Urban Revolution

556 Words2 Pages

How did humans come to their current opinions of nature and how we should relate to it? Kevin Reilly suggests that nature influenced our religious beliefs, while the Economist article titled “The Plough and the Now” advocates that advancements in technology led to new power systems and social relations. These two combined factors have shaped modern beliefs which have in turn shaped the perception of nature, which is a repeated theme in Ishmael. Nature affected ancient religions while technology changed social interactions. Thousands of years later, these combined changes of humans perspectives toward the world are adjusting how they handle nature.
“Mesopotamian and Egyptian Civilizations: A Tale of Two Rivers”, an essay by Kevin Reilly proves the point that nature forms spiritual beliefs cause. While the Nile River was calm and predictable, the Euphrates River was erratic and caused much destruction each flooding, this reflects in the beliefs of the people by these rivers. The Nile was a god to the Ancient Egyptian people, it flooded annually, was easy to travel on, and provided fertile soil. “The Egyptian god of the flood, Hapi, was a helpful deity, who provided the people’s daily bread. Egyptian priests and philosophers were much more at ease than were their Mesopotamian counterparts.” (Reilly 39). The Mesopotamians also had a god of the flood, however this one was feared, in fact, most of the Mesopotamian nature gods were seen as evil. In the end, the Mesopotamians created much more powerful cities due to their “humans versus nature” beliefs and need for greater technology, bringing with them into the modern age their notions of nature.
Advancements in technology, more specifically agricultural technology, caused a shift in ...

... middle of paper ...

...the ideas of Ishmael in modern days. Though no one alive today was able to witness what started theology for or opposed to nature, it’s hard to believe that nature wouldn’t be the starting component of religion, Ishmael does not provide a satisfying point against this idea. What would seemingly make the most sense is that in modern times, human ideas about religion, based off of nature, and about social standards, caused by technology, have led to the common perception of nature and how one should interact with it. There is no logical way that humans without a strong belief system or set of gods could create a religion so strong without looking towards nature.
Nature created religion and a certain set of gods, technology caused people to think in certain ways about their place, and finally, these two combined mindsets led to contemporary understandings of nature.

Open Document