We do not have to be violent with the nature. We have to love it!

by Laura Langone

....”From dust we were created, and to dust we shall return”... how many times we have heard these words pronounced by the "unmentionables", in front of the apologists of the religious metaphysics? Or better, "earth we were and earth we shall return". It there has always been in the human conception an indissoluble tie between nature and life: on the one hand the seed that sprouts, the plant that grows and matures and then dies returning to the earth; on the other the child who is born, crosses adolescence and adult age in order then to die returning to the earth. Since the dawn men have inquired on their genesis, on their relationship with the created, with the earth.

In the fifth century B.C. Empedocles had assumed four original and immutable roots (rhizomata) as principles or archai from which the whole thing, the being, derived: fire, water, air and earth, joint and separated by two cosmic forces: Love or Friendship (Aphrodite or Philìa) and Hatred and Discord (Neikos). However, one of the first unmentionable to be put on the dock for having denied Gods existed is Anassagora from Clazomene, author of a sort of "Big Bang". He, in fact, embraces the thesis of unity and homogeneity of the being formulated by the previous philosophers. However, he denies that it is immovable and lacking of determining factors; imagining it as an original chaotic mixture (migma) in which all the qualitative and infinitely divisible principles or "seeds", of which the various bodies will be constituted, reside; therefore earth in the life, life in the earth, man and nature.

Then the organisation of the migma becomes the effect of the nous or intelligence, lighter and thinner matter that guides and partitions the seeds in different proportions in the various things, that is "all is in all". On other hand, Democritus admits an infinite entity, a plurality of countless entities (atoms), which differ among them for shape and size, order and position. Nevertheless, the one who fully deserves the title of "unmentionable" is certainly Epicurus who, following Democritus, even if with some divergence, resumes the atomic theory: the atoms are infinite, unalterable and imperceptible; however, their shapes are not several as in the previous theory but finite; their eternal movement is not dispersion but, having weight, they are subject to fall vertically and to a minimal declination (parènkclesis), a sort of gravity.

Nowadays we are in the age of secularisation and of religions at the same time, we have lost the "innocence" of our ancestors, we have stopped to put ourselves in relationship with the nature, with our mother: the earth. We have betrayed, oppressed her. History is nothing else that the history of the nature, of the `homo naturalis’ who has abandoned the ‘amore naturaliter’, who it is trying to kill his mother and his father; differently from Oedipus, nevertheless, he is aware of that.

That happened when the man abandoned his natural intellect, in order to chase a unnatural intellect, or unknowledgeable, to say it as Kant; that is when it abandoned the reason for the

spiritual fond contemplation. And, in fact, God said: "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. And let him have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every reptiles that creeps on the earth (Genesis 1,26-27). What He, Lord of the Skies, had previewed exactly happened. The man indeed dominates, however such dominion is precarious, suicide, since the man’s destiny is indissolubly linked to the nature: when the nature perishes, same fate will happen to the man and then neither there will be earth, nor life. "We do not have to be violent with the nature. We have to love it instead"…. (Epicurus).