Nature

The idea of nature reaches further than almost any other in these volumes, because the word serves several purposes at once. It names the whole order of things that comes to be and passes away without human contrivance. It names the essence or constitution of a particular being, as when we speak of the nature of man. And it names a standard, the natural as against the artificial, the customary or the corrupt. The Harvard Classics add a fourth sense that the ancient philosophers hardly used: nature as scenery, the landscape that consoles, terrifies or instructs. Physicians, theologians, Stoic emperors, economists, voyagers and lyric poets all appeal to nature, and they seldom mean the same thing. The confusion is itself instructive, since much of the argument in these books concerns which meaning should govern the others.

Several authors notice the ambiguity and try to discipline it. Raleigh complains that the loose use of the word hides God’s glory. Nature, he says, works only when matter is present and has no choice, so that the true cause is God¹. She is obedient, possesses nothing of her own, and acts by an infused faculty without knowing herself². Browne puts the same view memorably: nature is God’s servant and “publick Manuscript,” the settled course God ordained rather than a principle acting on its own³. Berkeley ascribes the regular course of things to divine wisdom rather than to matter^4,5. Coleridge calls nature the art of God⁶. Long, commenting on Marcus Aurelius, approves Butler’s definition of the natural as the stated, fixed, settled and rejects vague personifications⁷. Against this stands the definition Darwin gives. For him nature means only the aggregate action of natural laws, the sequence of events as we ascertain it⁸. Huxley calls nature an order with which nothing interferes, which mankind must learn and govern itself by⁹. Lyell’s geology rests on the uniformity of nature’s course^10,11, and Kant defines nature in general as existence determined by universal laws, which he then borrows as the model for the moral test^12,13. The Bhagavad-Gita offers a third possibility. There Nature is beginningless and works all changes through her qualities, while Spirit, which also has no beginning, does not act^14,15.

Whatever nature is, many authors agree that we know her imperfectly. Bacon makes man the servant and interpreter of nature, able to know and do only what he has observed of her order¹⁶. The mind must wait upon her rather than presume to overrule her¹⁷. Hume finds that nature conceals her secret powers and secures our inference from like causes to like effects by instinct, not by insight^18,19. Pascal says that men rashly examine nature as though they were proportionate to her²⁰. Goethe’s Faust finds that she stays inscrutable even in broad daylight and will not be unveiled by force²¹. Long concludes that our knowledge of the sequence of phenomena is, and must remain, imperfect²². Emerson turns this limit into a theme of its own. Nature, he writes, is a vast promise whose secret stays untold²³, a mocker who leads us on toward nowhere²⁴, although she is also the incarnation of a thought and the counterpart of the soul^25,26.

Where definition fails, personification takes over. More’s nature is a tender mother who sets necessary things like air, water and earth in the open and hides vain things away²⁷. Montaigne’s universal mother teaches that life and death are indifferent²⁸. Shakespeare shows how dangerous the figure can be. Edmund takes Nature for his goddess and mocks the custom that brands bastards base²⁹, while Lear calls on the same goddess to curse his daughter, whose ingratitude he names “disnatur’d”³⁰. Carlyle’s kind mother hides her mystery so that man can walk securely over the abyss³¹. Thoreau’s mother is vast, wild and affectionate, and society weans us from her³².

On the order of nature the ancients and the early moderns largely agree. Socrates in the Phaedo argues that nature requires compensation and a circle of generation and would not go on one leg only³³. Epictetus sees a unified order in the regular rhythms of flowering, fruiting, moon and sun³⁴. Harvey, demonstrating the circulation of the blood, argues again and again that nature does nothing in vain³⁵. She gives no heart before its office is needed, and she added the right ventricle in order to drive blood through the lungs³⁶. Browne finds no grotesques in nature and more wisdom in small creatures than in great wonders³⁷. Kant turns the argument from design toward ethics. Since nature fits each organ to its purpose, and reason would be a poor instrument for producing happiness, reason must exist for the higher end of a good will^38,39. Emerson discovers compensation everywhere, every gift balanced by a defect⁴⁰. He also observes that nature secures her ends through pleasure and even deception⁴¹.

Darwin keeps the language of economy and alters its meaning. Coadaptations still abound⁴², and the ancient canon that nature makes no leaps turns out to be strictly true once extinct forms are counted^43,44. Yet he also says that nature’s bright face hides constant destruction, and that the birds which sing live by destroying life⁴⁵. The tangled bank, with its interdependent plants, birds, insects and worms, still yields grandeur, but now as a product of laws acting around us⁴⁶. Faraday too sees all nature tied together, plants and animals living on each other’s exhalations⁴⁷. Tennyson draws the bleaker conclusion that nature is one with rapine⁴⁸. The older picture of a graded chain of beings, in which Pope sees all things bound by love and mutual dependence⁴⁹ and Milton a scale by which men ascend to God⁵⁰, survives in Darwin only as a remark that beings low in the scale vary more⁵¹.

The Stoics make nature the measure of conduct. Marcus Aurelius tells himself to follow his own nature and the common nature, for the way of both is one⁵², and to live by the reason of his own nature, since nothing contrary to universal nature can befall him⁵³. Whatever the whole brings is good for the part⁵⁴. Nothing according to nature is evil⁵⁵, and death is willed by nature like every other season of life⁵⁶. Cicero applies the same teaching to old age, which nature makes the inevitable last act; to rebel against it is like the giants making war on the gods^57,58. Montaigne agrees that death is a piece of the world’s order⁵⁹. The doctrine has a social side as well. Men are made for co-operation like hands and feet, so that acting against one another is contrary to nature⁶⁰, and universal nature wills mutual help among rational animals⁶¹. More echoes this when he says nature moves men to help one another live merrily⁶². Cicero says nature ties all men together, though more strongly with nearness⁶³. Marcus adds a hierarchy in which inferior things exist for the sake of superior ones and rational beings for one another^64,65.

The Hebrew and Islamic scriptures treat nature as a sign of its Maker. Job’s rain, frost and lions show an order beyond man’s command⁶⁶. The Psalms set out springs and seasons that provide for beasts and men⁶⁷. The Koran presents earth, rivers and lightning as signs for people who reflect⁶⁸. Rousseau’s vicar reads the book of nature, open to all in a universal language, as teaching men to adore its Author⁶⁹. This is where miracle becomes a problem. Browne calls miracles effects against, above or before nature, and he holds that creating nature is as great a work as transcending her⁷⁰. Hume defines a miracle as a violation of laws that uniform experience has firmly established, and he judges such a violation less credible than human deception^71,72. Rousseau counts the unalterable order of nature the best witness to God⁷³, which leaves miracles looking like a weaker testimony. Darwin credits change to law rather than miraculous interposition⁷⁴. Whitman then reverses the polarity: the supernatural departs, and every blade of grass becomes a perfect miracle⁷⁵. Pascal dissents from the whole confidence that nature discloses God. She presents only matter for doubt⁷⁶, and she veils God, so that the impious attribute everything to nature alone⁷⁷.

Pascal also belongs to the Christian contrast between nature and grace. Thomas à Kempis sets self-seeking, deceitful Nature against simple Grace, which looks toward God^78,79. Pascal thinks the two will always coexist, and with them the quarrel between Pelagians and Catholics⁸⁰. He calls nature an image of grace⁸¹, yet one whose defects show that it is only an image⁸². Penn insists that grace perfects nature and never spoils it⁸³. Sin, in this tradition, disorders the cosmos. Milton’s Fall brings harsh winds and discord among the beasts⁸⁴, and the horses that eat each other after Duncan’s murder mirror the unnatural crime of regicide⁸⁵.

As for human nature, many authors find it stubborn. Bacon writes that nature is often hidden, sometimes overcome, and seldom extinguished⁸⁶. Caliban’s nature defeats nurture⁸⁷, and Aesop’s cat-bride still chases the mouse⁸⁸. Pascal is less sure. If custom can destroy natural love, he asks, what is nature at all⁸⁹? Hume answers the sceptic that nature is always too strong for principle⁹⁰, and Rousseau hears the voice of nature in conscience⁹¹. Nature’s authority also extends to the body. Cellini’s patient discovers that nature knows what she requires⁹², Locke advises leaving children to nature rather than to meddling physicians⁹³, and Jenner traces disease to man’s departure from his original state⁹⁴. Adam Smith transfers the healing power to economics, where men’s natural effort to better their condition repairs the folly of policy⁹⁵. Kinship is also natural, which is why Lear’s daughters are monstrous: nature that scorns its origin cannot be safe⁹⁶.

Rousseau gives the state of nature its fullest treatment. He claims to read man’s history in the book of nature, which never lies⁹⁷. Against Hobbes, he holds that the natural condition is the one most favourable to peace and that Hobbes wrongly carried social passions back into it⁹⁸. In that condition men are healthier⁹⁹ and inequality scarcely exists¹⁰⁰. The pastoral imagination had already dreamed of such a state. Gonzalo pictures nature bringing forth abundance with no labour or engines¹⁰¹, and Pope imagines a time when self-love and social love were one¹⁰². Schiller replies that to the savage nature is merely prey or enemy¹⁰³, and that cultivated man must honour nature while bridling its caprice¹⁰⁴. Thoreau looks forward rather than back. In wildness, he says, lies the preservation of the world¹⁰⁵, and he would have man be part and parcel of nature¹⁰⁶. Wordsworth finds in nature the guardian of his moral being¹⁰⁷, and Ruskin calls wild nature a great educator¹⁰⁸.

The arts raise the old question of nature and convention in its sharpest form. Hamlet tells the players not to overstep the modesty of nature¹⁰⁹. Johnson praises Shakespeare as the poet of nature, whose characters spring from general passions rather than local customs¹¹⁰, and Fielding confines the comic writer strictly to nature¹¹¹. Goethe, by contrast, sees a chasm between Nature and Art that genius cannot cross unaided¹¹², and Hugo distinguishes reality according to art from reality according to nature¹¹³. Sidney goes further still: the poet alone surpasses nature, making things better or entirely new¹¹⁴. Bacon seeks to enlarge human empire over nature¹¹⁵, and Descartes aims to make men masters of it¹¹⁶. Geikie answers that man can master the earth only by obeying nature’s laws, as the ruin left by deforestation shows¹¹⁷. Darwin judges nature’s productions truer than man’s¹¹⁸. Emerson dissolves the opposition entirely. Artificial life is natural too, he says, and nature made both the mason and the house¹¹⁹. Andersen’s living nightingale gives the fable’s verdict on the court’s mechanical bird¹²⁰.

Natural scenery, finally, runs from Pliny’s loving description of his villas^121,122 to Darwin’s tropical forests, which inspire wonder and devotion¹²³, and the sublime solitudes of the Andes¹²⁴. Dana records the Cape Horn gales that leave a ship helpless¹²⁵. The influence of physical conditions on peoples is old knowledge. Herodotus calls Egypt the gift of the river¹²⁶, Taine makes climate a motor of national character¹²⁷, and Emerson describes nature shaping a rude northern race into an empire¹²⁸. The Romantics ask whether nature feels with us. Wordsworth trusts that she never betrays the heart that loved her¹²⁹. Coleridge answers that we receive only what we give¹³⁰. Emerson finds natural objects healing and sobering¹³¹, but he also finds that nature always seems to lie somewhere else¹³².

The questions remain open. Nature may be God’s instrument or a self-sufficient order of law. She may be a norm or a mere fact, a mother or a field of rapine. Art may imitate her, conquer her, or simply be her. These texts give no single answer, but they show that each answer carries with it a view of man.