[x]

This is a fine article that provides much to think about. It would be wrong to use Crichton as a stick to bang on the heads of all environmentalists though. When mankind was at the mercy of the environment the forces of nature were seen as the enemy, first to be propitiated by offerings to God or the gods, then to be soothed by conforming to natural law, and finally to be conquered by understanding the scientific laws of nature.

Today, mankind -- or its technology -- is in the saddle, and nature inevitably comes to look like something weak, fragile, and in need of protection. Ignorant environmentalists sentimentalize nature. Searching for a new object of veneration they go too far in idolizing the earth and denigrating humanity, but there is some chivalry in our modern attitude towards nature that one wouldn't want to lose.

There was much to be said for the passion to conquer nature in its time. We have benefited from the desire to fight back against famine, disease, scarcity, and natural disasters. And we still need some of that fighting spirit, but I wouldn't be too quick to condemn moderns for moving away from that passion.

[cornelis]

moderns Wouldn't that be post-modern when they turn from their passion? Post-modern, as in the tradition of Nietzsche who blamed the religiosity of the encyclopedists?