Respect for nature is undoubtedly highly valued in the times we live in. Postmodern times, in the sense that, after — post — having experienced the undesirable unforeseen effects of modernity, we try to correct them. Among the ideas of modernity that are most clearly outlined, thanks to authors such as Descartes (1596-1650), is that of freedom understood as liberation.
The entire reality, about which wisdom incessantly questions itself, while at the same time catching glimpses of answers from time immemorial; is understood by modernity as being made up of three components: the supreme and absolute principle, the observing human subject, and that which is directly observed: nature.
We know that the birth of Greek philosophy, during the so-called pre-Socratic era: between the 7th and 6th centuries before the Christian era; It is characterized by the search for the supreme principle from natural phenomena.
According to Giovanni Reale (1931-2014), a prominent scholar of ancient philosophy; it is the Pythagoreans who conceive the world we observe as a cosmos, an ordered whole, arranged by a supreme principle. Indeed, cosmos, in classical Greek, is a noun derived from the verb kosmeō, meaning: I order, I adjust according to a certain rule. Hence, cosmetic, is that which allows personal arrangement.
Pythagorean wisdom recognizes, from ordinary experience, that the principles of the cosmos are the principles of numbers. Pythagoreanism is appreciated by modern scholars such as Galileo. It is recognized that nature can be understood through mathematics, thus laying the foundations of modern physics.
Along with this aforementioned recognition of an internal order, a statute proper to nature; In modernity, the desire for human liberation is presented: to free ourselves from the limitations offered by our other companions in the whole that is reality. As we saw before, these companions are: the supreme principle and nature. Descartes shows us this desire in his “Discourse on Method”, seeking the path (odos in classical Greek) to the goal, hence: met(a)odo(s). Path to the goal of liberation from the limitations imposed on us by both the supreme principle, above the human being, and nature, with its own laws that demand respect.
Therefore, the perfect science that modernity seeks to create is that of the dominion of nature to make us increasingly free. In contrast, the science conceived by classical Greek philosophy, Aristotelianism in particular, is the certain (sure, firm) knowledge of reality by causes: real principles. Certain knowledge, yearned for by the deep-rooted conviction that approaching it brings supreme happiness. It is seen that happiness consists in contemplating (theorein) the supreme principle (arché) through nature (physis). For this reason, the Swedish philologist Ingemar Dühring (1903-1984), in his work: Aristotle. Exposition and interpretation of his thought, highlights that the wise man from Stagira is the secretary of nature.
Aristotelianism distinguishes science (episteme) from technique (techné). Modernity, on the other hand, has generated, in its liberating efforts, the so-called technology, where science and technique have become dangerously intertwined, resulting in a double-edged sword with respect to well-being or catastrophe.
Science is cultivated, according to the modern paradigm, to transform nature, aiming to ensure that it does not truncate human aspirations towards a progressive and indefinite liberation. Thus, some authors refer to the homo sapiens —the wise human being— of premodernity as having become the homo faber —the transforming human being— of modernity.
In postmodernity we have to live with the consequences of the attitude of homo faber, a factor in the unbalanced technological society, in which techniques —supposedly liberating— prevail over Ethics. Such prevalence of the “can do” of techniques over the “must be” of Ethics has caused and continues to cause damage to nature itself, whose status, which an adequate development of Ethics would have to protect, has been manipulated by human desires for self-affirmation —liberationism—, leading to the blinding of intelligence, in order to be able to approach a peaceful and patient understanding that authentic freedom is a necessary condition, but not sufficient, to achieve the desired full and real good.
In this regard, the Magisterium of the Catholic Church invites us to reflect: «In the Age of Enlightenment (…) the call to freedom resounded with all its force (…) many saw future history as an irresistible process of liberation that must lead to an era in which man, totally free at last, would enjoy happiness already on this earth. In the perspective of such an ideology of progress, man wanted to become master of nature. The servitude he had suffered until then was based on ignorance and prejudice. Man, by wresting from nature its secrets, subjected it to his service. The conquest of freedom thus constituted the objective pursued through the development of science and technology.» Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (1986) Instruction. Libertatis conscientia.
