we must respect nature with all its forms. discuss.
Answers
Reduce, reuse, and recycle. Cut down on what you throw away. ...
Volunteer. Volunteer for cleanups in your community. ...
Educate. ...
Conserve water. ...
Choose sustainable. ...
Shop wisely. ...
Use long-lasting light bulbs. ...
Plant a tree.
Answer:
The idea that there is a sacred trust between mankind and our Creator, under which we accept a duty of stewardship for the Earth, has been an important feature of most religious and spiritual thought throughout the ages. Even those whose beliefs have not included the existence of a Creator have, nevertheless, adopted a similar position on moral and ethical grounds.
In some cases Nature's limits are well understood at the rational, scientific level. As a simple example, we know that trying to graze too many sheep on a hillside will, sooner or later, be counter-productive for the sheep, the hillside, or both. More widely we understand that the overuse of insecticides or antibiotics leads to problems of resistance. And we are beginning to comprehend the full, awful consequences of pumping too much carbon dioxide into the Earth's atmosphere.
Yet the actions being taken to halt the damage known to be caused by exceeding Nature's limits, in these and other ways, are insufficient to ensure a sustainable outcome.
In other areas, such as the artificial and uncontained transfer of genes between species of plants and animals, the lack of hard, scientific evidence of harmful consequences is regarded in many quarters as sufficient reason to allow such developments to proceed.
The idea of taking a precautionary approach, in this and many other potentially damaging situations, receives overwhelming public support, but still faces a degree of official opposition, as if admitting the possibility of doubt was a sign of weakness, or even of a wish to halt "progress".
On the contrary, I believe it to be a sign of strength and of wisdom. It seems that when we do have scientific evidence that we are damaging our environment we aren't doing enough to put things right, and when we don't have that evidence we are prone to do nothing at all, regardless of the risks.
Part of the problem is the prevailing approach that seeks to reduce the natural world, including ourselves, to the level of nothing more than a mechanical process.
It is because of our inability, or refusal, to accept the existence of a guiding hand that Nature has come to be regarded as a system that can be engineered for our own convenience, or as a nuisance to be evaded and manipulated, and in which anything that happens can be fixed by technology and human ingenuity.
Above all, we should show greater respect for the genius of Nature's designs, rigorously tested and refined over millions of years. This means being careful to use science to understand how Nature works, not to change what Nature is, as we do when genetic manipulation seeks to transform a process of biological evolution into something altogether different. The idea that the different parts of the natural world are connected through an intricate system of checks and balances, which we disturb at our peril, is all too easily dismissed as no longer relevant.