Connection Between Humans And Nature In Emerson’s “Nature” Free Writing Sample


Emerson’s “Nature” essay discusses the important and unifying relationship between man and nature. Responsible for the fathering of transcendentalism, Emerson’s view is that God made nature for a man so that he could dominate over it.

As such, God works through man while man can have an effect on nature. The relationship between man and nature thus aids in complete cycling of universal powers, where a man can be revitalized through his inner child while being excited by the powers that be. Emerson also defines nature as being uniquely designed to perfection while it can have a spiritual effect on man. Also, Emerson claims that art in the general sense is an extension of man’s relationship to nature, while it can be instructive to men in this sense.

Background information

Born as Ralph Waldo Emerson, he was a literary artist that has been attributed with sparking an entire branch of philosophy, transcendentalism (McAleer). Emerson generally opens the minds of the readers to unique concepts of life which are normally not discussed or simply forgotten (Richardson). He reveals how the conditions of society cater to human beings removed from the natural world while resultantly separating the natural ancient bond between humans and their natural surroundings. Emerson himself finds a deep peace within nature while expressing this as well as his experienced senses of unity and harmony in his “Nature” essay, which effectively began Emerson’s taking part in the beginnings of transcendentalism (Packer).

Spiritual matters

Emerson thought there to be a clear and immediate connection between God and human beings, in addition to a similar connection between human beings and the natural world. In his essay “Nature,” he describes the beauty of the natural world while emphasizing how all of this beauty is inherent, and furthermore that each individual perceives the natural beauty differently. The main component of Emerson’s work is this perceiving of the natural world.

Children are regarded as having an especially unique view in that they see nature as it really is, implying that the inherent qualities of nature are most obvious in youth and becoming clouded by the closed-mindedness that commonly occurs with age in the human experience. Emerson stresses the spiritual areas that are critical in the perfection of nature, suggesting Emerson believes that the world was designed by his believed God for the human race. In this belief, Emerson further suggests that man has control over it since it was built for man.

The language section also stands out as it discusses how people develop. Human beings, of course, have a language while the beings in the animal kingdom do not. Emerson suggests that nature plays a role in the development of language for people, as he says that words themselves are indications of facts in the natural world. Furthermore, nature as a whole is symbolic of our mental processes and general ways of interpreting things. Emerson continues to discuss how the man-made systems of languages have been applied to describing the natural world.

Emerson believes that one should make their own way through life and not choose a destiny that is predetermined by society or other factors. He had full faith in the philosophy that it is safe to trust oneself, while he says that conforming means one loses their uniqueness, identity, and perhaps even their potential in the human experience. Emerson advised that man embrace a more natural philosophy and be mindful of the natural world while acting as humans, rather than let society act as its own God. In this, human beings have nearly unlimited potential that Emerson feels is often not used (Richardson).

Natural connection

Emerson defines the connection between nature and human beings a positive and helpful. He says that human beings release their inner child when out in nature, and this Emerson writes, “The observant child experiences nature in a much more fulfilling way than the arrogant adult” (Emerson p.10). Emerson suggests that is it this so-called “inner child” that is actually the undying life of ourselves that humans tend to only associate with youth because of its lack of developmental characteristics. On this topic, Emerson also writes “The sun illuminates only the eye of man, but shines into the eye and heart of the child. In the woods is perpetual youth” (Emerson p.10).

The overall unity that Emerson emphasizes is also his expression of the positive connection between human beings and nature. Certain aspects in nature, whether visual or otherwise immediately detected by the senses, or actions have the potential to rejuvenate and excite people, as Emerson writes “The movement of tree limbs during a windy storm and the gentle swaying of forests as a breeze passes by uplift one’s being” (Emerson p.11). Experiences such as this allow Emerson to feel as if universal powers are flowing through him, while he loses his human perspective and feels as if he is a particle of God. Through such actions, Emerson feels that people can become united with God’s powers and play a role in creation.

Concluding remarks

Overall, Emerson’s work reveals the potential of the experience’s humans have in nature. While nature and its beauty rejuvenate the inner child while stimulating senses in a way that society does not, people need to keep a close bond with nature. Art does this to some extent, while it can be defined as instructive for these processes, it is not a complete substitute. As such, Emerson stresses both a continued relationship to nature and a sense of individuality so that the individual can follow his more natural instincts.

Works Cited

Baym, Nina, The Norton Anthology of American Literature, Norton, 1995.

Emerson, Ralph, “Nature,” Duffield, 1909.

McAleer, John, Ralph Waldo Emerson: Days of Encounter, Brown and Company, 1984.

Packer, Barbara, The Transcendentalists, The University of Georgia Press, 2007.

Richardson, Robert, Emerson: The Mind on Fire, University of California Press, 1995.

Essay Voice-over

Problems Which Ruin Relationships

Relationships begin to form at birth when a child builds a relationship with the mother and father, or the caretaker, and humans continue to engage in building relationships all through their life. These relationships are of different kinds and are emotional, romantic, friendly, marital, or with colleagues, peers, or co-workers. While most relationships take time and effort to build trust, it takes no time to destroy relationships. This paper aims to analyze the relationships which occur between parents and child and how they can be ruined by either the inability of the parent to understand their child’s point of view or the inability of the child to understand the loving care and effort which parents put in, to raise their children.

When children are born, parents are usually delighted. Great care and attention are given to the newborn child especially by the mother. Mothers are known for their sincerity and dedication in raising their children and put in a great deal of effort and hard work to bring their children. However, when children grow up and begin to have their own social lives, they forget the effort and love which their parents, especially their mother have put in to raise them. With new friends and social life, children begin to experience joy and comfort in the company of friends and begin to take their parents for granted. They change their lifestyles and forget the values and morals which they have been brought up with. This sets the stage for the destruction of parental and family relationships.

Children begin to give priority to their friends and society, rather than those beings who have given them all they needed after sacrificing a great deal. Problems become more severe when children lose respect for their parents and begin to argue with them, demanding freedom to behave and act in ways that are not considered normal by their parents, for instance, late-night parties, taking drugs, and sometimes not doing well academically at school. When problems become very severe there is a huge dent in the relationships between the parents and the child and the child begins to drift further away. It should be noted that the child is not entirely at fault here for ruining the relationship. Very often, parents too behave in inconsiderate ways and forget that their children are grown up and need to be dealt with affection, care, and understanding, rather than with a lack of sensitivity.

Adolescence is a difficult time for many children which leads them to become rebellious and causes many changes in their behaviors. This is due to the hormonal changes which occur in children and they have to deal with a great many pressures, emotional, social, and physical, which is why parents need to understand that their children are in the delicate years of their lives and need to be dealt with love, care, and sensitivity.

Thus it is apparent that failure to understand one another aggravates relationships and creates a battleground between the child and parents. It is said that even very healthy and strong relationships, fail the test of time and are ruined because of the inability of individuals to respect and care for feelings and emotions. Relationships take a long time to build and strengthen, sometimes many years. They should therefore be cherished and looked after by caring for the other person’s views and emotions so that that there is love and respect in relationships and they are not ruined due to insensitivity and lack of respect.

Sociology Regarded As A Science

The question of whether sociology must be regarded as a science or not could prove very complicated unless one is clear as to what science is. Although arts and sciences are very distinct especially in methodology, it is not uncommon to notice given similarities or basic assumptions that are shared. In this paper, by showing clearly how sociology shares in given assumptions with pure sciences, it will be established that sociology is partly a science and partly an art. It is not just important; rather, sociology must be regarded as a science.

All disciplines or studies aim at knowledge. The search for knowledge is supposed to be about truthfulness and validity in what is said, reflected on or perceived (Harris, 2007). The search for knowledge is about establishing, identifying, clarifying or discovering the relationships between things. Studies are about understanding what causes what, what can cause what, and what necessitates the causation.

Knowing highly depends on focus (Harris, 2007). What is knowable can be ‘know how’ (procedural knowledge or skills), knowing facts (knowing this or that the way that is), or knowing to i.e. knowledge for application that is not necessarily a skill. ‘Knowing to’ often frames knowledge that informs being (Harris, 2007). For instance, one knows psychology tenets towards being as the epithets of given theory of postulate state. Knowing facts is crucial especially in the consideration of conduct or ways of behaving. Knowing ‘how to’ is crucial towards being able to handle day-to-day chores necessary for living or developing systems that allow for the satisfaction of human needs and wants.

Experience is a key source of knowledge for all people. The vast sum of our knowledge comes to us from experience or via senses (Harris, 2007). Experiential knowledge is only possible or can only be processed by a conscious being. This is knowledge developed from direct encounters with sensations from the environment. From the pictures formed or impressed on the mind via sensations, an individual abstracts and can develop concepts.

People of antiquity relied heavily on mythology as a way of explaining things (Harris, 2007). The mythological way of knowing took the relationship between things as mysterious and unfathomable. As a result, only mysterious beings were posited to explain relationships or the existence of given beings. Mythological kind of knowing is best illustrated by belief development in the primitive or traditional societies. To explain the unexplainable, people posited beings or realities with powers or features beyond human comprehension or powers. For example, in traditional African settings and in religions like Hinduism, people posted gods in myths. Each god answered questions to a given unexplained happening or phenomenon. For example, to explain where rain came from and what is rain; they postulated the rain god whose tears fell down on earth as rain.

A historical overview reveals that people know differently and thus view the world very differently (Harris, 2007). From the early days of mythology, people have grown to investigate rational processes, empirical inquiries and the combination of the two. In our world of today, people rely on intellectual ways, mythical ways, spiritual ways and experiential ways of knowing. From individuals often one can discern more than one way of knowing. Even the most refined of all scientists in their quest for empirical evidence in ascertaining truth often have to rely on more purely intellectual ways of knowing. They often have to postulate theories that are only but logical suppositions or logical generalizations.

Of all kinds of ways of knowing, most people seem to identify with Intellectual knowing (Harris, 2007). Despite the paramount importance of experiential knowing, it is not uncommon to find people deriding it against intellectual knowing. Intellectual knowing relies on thinking processes as enabled by powers of the brain. Some common thinking processes are analysis, reasoning, drawing generalizations, and identifying or recognizing patterns. Intellectual knowing involves development and use of abstraction and concepts. The rationalists i.e. those who held the intellectual way of knowing as the only good way met a lot of resistance. It could not be understood why people were positing weird concepts to explain things that could be experienced and tested. Relying only on reason and coherence as measures of truth, people had started postulating theories that defied common sense. The contradictions in the theories of rationalists led to the development of the scientific method, which relies heavily on empirical evidence (Harris, 2007).

There are many ways of defining a science. In the oxford advanced learners dictionary, science is defined as “knowledge about the structure and behavior of the natural or physical world, based on facts that you can prove for example by experiments” (Hornby & Cowie, 1996, p. 105). There are different kinds of sciences. There are two categories of sciences: pure sciences and applied sciences. Another categorization identifies sciences as either natural or social sciences. Natural sciences investigate the physical world while social sciences investigate human behavior, interactions and social groups.

The definition of a science given above identifies given tenets of scientific knowledge. Scientific knowledge is facts about the natural or physical world. The facts are arrived at through a well-outlined method. Method is very important in any science. It is the method that guarantees a systematic study that does not allow for or cause bias, prejudice, stereotype, oversights, hindsight or any form of misinformation. The method has to be flawless if the end result is to be flawless. The method has to allow for the possibility of another person coming and doing the same investigation so as to test the result.

The scientific method starts from observation then basing on prior knowledge or just the observation, one can postulate a hypothesis (Harris, 2007). A hypothesis is a supposition, tentative answer or possible explanation that a scientist gives a phenomenon on observation. Before setting out on testing or trying to prove the hypothesis, the scientist has to visualize and conceptualize how the relationship between the different variables is. This is called prediction and it involves supposing how variables are likely to behave when being tested (Harris, 2007). Variables are the things that are either causing or to which effect is being registered. The scientific method is not complete without testing or experimenting so as to either affirm or negate one’s hypothesis. Science does not stop at personal hunch or opinion, one has to test or experiment to be sure.

Testing or experimenting takes different forms. However, the test or experiment itself is specially designed to reduce room for error. In a social science research, effort is made towards assuring both the internal and external validity of the research. In laboratory experiments, efforts are made to reduce influence of external factors. Use of control groups or species is often employed towards ensuring comparison between controlled environment and uncontrolled environment.

Once the testing or experimentation has been done, the scientist or researcher has to conclude. Inferences are often either deductive or inductive. Deductive ones lead to application of knowledge while inductive ones often only serve as the basis for further theorizing or positing of a hypothesis. Then the cycle of scientific research is repeated (Harris, 2007).

Sociology has been defined differently or diversely over a long period. However the definition, sociology has society or human beings in their social settings as its object of inquiry. Therefore, it would not be too far-fetched or simplistic to define sociology as a study of society. In the oxford advanced learners dictionary, sociology is defined as “the scientific study of the nature and development of society and social behavior” (Hornby & Cowie, 1996, p. 112). From the given definition, it is discernible that use of the scientific method is crucial in distinguishing sociology from any other study that concerns itself with the nature of society. As a study concerned with the nature of society, sociology is an endeavor to unravel causes and effects of given facets or processes in a society. It uses the scientific methodology towards establishing the basic principles around which societies are developed. There are some basic rules or principles that have to be in place before the structures of society coalesce into whatever they are.

To understand why the scientific method is an integral aspect of the sociological inquiry, it is imperative to understand the nature of sociology. Sociology is not just a study about present society but also society as it was. One is only able to discern the forces of change operative in society through study of transitions that society has been through.

Of key interest to sociologists is what is referred to as social activities (Van Kriekien, 2005). Sociology aims at expanding understanding of social activities. Of key interest are the different aspects, forces or issues that inform or lead to given social activities. To understand the social activities better, sociology endeavors to understand the contexts or structures that inform the activities. Sociology like all sciences aims at using precise tools and thorough investigation of observable and verifiable things towards establishing or identifying universal principles, rules, norms and ways that inform societal development (Van Kriekien, 2005).

Some scholars are narrow-minded in their understanding of what science is. They tend towards the position that science only investigates objective realms and not subjective realms. It has to be known that even in experiential or subjective knowing; the brain also plays a critical role. Some process in the brain does not necessarily involve reasoning but are rather subtle processes through which experience or stimulus is interpreted and directed

What is not often realized is the overlapping nature of knowledge (Nisbet & Gottfried, 2001). Objectivity and subjectivity are not static measures. Rather, they are dynamic references that change depending on context. Reality in itself is a complexity. It is for this reason that disciplines i.e. arts and arts, sciences and sciences, science and art overlap (Nisbet & Gottfried, 2001). Sociology is interdisciplinary and informs much in biology and psychology as it is informed by findings from those fields.

Sociology is a science because it employs the scientific method of inquiry (Spencer & Turner, 2002). Like all sciences, sociological studies start in observation. An observation paves way to tentative answers or theorizing on behalf of the researcher. The researcher then designs research to ascertain whether his premonitions are correct or misguided. The research design anticipates all the twists that could affect the result.

Research design in sociology often involves reviewing previous works, developing research objectives, designing research questions that would inform the different research objectives, designing research tools e.g. data collection, recording and presentational tools and proper control of population to feasibly do the research (Spencer & Turner, 2002).

Research in sociology either takes the form of a survey or case study. In a survey, all members of a given population are targeted by a research. Out of the population, through different sampling methods and techniques, final respondents are approached and their responses are generalized to the whole population. Case study researches are a normally in-group or small group focused.

Sociology is a social science because it concerns itself with people or social behavior (Van Kriekien, 2005). It is not a natural science because it does not deal with the nature of the physical world. Social sciences are concerned with the factors that inform human behavior and interactions. For sociology, the focus is on societal structures and ways or norms that inform individual behavior (Van Kriekien, 2005). It aims at establishing universal principles or dictates that guide or determine social or societal processes, structures and focus.

Sociology is not a pure science; rather it is an applied science. Although it differs from other social sciences because the former are very specific in their focus, sociology anticipates the identification of general rules that govern human behavior and interaction (Spencer & Turner, 2002). Examples of other kinds of social sciences include political science, comparative religion, economics, community development and ethics. Sociology is an applied science because its findings are directly applicable in transforming society (Spencer & Turner, 2002. Branches of sociology such as urbanization are directly relevant considerations when urban planning is necessary.

Considering the foregoing consideration, the question of whether to regard sociology as a science or not is false because sociology in its nature is a science. If the question is worth considering, the polite answer would be that sociology should be regarded as science because it employs scientific methodologies in its inquiry. Even though in some instances, sociology as an art concerns itself with issues in the subjective realm, the issues are all the same approach with scientific objectivity.


Harris, M 2007, Ways of Knowing: Anthropological Approaches to Crafting Experience and Knowledge. Berghahn Books, New York.

Hornby, A.S. & Cowie, A. P 1996, Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary. 5th Ed. Oxford University Press, New York.

Nisbet, A. R., & Gottfried, P 2001, Sociology as an Art Form. 2nd Ed, Transaction Publishers, New Jersey.

Spencer, H. & Turner, J 2002, The Principles of Sociology. Transaction Publishers, New Jersey.

Van Krieken, R 2005, Sociology: Themes and Perspectives. 3rd Ed, Pearson Education: Australia

error: Content is protected !!