Ever since mankind emerged from its primitive animal state and entered upon human society,¹ it has come to realize the relations of unity and opposition between man and nature. With the evolution and progress of human society, mankind has progressively deepened its understanding of this relationship. To observe this process is an important and basic aspect of the philosophical reflection of mankind; this chapter is an attempt at analysis and interpretation.

THE NAIVE UNDERSTANDING OF RELATIONS

BETWEEN MAN AND NATURE: ANCIENT GREEK

AND CHINESE PHILOSOPHIES

Roughly speaking, before mankind entered civilized society, it was in an extremely weak position in relation to nature, like an infant in the arms of a harsh mother who knew neither mercy nor care for her children. At the beginning, foraging was the only means for survival; fishing and hunting came later; fire gave humans a primitive and meaningful weapon in their struggle against outside surroundings. During this long barbaric period when mankind was under the oppression of nature it was forced into a state of subordination, subjection and control. Even when animal husbandry and agriculture developed, mankind was not strong enough even to challenge nature's control. In this state of subordination to strong natural powers the varied alienated and terrifying forces of nature gradually developed into totism and worship of natural gods and spirits: mankind felt itself surrounded by miraculous forces. With the later emergence of the concept of life after death (the concept of soul), this primitive idea of being surrounded by miraculous forces affected not only everyday life, but the life of the soul which could be separated from the body, and hence have a "next life" after death. At this time, the concept of polytheistic worship gradually emerged, whose description and record constituted the primitive myths which in essence were naive, simple and absurd.

From this kind of cultural background mankind entered upon civilized society. The following essay, in analyzing the relations between man and nature at the beginning of civilization, takes as two typical examples ancient Greek Society for the culture of the West and the ancient Chinese society for the culture of the East.

Greek Society

Man made great advancements during the ancient Greek era. Marked progress was achieved not only in agriculture, animal husbandry and handicraft, but also in metallurgy (iron tools were already in use in ancient Greece), navigation and commerce. The development of the productive forces of society reflected and promoted the stunning achievements by the ancient Greeks in mathematics, astronomy, medicine, geography, wine brewing, navigation, etc. All this attests to the fact that mankind had developed a much deeper understanding of nature. Some basic, yet wonderful, achievements were made in the conquest and use of nature so that mankind somewhat freed itself from the oppression and bondage of natural forces. The ideological tendency to scientism and rationalism in ancient Greek philosophy expressed this theoretical progress and was the first great victory of man over nature.

What is most important about ancient Greek philosophy was that it began to realize for itself the strength of human reason. Mankind was able to understand the secrets of nature (the laws of nature or "logos") and apply what it had already known in its productive and social endeavors so as to achieve its predetermined goals. One interesting phenomenon was the group of so-called "physicists" who engaged in the study of nature. As most of their works were entitled "On Nature," it can be said that before the concept of "philosophy" appeared "physics" was another name for philosophy. What is common to this group of physicists is that they attempted to interpret the world in terms of natural causes instead of the supernatural forces and miracles which mythologists had used to explain worldly matters. Thus the science of philosophy and myth were separated.

To regard nature as a reality which could be effected by mankind instead of something that carried with it mysterious forces which could not be controlled by man is the essence of scientism and rationalism in ancient Greek philosophy. What really matters is not how many concrete results these early physicists achieved, but rather that they set a new direction for thought. Mankind was beginning to free itself from the state of slavery, to emphasize that man is the center of the universe and to proclaim itself master of nature. Plato (427-347 B.C.) made this point in one of his stories. He pointed out that human beings were endowed with the wisdom of a god and thus possessed some of the qualities of a god. Among living creatures mankind alone had learned to use the fire stolen by Prometheus, the mechanical techniques of Athena and the "dignity and justice" given by Hermes on behalf of Zeus. Protagoras' (48l-411 B.C.) famous saying that "Man is the measure of all things on earth" strongly affirmed the central position of man. Aristotle (384-322 B.C.) made the following definitions based upon his observation of the essence of man: (1) "Man is a two-legged hairless animal." (2) "Man is a rational animal." (3) "Man is a social being," or a political being, etc. That is to say, man is a natural being (Definition 1). Man is higher than other natural beings (Definition 2). What is of particular importance is that Aristotle already made clear the social character of man (Definition 3). Of course, how to look at the social and political characters of man is a debatable issue, but this is, after all, a new subject with substantial content.

Of course, the older traditional powers are not to be neglected. The concept of a supernatural god derived from deifying natural forces was still strong and stubborn in the social life of ancient Greece. That is due partly to the force of law of inertia and also to a new social factor, i.e., the backward and reactionary classes "who" took advantage of, and supported, this concept. Since humankind split into the different classes and entered upon civilized society, traditional conservative ideas, concepts and systems always have safeguarded the interests of the reactionary classes and their own social strata. It is not surprising then that concept of deified natural forces above all and of man crawling as a slave under the feet of the gods was still deeply rooted in ancient Greece. Nor is it difficult to understand how rampant these stubborn forces ran if one recalls that one of the reasons for Socrates (469-399 B.C.) being sentenced to death was that he did not believe in the traditional god of the city-state of Athens.

However, in ancient Greece, the strength of man was greatly improved even as reflected in their mythology. The gods and goddesses in Greek mythology were different from the primitive ones in that they were personified. Their intelligence, strengths and beauty were modelled after man rather than being an image of some strange supernatural being.

The constant social turmoil and wars in the latter period of ancient Greece paved the way for Neo-Platonism and allowed the mysticism and fatalism advocated by Stoics to become rampant. Man again lost confidence in his own strength and was relegated to a plaything in the hands of "god" and "destiny." In fact, man was once again thrown into the position of being enslaved by nature. However, in contrast to their enslaved situation in the barbaric period of mankind's early existence, the new tendency was to mingle man and nature. Man held that he could be promoted to a point at which he could be combined with nature, that is, since man emanates from god he could return to god. In this sense, man and god enjoy an equal or identical relationship. This idea was coated with mysticism and illusion, and eventually led to the ruling of Christian theology in the Middle Ages in Europe. But it is worth noting that it put forth the idea of combining man and god in an illusory and distorted fashion. Actually, this idea was an expression of the desire to establish an harmonious relationship between nature and mankind.

It can be concluded that there has been a further and richer understanding of the relationship between man and nature in the ancient Greek period, the first stage of human civilization. This realization included the concept left over from the barbaric period that man is the slave of nature, the germ and development of the concept that man is the master of nature, and also the illusion and desire that man and nature should be regarded as one entity. The naivete of these thoughts was determined by their understanding of the relationship between man and nature. Just as the variety and richness of the ancient Greek philosophy demonstrated the pioneering spirit of the intelligent Greek people, their understanding and observation of the relationship between man and nature was also varied and filled with a pioneering spirit. Thus, it contributed an invaluable cultural heritage for mankind.

Chinese Society

Reflection upon the relationship between man and nature in ancient Chinese philosophy was on a par with ancient Greek philosophy in terms of richness and variety. But at the same time had its own characteristics.

The situation of the ancient Chinese people before recorded history can be understood in the traditional ideas that existed in the Sang Dynasty (C. 16th cen.--1066 B.C.). Strong natural forces were embodied in the concept of "Heaven." An all powerful god, "emperor of heaven," controls the luck, the ill omen, misfortune and happiness of man in the mortal world. Since this time the concept of ancient China that man is the slave of nature has merged with the ideas of an undying soul and worship of one's ancestors. The souls of the ancestors seem to have been injected with the will of "Heaven," thus becoming the conveyer and representative of the will of "Heaven." The souls of the ancestors, together with "Heaven," become the opponent of man, even his enslaver. The so-called "Shang people worship ghosts" showed this state of mind.

The period ranging from the Western Zhou (c. 1066-771 B.C.) to the Warring States (403-221 B.C.) was equivalent to the ancient Greek period and its subsequent "Hellenistic" era (about 8th cen. - 2nd cen B.C.). The ancient Chinese and Greek cultures flourished at the same time in their respective hemispheres. Agriculture, handicrafts and commerce were highly developed in ancient China. Marked progress was made in wine brewing, metallurgy (coating of copper and iron), textiles (especially the silk products), water irrigation and architecture.

The fierce class struggle and social turbulence during these periods of Spring and Autumn (722-481 B.C.) and of Warring States opened the way for spectacular development in the cultural field called "the contention of one hundred schools of thought." On the whole the Confucians were advocating the authority of heaven: "Man proposes, heaven disposes," "Fearing the orders of Heaven," and "Worshipping the ancestors"; "Following the laws of the former kings," "Managing the country like Yao and Shun," and "Elaborating King Wen, King Wu, and Duke Zhou's Orthodox Way." But, Confucius (551-479 B.C.) also proposed such ideas as "universal love" and "a kind person should love others," which have strong humanistic characteristics. He advised, "do not say eccentric forces and mysterious gods." He also took a cautious attitude toward ghosts, god and superstition, saying "If you pray, it seems god is just in front of you." Xun Zi (C. 289-238 B.C.) had more progressive and valuable ideas such as "enforcing the laws of the present kings" and "controlling the laws of Heaven and making use of it." As for the Legalists, they held that we should carry out the "Reform and Renovation" and should make way for the initiative of manful play.

Of course, the scope of "man" in the eyes of Confucius, Xun Zi and the Legalists covers only the "big men": "gentlemen" and the "bright and good kings and emperors" who had "high moral standards." Only they were thought capable of "conquering and making use of Heaven," of "ruling on earth and under heaven and controlling all things on earth." As for the "small men" and "women," they should kneel in front of "Heaven" and of the "big men." These ideas are identical with those of Aristotle, who regarded slaves as "tools that can speak": slaves do not belong to the category of "man." Also in Athens women had no right to join the political life. Thus, the emancipation of man at this time was partial and incomplete.

Similar to the conservative idea of obeying "god's will" and "destiny" advocated by Neo-Platonism and Stoicism as a result of the social turmoil in the Helleninstic era, Lao Zi (C. 6-5 cen. B.C.) and Zhuang Zi (C. 369-286 B.C.) in ancient China spread the philosophy of escapism. They upheld that to realize the "perfect state" of making man and nature one entity, man should "abandon wisdom and intelligence" and "go back to nature" so as to overcome its control and achieve the position of "Real Man." They cherished the hope of cancelling the contradiction between man and nature by destroying man's instinctive characteristics, i.e., to abolish the contradiction subjectively from a relativist point of view. This idea that "all things are the same" which is colored by an illusionary asceticism, and the neo-Platonic idea of "merging with god" which is coated by mysticism are both subjective hopes which lead to the same end.

It can be seen from these philosophical reflections on the relationship between man and nature in ancient Greece and ancient China that, after escaping from subordination to nature in primitive society and on the basis of its basic understanding and conquest of nature, mankind foresaw that it could gradually control nature and become its master; it also envisaged combining with nature and forming one entity. These brilliant and creative ideas of mankind in ancient times promised a rich and continuing development of the relations between man and nature.

MAN ENSLAVED BY NATURE IN THE MIDDLE AGES

Mankind has traversed a tortuous road in its development. Speaking generally, man was again enslaved by nature in the Middle Ages (this period being equivalent in China to the long feudal autocracy beginning from the Qin and Han Dynasties).

One of the obvious characteristics of the relationship between man and nature in this period is that apart from worshipping the awesome power of nature, as was done in primitive society or in ancient times, mankind was now also under another strong and rapidly developing social force, that is, the political, economic, military and cultural forces possessed by the ruling classes. It controlled the destiny of society, thus becoming an alienated and seemingly super-social force--a "second natural force." The so-called "first natural force," when combined with the "second natural factor," constituted a more terrifying oppressive power threatening mankind.

Europe

This situation is fully exemplified by the theological rule of Christianity in Medieval Europe. The lives of men were filled with tears and pain, for they had to make up for their sins since man was regarded as sinful. Everything about man was decided by God's either choosing or abandoning one (the so-called "chosen ones" and "abandoned ones"), by God's will and grace or by their predestined "fate." "Looking down upon mortal life and looking up to God" became the highest article of faith and the rule of life.

The entire life of man thus became a world of tears. Men were regarded as poor lambs at the mercy of God in an endless sea of pain and sufferings. Their only way out was to expect God to show charity and kindness. In this way man's life from the cradle to the grave was enveloped in the seamless dark net of destiny.

Human stupidity was thus fully exposed. Progress in social production had freed a group of slaves economically and politically who had not originally belonged to the category of "man," thus expanding the scope of the meaning of man. But, on the other hand, by supporting and manipulating Christian theology, the exploiting classes once again put man--to some extent, man itself is included in the ruling and exploiting classes--at the mercy of God by weaving a bigger net of God's will. That is to say, man is under the duel control of natural forces and social oppression. Consequently, he lost that tiny bit of dignity gained in ancient society.

China

In the East, the Chinese went through a feudal period marked by some distinctive features. The traditional humanism and rationalism which long had existed in ancient Chinese culture had undermined any possibility of a religious group or theology gaining dominance, as did the Christian Church and its theology in Europe. The outstanding characteristics of this culture manifested the vitality of Chinese civilization and the profound strength of rationalism.

If we say that in medieval Europe the subordination of man to nature and to alienated social forces were manifest in the strict rule of the Christian religion and theology, then in China the subordination to nature and to the social forces was manifest in the absolute autocracy of the emperors and by the autocratic ethics of feudalism. In Europe, the representative of almighty God was the Christian Church set up by those, like St. Peter, who proclaimed himself to be the servant of God. Mortal power was only a tool given by God, via the Church, to rule the people.

In China, the feudal emporers considered themselves to have the qualities of both Jesus and the Christian Church. The emperor regarded himself as the "Son of Heaven" entrusted by Heaven to represent it in the mortal world. The life of the Chinese people under the rule of the emperor, who gathered in himself the powers of Jesus, the Apostles, the Church, Pope and King, was no easier than that of their counterparts in Europe. If the Europeans were regarded as the sons, daughters and subjects of God (though entrusted by God to select the mortal heads to rule the people), then the Chinese at this time were sons and subjects of feudal emperors who "receive instructions from Heaven." The average Chinese at this time called their local magistrates "parent official" or "state herdsman." This concept indicated that the officials were entrusted by the "Son of Heaven" to supervise over his children and subjects. Or to put it more bluntly, they were like herdsmen told to look after this group of sheep, cattle and horses.

The Chinese in the Middle Ages threw away the pedantic overcoat of theology, regarded as unimportant, and resorted to an effective feudal ethics regarded as in compliance with the "ethics of Heaven." The so-called "three cardinal guidances" and "five constant virtues" put heaven and earth above man. The ideas that "ruler guides subject, father guides son, and husband guides wife" ran through the concept of the power of God, ruler, father and husband and the worship of ancestors. The medieval Chinese initiated a social hierarchy based upon this political ethics. In principle, under this kind of social order man was reduced to nothing because this terrible social order stipulated that the altars of Heaven and the Emperor are unlimited and the rights of man are infinitely small--which equals nothing.

Both in Europe or in China, the social order of feudal society showed the brutality, benightedness and hypocracy of the feudal ruling classes. Meanwhile, the dignity, pride and the rights of man were ruthlessly violated and destroyed. Of course, this does not mean that no progress had been made in the field of sciences and production. But the progress made did not save people from a state of subordination.

THE EMANCIPATION OF MAN IN MODERN TIMES:

CONSOLIDATION OF THE CONCEPT OF

MAN AS MASTER OF NATURE

Europe

As Europe moved gradually into the modern society from the time of the Renaissance, capitalist political and economic systems replaced those of the feudal Middle Ages.

Alongside this progress, mankind gradually restored its awareness and confidence in its own strength through a better understanding, and even conquering, of nature in its scientific and productive endeavors. Once again man developed the idea that he should control nature and be its master. This is a great breakthrough for mankind in modern intellectual history.

To overthrow feudalism in modern Europe, the first step was to destroy Christian theology which served it and provided its foundation. In particular, the submissive position of man to God and to nature should be demolished so as to restore the dignity and confidence of man in himself. A large group of outstanding and courageous poets, scientists, philosophers and thinkers have made great contributions in this respect. They developed such slogans as: "I am man and hope only for mortal happiness in this world"; "Our happiness is in this life, not in life after death." At the same time they attacked the Christian Church as the embodiment of benightedness. They strongly held that humans are all-powerful and possess enough wisdom to do everything for themselves. The strong wave of humanism in the Renaissance swept away the suffocating rule of theology. Men raise their heads high to face nature squarely. To some extent we can say that man was emancipated once again from nature and from theology, and restored to his true image.

The theoretical idea that man is able to understand and control nature, and thus become its master, was initiated by Bacon and Descartes, and later consolidated by Kant and Hegel in modern European philosophy.

Francis Bacon (1561-1626) demonstrated that man is capable of understanding the secrets of nature, i.e., the laws of nature, through summing up his experiences. Consequently, man is able to make use of, and conquer, nature. He pointed out: "Man . . . is the servant and explainer of nature";² "The only way to conquer nature is by obeying it."³ This is what his phrase "Knowledge is power" actually meant, as do his statements: "The road to attain man's strength and his knowledge are next to each other"⁴ and "Man's knowledge and power is consistent."⁵ The direction pointed out by Bacon paved the way for the rapid development of the natural sciences and demonstrated the strength of Bacon's philosophy.

Descartes (1596-1650) proved a similar principle from another angle, by strongly emphasizing the importance of man's reasoning power. The earlier sacred, inviolable "authority" and "belief" are now subject to the "universal doubt" of human reason. Such slogans of the Middle Ages as "Believe and then understand" are cast away and everything has to be reestablished on the basis of the "Cogito, ergo sum" through the examination of reason. This shows that man occupies the central and dominant place in relation to god and the deified natural forces: Only "reason" is real and all-powerful. Hence, Descartes said with pride, "By way of practical philosophy, we can . . . enable ourselves to become the master and ruler of nature."⁶ Talking about physics, he produced the famous saying, "Give me matter and motion, and I will make the world for you."⁷ (It is interesting to note that a century later Kant repeated this sentence almost word for word). This led to setting up the "court of reason" established by the French enlightenment and materialist thinkers of the 18th century.

The two schools of empiricism and rationalism represented by Bacon and Descartes have some major differences as to the source, process and capability of understanding. But they both agree on the fundamental point, namely, that man is able to understand and control nature. This consensus was later proven by the philosophy of Kant (1724-1804) which contain strong elements of humanism. He proclaimed such famous dicta as "Man is the end, not only the means," man has absolute value and objective goals are regarded as the highest moral standard. This allows everyone to enjoy the same right and freedom in the "republic" (or in "the kingdom of ends"). A strong feature of Kant's philosophy, moreover, is his stress upon esteem for man not merely in a broad sense, but with particular regard to subjective initiative. This is what is meant by "Man is the legislator of nature."

He stated that "the highest legislation of nature must lie in our heart, i.e., in our understanding" and that "the understanding does not derive its laws (a priori) from nature, but prescribes them to nature."⁸ According to Kant, man "goes back to nature and learns lessons from it; . . . he must not, however, do so in the character of a pupil who listens to everything that the teacher chooses to say, but of an appointed judge who compels the witnesses to answer questions which he has himself formulated."⁹ That is, he approaches nature in terms of his own principle. This idealist theory has grave weaknesses and contradictions because he concluded that nature is the aggregate of all phenomena put together through the process of cognition, and not through "matter itself." By holding that the "thing-in-itself" belongs to an objective world over which man has no control, Kant restricted man's reason and left room for "belief."

Hegel (1770-1831) occupied this area under the name of "absolute spirit," which he put under the jurisdiction of reason. He regarded reason as the master of the whole of nature. Even nature is the outgrowth and alienation of "spirit" in his strange absolute idealism. In this way, "reason" and "spirit" are promoted to the highest, dominating position.

China

Compared with this modern development in Europe, the struggle against feudalism in China developed very late (after the Opium War in 1840) because of such special circumstances as the long continuation of the feudalistic society, the slow development of capitalism, the disasters brought about by imperialist invasions, etc. This struggle was interwoven with that against imperialism and national oppression at home, rendering comparatively weak the content of the movement for democracy and freedom in the intellectual history in China.

The peasant uprising known as the "Heavenly Kingdom of Peace" (1851-1865) led by Hong Xiuquan (1814-1864) was a search for a super combination of the Chinese feudalistic hierarchy and the free and equal relationship between Christianity's children of God. This strange combination of the hierarchy of the Catholic Church and Munzer's "Kingdom of one thousand years" is obviously very incomplete and contains grave internal contradictions. But it is a great breakthrough in the history of modern Chinese thinking, in that it fiercely attacked feudalistic ethics and Confucianism, advocated the ideal of the Great Harmony and praised free and equal relations between men.

Later Kang Youwei (1858-1927) and Tan Sitong (1865-1898) stated the weaknesses of the Chinese bourgeois classes and their illusion of compromise with feudalistic forces by following the road of reform known in history as the Constitutional Reform and Modernization. But Kang, in terms of explaining the ancient Chinese ideal of the Great Harmony, justified his advocacy of "seeking happiness and getting rid of pain," and expounded the despotism and ruthlessness of Confucian ethics.

Tan's "Theory of Charity" attacked harshly the cruelty and irrationality of the three cardinal guidances and the five constant virtues which plagued Chinese history for several thousand years. He advocated that this "net" should be torn up in order to set up a "free" and "equal" relationship of fraternity. This theory manifested a desire for the emancipation of man. Zhang Binglin (1869-1836) and Dr. Sun Yat-sen (1866-1925) were two great democratic thinkers in modern Chinese history. They held that the only way to achieve freedom and equality is through revolutionary means, i.e., to get rid of feudalistic bondage and set up a democratic republic. Sun elaborated the traditional ideal of the Great Harmony in terms of a strong belief in, and search for, man's emancipation and happiness.

CONTEMPORARY IDEAL: THE CONSCIOUS CONSTRUCTION OF AN HARMONIOUS RELATIONSHIP WITH NATURE--

MAN BEFRIENDING NATURE

A new ideal, namely, that man should have an harmonious relationship with nature has formed gradually along with the evolution of the idea that man should be the master of nature.

The new concept developed from the doctrine of 18th century French materialism and Feuerbach's anthropological materialism: Man is one entity with nature. The French materialists proved in particular that the unity of the world lies in its materiality. As La Mettrie (1709-1751) said humorously, "Man is not made of mere precious things; man is made of the same flour by Nature, but it used various yeasts and in a variety of ways."¹⁰ They expanded Descartes' idea that "An animal is a machine" so much that they held that "Man is a machine," even "Man is a plant." Of course, La Mettrie's doctrine is wrong in that it underestimated and neglected the qualitative difference between man and other animals and plants. This erroneous trend was partially overcome when Diderot (1713-1784) put forward the idea that man's consciousness is a product of matter developed over a long period on the basis of the "sensibility" common to all matter. He concluded that this sensibility is a product of the special matter which makes up man's brain. When Holbach (1723-1789) and Helvetius (1715-1771) emphasized that "Man is a product of education," they touched upon the question of the social nature of man.

However, they did not fundamentally overcome their rigid naturalistic understanding of man and nature as a simple whole. That is, "Nature is the aggregation of all things on earth,"¹¹ "Man is the product of nature in which he exists; he is subject to its laws and can not transcend it."¹² Marx (1818-1883) and Engels (1820-1895) pointed out this crucial point when analyzing subordination to nature in the ideas of Feuerbach (1804-1872): "Being a materialist, history is beyond his vision; when he explores history, he is by no means a materialist."¹³

Production in capitalist societies developed at a stunning rate and paved the way for the rapid development of science and technology, while conversely, the contributions made by science and technology accelerated production. Successful transformation of nature by mankind appears to have demonstrated man's unlimited capabilities. The expectations cherished by the early philosophers that man should be the master of nature is being made a reality. By the 1980s mankind not only has conquered the earth, sea and sky, and utilized the natural resources that lie deep in the ground, but also is now extending its "magic stick" into space. It has landed on the moon, is exploring the space of the universe, and is approaching the other stars in the solar system. No doubt, all these achievements made by mankind in its struggle against nature have attested to the fact that mankind is not only identical with nature, but also its master.

But there is another side to the matter. The development of capitalist production and science has shown not only utilization and control of nature by man, but also how natural forces could control and "take revenge" upon mankind. The history of capitalist development has proven that the system of machine production has turned man into an auxiliary part, destroyed his health, happiness and instinctive nature, and made him into a distorted, impoverished and enslaved being. The focus of the present question is not that some part of mankind is being jointly enslaved by nature and society (the big hand that controls the destiny of the masses); but rather that the natural forces, like the evils released from a "Pandora's Box" are aiming the sword of revenge at the whole of mankind. In two world wars advanced military technology has destroyed tens of millions of lives. Mankind is now faced with nuclear power like the "sword of Damocles" hanging over its head. Rapid disappearance of forests, desertization of the land, ecological imbalance, disappearance and extinction of various animal species and plants, acid rain, pollution of air and environment, waste of water resources, plundering of mineral and aquatic resources, unplanned growth in population and explosive expansion of cities: all this shows that nature is not a submissive slave of mankind, but is capable of striking deadly blows at its cruel master.

When these phenomena began to emerge early in the 19th century a group of far-sighted socialists stressed the importance of adjusting human relations and their relationship with nature, and of converting the exploitation of man and nature into a harmonious relationship so as to realize the goal of turning nature into a human paradise; the communist doctrine of Marx reflected this insight. Ever since the 1950s, in light of the potential threat of nuclear weapons to mankind, scientists have issued a solemn call that "Science should be used for peaceful purposes." The Green Party which has sprung up in Europe in recent years and is now growing has taken upon itself the protection of the environment as an urgent humanistic and political task.

All this shows that there is a reawakening that man should be united with nature as one entity in this new historical period. Man and nature should have a harmonious relationship of dependence upon each other and of peaceful coexistence. Human history so far has proved that only through continuous efforts has man escaped from being enslaved by nature; thus he should not in turn simply enslave nature. Man should handle his relations with nature by enhancing its rational level. In dealing with this relationship of unity with its opposite, man should strive to push it to a higher stage--that of harmonious and interdependent unity with its opposite. That is, he should build a friendly relationship between man and nature--or befriend nature.

CONCLUSION: TURNING IDEALS INTO REALITY

Mankind has been through hundreds of thousands of years of evolution since it emerged from the animal world. It has witnessed additional thousands of years of development since it formed human society. The history of mankind, on the one hand, is one of tears and slavery, of conquering and being conquered, of killing and of man "eating man": human beings have suffered countless hardships. On the other hand, it is a history of mankind's constant search for a kingdom of reason and freedom through its endless efforts to rid itself of subordination to natural necessity and animality. Human reason, through its own efforts, has been building a kingdom--called by Kant the "Kingdom of Ends," in which human dignity and pride is respected. Countless martyrs, revolutionaries, sages, philosophers, great masters and scientists, together with the rank and file, have opened this road to further development for mankind through their constant and consistent groping and struggles toward this end.

Our era calls for the institution of a cordial relationship between man and nature through conscious human efforts. This is a grave historical task in which everyone is called to help. The least that one can do is to improve his or her level of consciousness by achieving a better understanding of the problem. Of course, the road of human development still will be accompanied with fire and sword, blood and tears; but mankind will, no doubt, pursue the course leading to the ideal and harmonious free kingdom.

Hegel has a famous saying: "What is reality is reasonable, and what is reasonable is reality."¹⁴ "Reality" today, including the relationship among men and man's relations with nature, has a basis on which to exist: it is "reasonable." Further, it is a "reasonable" ideal to build an harmonious relationship between man and nature in accord with the law of historical development. This ideal should be turned into reality; it is the brilliant future sought by mankind.

Peking University

Beijing, People's Republic of China

1. When this period began is a very difficult but interesting scientific problem of the pre-history of humankind, but will not be discussed here.

2. F. Bacon: Novum Organum (Indianapolis: Bobbs Merrill, 1960), I. 1. 3. 3.

3. Ibid., II, 4.

4. Ibid.

5. Ibid., I, 1. 3. 3.

6. R. Descartes, Principles of Philosophy in Philosophical Works, eds. E.S. Haldane and G.R. Ross (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1967), Vol. II.

7. Ibid.

8. I. Kant, Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics (Indianapolis: Bobbs Merrill, 1950), p. 36.

9. I. Kant, Critique of Pure Reason (New York: St. Martin, 1969), pp. xiii-xiv.

10. La Mettrie, Man a Machine (La Salle, Ill.: Open Court).

11. Holbach, System of Nature or Laws of the Moral and Physical World (New York: B. Franklin, 1971).

12. Ibid.

13. The German Ideology in Marx and Engels, Complete Works, Chinese ed., Vol. 3, p. 51.

14. Hegel, The Principle of Philosophy of Law (Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 1942).