Scan barcode
atticmoth's review against another edition
3.0
To those outside the formal world of academia, E. O. Wilson may not be a familiar name, but it’s hard to make it through any ecology course without his being mentioned. E. O. Wilson was a renowned entomologist, particularly from an evolutionary perspective, but most notably an early advocate of conservation biology, one of the scientists who coined the term “biodiversity”. Most of Wilson’s work probably wouldn’t be interesting to anyone outside academia, save for Biophilia, which was written later in life in the 1980s. Biophilia is defined as “the innate tendency to focus on life and lifeline processes,” and the goal of this book was to position biophilia as the driving force behind the conservation ethic. In Biophilia, Wilson synthesizes evolutionary biology, traditional indigenous knowledge, personal experience and Jungian archetypes to defend his perspective that humans are innately drawn to nature because we are a part of it. This is a true statement, but I would perhaps find it more powerful if Biophilia had remained a purely philosophical argument, instead of trying to force a scientific one. For example, Wilson attempts to explain the human conception of beauty (landscape gardens, Bonsai trees) as imitating the “original environment” — the savannas of Africa, claiming “some unconscious force has been at work to turn Asiatic pines and other northern species into African acacias.” A lot of Biophilia seems scattered from Wilson’s original thesis, until “The Conservation Ethic” chapter, when he turns his biophilia theory towards advocating for environmental protection. I wish more of the book had been about this, instead of rudimentary ecological concepts for the layman interspersed with personal anecdotes about discovering a millionth ant species in Suriname. I often had to remind myself what Wilson was arguing in the first place, which is why I am not sure I would recommend this book as a cohesive whole, but perhaps as individual essays that could serve as a primer to a study of conservation biology.
uhambe_nami's review against another edition
4.0
The truth is that we never conquered the world, never understood it; we only think we have control. We do not even know why we respond a certain way to other organisms, and need them in diverse ways, so deeply. The prevailing myths concerning our predatory actions toward each other and the environment are obsolete, unreliable, and destructive. The more the mind is fathomed in its own right, as an organ of survival, the greater will be the reverence for life for purely rational reasons.
In Biophilia, E.O. Wilson takes us on a tour through the jungles of Surinam, Brazil, and New Guinea, some of the last remaining wildernesses of this world, and argues that we human beings have an instinctive bond with other living systems, which eventually will lead us to protect rather than destroy all living things and the environment in which we live. I can only hope, with all my heart, that this is true.
In Biophilia, E.O. Wilson takes us on a tour through the jungles of Surinam, Brazil, and New Guinea, some of the last remaining wildernesses of this world, and argues that we human beings have an instinctive bond with other living systems, which eventually will lead us to protect rather than destroy all living things and the environment in which we live. I can only hope, with all my heart, that this is true.
emmmmy96's review against another edition
5.0
This book will bring you great joy if you enjoy philosophy and are craving to deepen your wisdom of species and it’s necessity to conservation.
rachitsingh's review against another edition
2.0
2.5*
Quite disappointed, to be honest...despite the good things I had heard about this one, it did not connect with me at all.
The style of writing was inconsistent, vague at times and not engaging. However, some good thought-provoking lines were there but to arrive at them I had to sift through several pages that did not seem connected to the theme of the essay at all. The whole idea of Biophilia, even after reading the book, seems unclear. One of the reason beings that there were too many unrelated topics or events described. Almost like he got a flashback while writing the manuscript and then decided to dedicate 2-3 pages to that, and then see how it fits the essay's title.
Don't think I would recommend it to anyone but since the reviews on this are so mixed, I guess one can give it a try and see how it goes. Did not connect with me and trying to maintain interest in the text was a challenge!
Quite disappointed, to be honest...despite the good things I had heard about this one, it did not connect with me at all.
The style of writing was inconsistent, vague at times and not engaging. However, some good thought-provoking lines were there but to arrive at them I had to sift through several pages that did not seem connected to the theme of the essay at all. The whole idea of Biophilia, even after reading the book, seems unclear. One of the reason beings that there were too many unrelated topics or events described. Almost like he got a flashback while writing the manuscript and then decided to dedicate 2-3 pages to that, and then see how it fits the essay's title.
Don't think I would recommend it to anyone but since the reviews on this are so mixed, I guess one can give it a try and see how it goes. Did not connect with me and trying to maintain interest in the text was a challenge!
skepticalcactus's review against another edition
Want to pick it up later just got busy!
nerdy_scholar's review against another edition
5.0
Read this slim volume in less than two days. The eloquence and moving style of the late E. O. Wilson is simply irresistible. His argument for the conservation of ecological systems and belief in the kinship of all life forms is truly inspirational.
baldingape's review against another edition
3.0
'The Natural world is the refuge of the spirit, remote, static, richer even than the human imagination. But we cannot exist in this paradise without the machine that tears it apart.' pg 11 - 12
And that is perhaps the most heartbreaking thing about being a human.
We see and hear all about this climate change stuff, and while some deny it still, those of us that are very aware of it are left in this dilemma where we know what's going on, but we feel somewhat helpless to do anything about it.
Tie that in with the last book I read about just how much of the land is cut off to people, and its helplessness becomes more apparent. What can little old me do? We might ask ourselves one of the plebs in the 'machine in the garden,' except much of that garden is taken away from us. And we're just left with the machine.
Yet that machine is the very thing that I rely on. Many of us do, but as a disabled person, I certainly feel trapped by the machine because as I look into the abyss, I see that it is the machine that keeps me alive, yet we should arguably have been playing in the garden all along.
And that is the dilemma that I live in.
Without the machine, I am dead. But without the garden life is empty.
I especially liked when he said this towards the end of the book:
'I have argued in this book that we are human in good part because of the particular way we affiliate with other organisms. They are the matrix in which the human mind originated and is permanently rooted.' pg 129.
Could it be that we're becoming a species that will slowly become more defined by how we don't affiliate with other organisms?
'The forests may all be cut; radiation slowly rise, the winters grow steadily colder, but if the effects are unlikely to become decisive for a few generations, very few people will be stirred to revolt.' Edward O. Wilson wrote.
The book published in 1984 and it's still a problem we're trying to navigate in 2021.
By the end, he states that we need to promote more selfish ideas as to why we need to conserve the world around us, and I think he may have a point.
Try as hard as we might, all attempts to get people to care about the 'natural world' outside of themselves and their enclosed habitats appears to fail if you don't appeal to their own self-interests.
This may be an ugly view upon humans, but it nevertheless seems to be true.
And that is perhaps the most heartbreaking thing about being a human.
We see and hear all about this climate change stuff, and while some deny it still, those of us that are very aware of it are left in this dilemma where we know what's going on, but we feel somewhat helpless to do anything about it.
Tie that in with the last book I read about just how much of the land is cut off to people, and its helplessness becomes more apparent. What can little old me do? We might ask ourselves one of the plebs in the 'machine in the garden,' except much of that garden is taken away from us. And we're just left with the machine.
Yet that machine is the very thing that I rely on. Many of us do, but as a disabled person, I certainly feel trapped by the machine because as I look into the abyss, I see that it is the machine that keeps me alive, yet we should arguably have been playing in the garden all along.
And that is the dilemma that I live in.
Without the machine, I am dead. But without the garden life is empty.
I especially liked when he said this towards the end of the book:
'I have argued in this book that we are human in good part because of the particular way we affiliate with other organisms. They are the matrix in which the human mind originated and is permanently rooted.' pg 129.
Could it be that we're becoming a species that will slowly become more defined by how we don't affiliate with other organisms?
'The forests may all be cut; radiation slowly rise, the winters grow steadily colder, but if the effects are unlikely to become decisive for a few generations, very few people will be stirred to revolt.' Edward O. Wilson wrote.
The book published in 1984 and it's still a problem we're trying to navigate in 2021.
By the end, he states that we need to promote more selfish ideas as to why we need to conserve the world around us, and I think he may have a point.
Try as hard as we might, all attempts to get people to care about the 'natural world' outside of themselves and their enclosed habitats appears to fail if you don't appeal to their own self-interests.
This may be an ugly view upon humans, but it nevertheless seems to be true.
cdua's review
informative
reflective
slow-paced
3.25
What a read. I had to read this book for my biology class this year, and it was both under and overwhelming. I found that it fascinated me at times, and delved into topics or ideas that I had never even considered. But at times it was excessively confusing and simply rambled on to be honest. And I like to ramble, so you think I would be forgiving with that. Overall, I think it was such an educational and interesting read. It was definitely inspiring for someone interested within ecology and I was glad to have to do the required discussions on each chapter because that enhanced the experience of reading it a lot more than I would have expected it to.
cetian's review against another edition
5.0
A beautiful essay in humanism that sugests we search for a new ethic confirming an afinity with all life. A work that asserts science as a precious tool to observe and apreciate the natural world.
Very inspiring these days when misantrophy is almost the obvious partner of ecological despair. And many fantasize about how better off the biosphere would be without humans.
Wonderful writting, mixing the love of science and a passion for human culture. Its descriptions of nature, both in its intrinsic beauty and in our enjoyment of it are great literature. There is an uncompromising pragmatism that never gives room to cynicism. In a way, this work can also be a great impulse to tune the philosophy of science with bioethics.
Very inspiring these days when misantrophy is almost the obvious partner of ecological despair. And many fantasize about how better off the biosphere would be without humans.
Wonderful writting, mixing the love of science and a passion for human culture. Its descriptions of nature, both in its intrinsic beauty and in our enjoyment of it are great literature. There is an uncompromising pragmatism that never gives room to cynicism. In a way, this work can also be a great impulse to tune the philosophy of science with bioethics.