Human Imagination and Interaction with the Environment - Essay Example

?Human Imagination and Interaction with the Environment There are people who believe that imagination is primarily based on mental creation alone andthat it is always less likely to be anchored in objective conditions. The mind can indeed be predictable. It has the ability of developing ideas different from what are usually seen or sensed. This is the very reason why people, especially artists, are exhorted to think out of the box, which actually means to detach from reality and to let their imaginations alone dictate. However, it is simply impossible to deny the fact that even the most imaginative or creative can never really isolate themselves from the objective conditions that surround them. One’s mode of thinking can never be absolutely free from the influence of reality. In fact, the appreciation of reality is still the very basis of how one interacts with others and with the environment. Man’s relationship with the other animal species, for example, is primarily dictated by his humanness. However, in Caroline Fraser’s Rewilding America, it is clear that the man must first grasp his animal side to understand better what could be best for wildlife species. If he fails to do so, he would naturally fail to provide solutions meant to improve the conditions of wildlife. Imagination that is not in any way anchored on the demands of reality can also be disastrous for man himself. This is exemplified in Jon Krakauer’s article, The Alaska Interior, which is a selection from Into the Wild, is an account of how one individual; Chris McCandless tried to live in the wilds without considering well the means to overcome the difficulties that he would encounter. To appreciate fully reality though or the conditions that one encounters it is necessary to employ all the senses. As explained by Juhani Pallasmaa in Architecture of the Senses, which is an excerpt from his book The Eyes of the Skin, in order for man interact with the environment his imagination should be a product not just of his vision but by all the other senses. The three authors have affirmed in their respective ways that imaginations to become realizable must be based on man’s actual interaction with the environment. Aside from being a product of his interaction with the environment, this imagination too also influences the conduct of his relationship with his surroundings. Before one can adapt to an environment or intervene in natural processes or systems, it is necessary to first appreciate the objective conditions. If man, for example, must do something for the benefit of other species, it is not appropriate to just immediately commit himself to certain actions without first verifying whether such acts would indeed be good for the supposed beneficiaries. In Fraser’s article, the question on which method of setting up conservation areas would be more advantageous is tackled. One method mentioned was the creation of corridors that would connect the nature and wildlife preserves. However, it is very important to first learn about the behavior of the animals involved. According to Fraser, “understanding their behavior could affect the potential design of functional corridors, which would have to meet the needs of the animals that would actually use them.” (127) It is not enough that man appreciates the need to provide solutions to the problems being encountered by wildlife. What is also very necessary is his deeper understanding of what the natural tendencies of wildlife are and how these would react to the changes that are going to be introduced. Otherwise, efforts toward such objective would just fail. Worse, results that are detrimental could emerge. As narrated by Krakauer, McCandless failed to understand the environment that he is encountering and this led to his failure. He reported “I duly reported McCandless's mistake in the article (he) wrote for Outside, thereby confirming the opinion of countless readers that McCandless was ridiculously ill prepared, that he had no business heading into any wilderness, let alone into the big-league wilds of the Last Frontier.” (216) If McCandless had first gone through the process of surveying the environment that he is about to become a part of, he would have done his best to prepare himself for whatever difficulties that he would encounter. The fact, however, is that he did not go through it and he later on experienced the negative consequences. It is clear that man’s interaction with the environment should not be based solely on his imagination but also on his comprehensive appreciation of what the objective conditions are. In order to identify the probable reasons why man fails in his endeavors, it is necessary to establish the relationship of such objectives and methods to concrete conditions. If the objective is not in any way anchored on what reality can allow then it can be considered as unrealizable. Of course, in this circumstance, it would also be impossible to develop effective methods for such objectives. In fact, such methods too are doomed to fail. The negligence in understanding actual conditions of his environment has been the main basis for man’s folly. Krakauer writes that “when McCandless turned up dead, he was likened to Franklin not simply because both men starved but also because both were perceived to have lacked a requisite humility; both were thought to have possessed insufficient respect for the land.” (218) Accepting the boundaries or limitations set by environmental conditions is indeed a sign of humility. Despite man’s abilities, most of which are signs of his superiority over other species, he must still recognize and respect the boundaries set by the environment. Any attempt to impose his will without such recognition can bring about disaster for himself. Aside from being humble enough to accept environmental truths man must also learn how to define these. Actually, it would be impossible for him to appreciate objective conditions if he does not even know how to define these. According to Pallasmaa, “the growing experiences of alienation, detachment, and solitude in the technological world today, for instance, may be related with certain pathology of the senses.” (284) Pallasmaa points out that the man’s failures and tragedies even when he already has the supposed means due to the advancement of science and technology are causes by the inadequate use of the senses. If one does not fully grasp the essential characteristics of the environment with the use of the five senses, he would naturally develop decisions that could never be implemented or realized. Pallasmaa was writing about architectural works that fail because of not using all the senses. Such rule may also apply to man’s treatment of the environment. He may also fail in this regard because he works based on his imagination alone and not an analysis that is founded on the correct appreciation of objective conditions through the use of his senses. Man is not to too foolish to disregard entirely the need to grasp the form and substance of every objective condition he is confronted with before actually dealing with it. The ability to analyze situations is actually a basic instinct, one that even animals may have. However, the most common mistake that he does is rushing to judgments based only on his initial findings. Such initial findings are results of the use of only one or two senses, while disregarding the need for the others. Pallasmaa writes that “vision and hearing are now the privileged sociable senses, whereas the other three are considered as archaic sensory remnants with a merely private function, and they are usually suppressed by the code of culture.” (283) Pallasmaa notes that such sorry tendency is actually entrenched in culture, which is why overcoming this has not always been easy for any individual. Nevertheless, this means that there is still a need for man to base his findings on the environment not just with a few senses or not just with on his initial recognition. There are people, however, who have successfully overcome such habits and, as a result, have been able to identify and enforces the most effective solutions and intervention for the environment. Fraser writes that there are biologists who “for all their carefully calibrated qualifications, excel at this kind of startling bestial insight, stepping outside our species to see how we affect others.” (127) Those who did succeed in the developing ideas that accurately work for the best interests of wildlife and environment have to set aside their being human and embrace instead the interests and patterns of behavior of animals. It is only through this that actions that would truly serve the good of wildlife become effective. Man easily gets contented with spur of the moment ideas. Such ideas either result in the inadequate use of the senses or from the wrong context. Apparently, it is only by basing his decisions on the conditions appreciated with the use of all his senses can he guarantee success. This goes the same when he sets aside the human mode of thinking in order to serve best the interest of the non-humans. Every action that a human being does as he interacts with the world around him is always based on his imagination or thinking. Therefore, if one has to assess the relevance of such action or the possibility of its success in achieving its objectives, it is best to consider the process in which such imagination underwent. If it is solely the product of his own musings, devoid of any consideration for the concrete conditions, then it is basically deemed as unrealizable. Any attempt at realizing it would be futile. If it is based on one-sided conclusions because not all the senses were used in determining and analyzing concrete conditions, then it may work but not optimally and only up to a certain extent before it encounters limitations. Fraser raises this point as she tries to describe the failures and successes in creating wildlife preserves. Krakauer articulates this when he discussed the experience of Chris McCandless. Pallasmaa reiterates the need to use all the senses, which also means the necessity to grasp well the conditions, before making decisions and designs in treating man’s surroundings. These ideas are certainly important as man tries to creatively deal with the objective conditions that he is confronted with, including other people and species. Man may certainly rely on his imaginations or mental constructs. However, he should not forget that such imaginations should also be based on realities. The challenge therefore is not just to be imaginative but also to be very sharp at identifying and defining realities. Works Cited Fraser, Caroline. “Rewilding North America.” Pallasmaa, Juhani. “Excerpts from the Eyes of the Skin: Architecture and the Senses.” Krakauer, Jon. “Selections from Into the Wild: The Alaska Interior.” Read More