation for the separation of humanity and the natural world. 

In the early modern period, philosophers and scientists have cemented the dualist argument. Francis Bacon (and many alike) argued nature exists to serve humans and that the mind is a tool for mastering the physical world. In the 17th century, René Descartes reframed the world in his writings on Cartesian dualism. Like his predecessors, it was clear to Descartes that humans, as the only rational beings, must be wholly separate and superior to nature and nonhuman animals, which were seen as mindless machines to be mastered and exploited. Descartes was greatly influential in shaping modern concepts of science, human identities, and animal identities in western society. During the millennia-long time period, philosophers and scientists reinforced increasingly widespread anthropocentric perspectives in Western society.

The rise of Judeo-Christian values 2000 years ago marked a major change in the perceptions of nature and its ‘purpose’. Historian Lynn White argued that Judeo-Christian beliefs laid the values for modern anthropocentrism. Previously, belief systems with multiple gods and earth spirits where humans were considered part of nature dominated the Western world. Conversely, in both Judaism and Christianity, God is placed outside and above nature. It is a crucial part of Chirstian teachings that God made the world for Adam and Eve so they could take what they needed from the natural world. According to the Old Testament, God made humans in his own image and granted dominion over Earth. Today, these theological ripple throughout the Western world.

The development of the concept of “wilderness” further isolated humanity from nature. In The Trouble with Wilderness, environmental historian William Cronin describes American wilderness as “invented” and “constructed”, merely a consumerist product or recreational thing to be used. In its essence, wilderness is an illusion of pristineness. Wilderness is often imagined as some distant landscape to escape the realities of society. Yet this framing provides a way of ignoring responsibility, both for this distant “wilderness” and the nature of our everyday lives. Notably, the United States National Parks movement is well-known for its ambitious targets to preserve threatened landscapes, but it frames nature as some pristine “great outdoors”. It also obscures the histories of Indigenous peoples who inhabited many landscapes later designated as “untouched” national parks. In addition, the depiction of an untouched landscape as the “ideal” marginalises and devalues highly modified areas where nature can, in fact, flourish. However, this idea that nature should be uninhabited suggests the only way we can save nature is to die, therefore practically impossible to do so.  To avoid risking both nature and humanity, we must instead seek to value all natures, however untraditional.

Capitalism further institutionalised and intensified the separation between humans and nature. Capitalism reduces nature to “raw materials” and “resources” that can be manufactured into commodities for a profit. The emergence of private property enabled the enclosure of land which allowed ecosystems to become ownable assets. Some scholars argue that the human brain has evolved to be destructive, making capitalism and its exploitive consequences inevitable. Others, including ecologist Michael Loreau, challenge this view by arguing humans are neither solely destructive nor protective of nature. Historically, many societies did not have a concept of private property, meaning land could not be commoditised, and animals were viewed as equals. In contrast, contemporary capitalism allows us to monetise practically every aspect of the natural world. This has led to the conclusion by some of these scholars that we truly live in the ‘capitalocene’ as opposed to the ‘anthropocene’, reflecting the widespread influence of capitalism throughout the world.

The gap between society and nature widened as modern language developed. Many indigenous languages don’t have a word for ‘nature’. For example, the Māori identify themselves by the history of their lands, oceans, rivers, lakes. They view they are the land and the land is them, which is very far removed from the western separatist view. Today, new terms will help us use language to bridge the gap in our thinking and better understand nature. Yet intellectual understanding alone is not required for connection, in the same way one can feel deeply connected to a person who speaks a different language. Even so, developing language that better expresses the entanglement of nature and society could foster a broader shift in thinking, helping to reconnect the two.

Reconnection as response

A worldview that perceives humans and nature as fundamentally separate struggles to address ecological crisis. This view ignores the reality that humans are integral, biological parts of ecosystems, instead placing society on a baseless pedestal. Our actions are inconsistent with the fact our lives rely on nature for survival. Instead, our current industrial and social systems further alienate ourselves from nature. To fix the climate crisis, we must reject the way we view industry, recreation, social life, and all other aspects of human life, and adopt a more holistic view of life. The survival of humanity requires us to see nature in humanity and the humanity in nature.

Bridging this divide requires an educational change. Education serves as the ideal vehicle for this systemic reshaping. Education shapes young minds, as well as the cultural norms and values of the next generation. We need a thoroughly nature-focused education, which will require a complex curricula redesign of teaching at all levels of education. Today’s children suffer from ‘nature-deficit disorder’ due to decreased time outdoors. To address the resulting behavioural and psychological problems, it is not enough to simply increase outdoor playtime. It is not enough to simply increase outdoor playtime; it requires sparking a curiosity in young minds that challenges the “Man vs. Wild” narrative. Practices such as nature journaling, outdoor exploration, and story time can create a lasting connection to the natural world in primary school aged children by fostering a “land ethic” where humans see themselves not as masters of the land, but as members of a “biotic community”. Ultimately, a more nature-focused education will empower future generations to live sustainably and recognize their inextricable ties to nature.

The rift between society and nature has developed over millennia, but the need for reconnection is urgent. It is clear that this separation has fostered a world of environmental destruction for centuries. Reintegrating nature into our understanding of what it means to be human is necessary to successfully address the climate crisis.