4.

Part II brings up the topic of morality and how it relates to nature. Kohak states that the way we perceive nature influences the way we conceive it. I would agree with this statement in that if I see nature as a waste and nothing important, I'm probably not going to show any care or concern for it. Therefore, in relation to morality, I think it's as simple as recognizing the beauty of nature (whether it is plants or animals) and treating it in a humane way. I believe that as inhabitants of the earth, we have moral duties to uphold to keep it an environment that plants, animals, and humans can live in. It's not like pollution and other environmental issues are only affecting animals.

On page 53, Kohak states that nature as a whole is not something we see. I feel like he is giving nature God-like qualities. Maybe some people perceive God in the nature surrounding them, however, God created nature. While we can see nature, we can't exactly see God. The three ways that historians reveal humans relating to nature is thought provoking. After reading through them, I was wondering why a combination of the three fails to exist? I feel like throughout this book, it always has to be one way or the other. Black or white. Why can't humans be aware of nature, depend on it, yet show a caring attitude towards it all at once? Maybe my ideas are too much to ask in a world that is only seeking personal short-term gains. To a certain extent, I feel like if people lived the way we were taught back in kindergarten (don't waste electricity/water, only use what you need, don't litter, plant trees etc.) the world wouldn't be such a mess.

Maybe I am cynical but Kohak's part about theocentrism portrays that the challenge is for humans to live in peace with nature - something that seems impossible for society to do. With so many opinions, theological beliefs, and issues in faith matters, I don't see how people can come to an agreement. The fact of over consumption and irresponsible lifestyles are made apparent in this section which I can agree with. It's just a matter of how to compensate for the unnecessary destruction we have already caused.