Lucretius believed that the universe constituted of particles which arrangement had occurred by chance. In addition, he held the conviction that change and decay were inevitable.
These assertions formed a doctrine that was similar to the modern concept of entropy. Lucretius described the way human activities in the Roman agriculture interacted with the environment and resulted in severe land degradation.
Lucretius argued that art and science, which arose through trial and error, were subject to similar deterioration as the materials available to the two disciplines (Krech et al. 768).
It means that just as the way scientific principles resulted from trial and error, agriculture could not facilitate the expansion of the Roman economy and preserve the environment at the same time.
Lucretius argued that it was difficult to undertake agriculture in Rome because land infertility was increasing. Some farmers confessed to Lucretius that the last harvests were incomparable to those of the previous seasons.
This was not a mere rhetoric considering that writers on the Roman agriculture also highlighted the decline in land productivity either due to the land being old or because of humans’ failure to preserve the available land.
This implied that Lucretius’s sentiments about the Roman agriculture were justifiable since even the farmers themselves confirmed that land infertility was eminent.
In the Roman agriculture, the pursuance of the unexploited land led farmers to cut down trees on the hillside and convert woodlands into agricultural fields and grazing grounds (Krech et al. 769).
Lucretius stated that woodcutters confined the forest to the mountain, leaving the foothills for farming purposes. Thus, Lucretius focused on the deforestation of Italy during the Roman Empire period.
He implied that as the Romans attempted to employ modern technology in farming, they were leaving most of the land barren and thus encouraged desertification.
Lucretius argued that mining resulted from the Roman’s quest for expansion thus most of the agricultural land suffered degradation. This implied that as the Romans continued developing their economy, they affected nature negatively.
Lucretius described the discovery of metals after humans set forests on fire and observed the metal-ore melting with molten metal seeping out of the earth’s cracks. People experimented with their new discovery and found out that they could make tools and weapons as well as ornaments.
Furthermore, Lucretius described mines which contained dangerous pollutants that contaminated the air. However, mines did not only emit foul smell, but also affected mineworkers and reduced their life expectancy.
This implies that human interference with nature presents undesirable outcomes (Krech et al. 769).
Lucretius believed that nature superseded the efforts adopted by humans. In his view, all human works would lie in ruins since no permanent improvement could emanate from people’s efforts because history is a process of decline.
In addition, Lucretius supposed that either Gods or Aristotelian purpose had stopped guiding nature. He observed that early humans were healthier compared to those of his time even though the living conditions of previous generations were primitive.
Lucretius argued that humanity became civilized not due to following some law of progress, but by responding to trials that nature made humans face.
Conclusion
Lucretius concluded that the most appropriate way to cope with natural disasters and better people’s life was to seek innate explanation for every phenomenon and remain contented with the current order of things.
He observed that irrespective of the humans’ guest to gain control over various aspects of their lives, nature always thrived (Krech III et al. 768).
Works Cited
Krech III, Shepard, McNeill, John Robert and Carolyn Merchant. Encyclopedia of World Environmental History: A – E. New York: Routledge, 2004. Print