What do you think?
Rate this book
Biofilia. Il nostro legame con la natura
In questi saggi, che si alternano a racconti autobiografici, Wilson dichiara la bellezza e la meraviglia della scienza a partire dalla sua personale esperienza di biologo e naturalista, secondo una prospettiva profonda e originale. Biofilia significa letteralmente “amore per la vita” – un amore che il naturalista prova mentre è immerso dall’alba al tramonto nello studio di un metro quadrato di foresta pluviale, o quando scopre un organismo sconosciuto o rimane estasiato di fronte all’infinita ricchezza di forme di vita solo apparentemente effimere. Nell’osservazione del faticoso lavorio che il mondo naturale porta avanti ben al di là della limitata attenzione che gli prestiamo, la storia e l’uomo acquistano una dimensione diversa.
Dunque l’ipotesi biofilia rimanda anche ad altro: ai milioni di anni durante i quali l’uomo si è relazionato al suo ambiente, stringendo con esso un legame inscindibile, all’innato bisogno fisico, psicologico ed emotivo di venire in contatto con gli altri esseri viventi, di adattare ad essi le nostre vite e culture. Esplorare la vita e capire che ne facciamo parte costituisce un processo profondo e complesso nel corso dell’evoluzione mentale. Tutti questi elementi sotto il termine “biofilia” sono la base su cui costruire un’ etica profonda della conservazione, nuova e potente, fondata sulla comprensione delle vere radici motivazionali per cui amiamo e proteggiamo la vita.
Dunque l’ipotesi biofilia rimanda anche ad altro: ai milioni di anni durante i quali l’uomo si è relazionato al suo ambiente, stringendo con esso un legame inscindibile, all’innato bisogno fisico, psicologico ed emotivo di venire in contatto con gli altri esseri viventi, di adattare ad essi le nostre vite e culture. Esplorare la vita e capire che ne facciamo parte costituisce un processo profondo e complesso nel corso dell’evoluzione mentale. Tutti questi elementi sotto il termine “biofilia” sono la base su cui costruire un’ etica profonda della conservazione, nuova e potente, fondata sulla comprensione delle vere radici motivazionali per cui amiamo e proteggiamo la vita.
250 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1984
163 people are currently reading
4415 people want to read
About the author
Edward O. Wilson
201 books2,496 followersEdward Osborne Wilson, sometimes credited as E.O. Wilson, was an American biologist, researcher, theorist, and author. His biological specialty is myrmecology, a branch of entomology. A two-time winner of the Pulitzer Prize for General Non-Fiction, Wilson is known for his career as a scientist, his advocacy for environmentalism, and his secular-humanist ideas pertaining to religious and ethical matters. He was the Pellegrino University Research Professor in Entomology for the Department of Organismic and Evolutionary Biology at Harvard University and a Fellow of the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry. He is a Humanist Laureate of the International Academy of Humanism.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 111 reviews
March 26, 2017
I will be so bold as to define biophilia as the innate tendency to focus on life and lifelike processes.
from the Prologue
E.O. Wilson, September 2009 (Wiki, Acghost)
Edward Osborne Wilson (born June 10, 1929) is an American biologist, researcher (sociobiology, biodiversity, island biogeography), theorist (consilience, biophilia), naturalist (conservationist) and author. (Wiki)
When I started reading Biophilia I was wary of the possibility that it might be dated. He addresses the question of species extinction and loss of biodiversity throughout the book, and though he expresses vast concern about both, Wilson is also (here and there) optimistic. What would he think now, thirty years on? the reader may wonder, as I did.
But fortunately that question can be answered (though you won’t find the answer here), because Wilson has been writing throughout that period, and as the situation has become more dire, his views and hopes have evolved. So, to digress briefly, his best books by decade (according to the reviewer, who has only read one of them)
Pre-1990s: Biophilia
1990s: Consilience: The Unity of Knowledge The Diversity of Life Naturalist
2000s: The Future of Life
2010s: The Meaning of Human Existence The Social Conquest of Earth A Window on Eternity Letters to a Young Scientist
Biophilia is not simply a book about the life sciences. It is a memoir, a statement of philosophical and ethical positions, sprinkled with themes from years of field observations.
Mostly it is a book with an overarching idea, expressed in Wilson’s concept of “biophilia” as that innate tendency to focus on life and lifelike processes - a tendency, he doesn’t bother saying, which he ascribes to the human animal. Going a little further in his introduction, he says that the case he will make is that “to explore and affiliate with life is a deep and complicated process of mental development … our existence depends on this propensity, our spirit is woven from it, hope rises on its currents … to the degree that we come to understand other organisms, we will place a greater value on them, and on ourselves.”
In the first few chapters Wilson veers off on other paths. In The Superorganism he uses his world famous knowledge of the field of myrmecology (the study of ants) to relate many of the astounding details of the workings of leafcutter ants, emphasizing the idea that both individually (if that even makes sense for these creatures) and collectively, the life cycle of a colony is like nothing so much as the workings of a chemical machine. Another chapter tells of the male Emperor of Germany bird of paradise, and its elaborate courtship ritual. Over the last few pages Wilson presents a small essay on the way in which science can focus in on the details of all the microscopic events which culminate in the courting dance; and then backs off from this description to explain how this analytic part of the science can be followed by a synthetic step which will return to the beauty of the image we perceive:
This leads directly into The Poetic Species, a lengthy narrative which includes reflections about Carl Sagan, Einstein, Max Plank; the importance of elegance and metaphor in the scientific enterprise; thoughts and ideas of T.S. Eliot, the Mexican poet Octavio Paz, Albert Camus, as they apply to science; and much more, having to do with “the common, human origin of science and art.”
He reconstructs a fascinating description of the give and take that went on between him and the mathematician/ecologist Robert MacArthur over a period of time in the early 1960s in which they were gradually and jointly coming up with the founding ideas of the field of insular biogeography.
Finally, by adding more strands from the Irish poet Thomas Kinsella, the philosopher Richard Rorty, the astounding Indian mathematician and autodidact Srinivasa Ramanujan, the Belgian psychologist Gerda Smets, and a reference to Joseph Stella’s “Tree of My Life” (below), Wilson makes his way to
In the final three chapters Wilson begins to turn back toward a deeper examination of biophilia.
In The Serpent, he admits that, regarding this innate urge, “evidence for it is not strong in a formal scientific sense … nevertheless so clearly evinced in daily life as to deserve serious attention … It unfolds in the predictable fantasies and responses of individuals from early childhood onward. It cascades into repetitive patterns of culture across most or all societies, a consistency often noted in the literature of anthropology. These processes appear to be part of the programs of the brain. They are marked by the quickness and decisiveness with which we learn particular things about certain types of plants and animals. They are too consistent to be dismissed as the result of purely historical events working on a mental blank slate. … Perhaps the most bizarre of the biophilic traits is awe and veneration of the serpent”. And at the end of this chapter, a dense page, too much to quote, linking culture, the mind, consciousness, the biases “built into the sensory apparatus and brain by particularities in cellular architecture.”
Next, The Right Place. Animals have a built in (genetic) ability to seek out the environment that maximizes their chances to survive (example as minute as colon bacteria). The connection of this to the “preferred habitat of human beings … With aesthetics we return to the central issue of biophilia … and inquire about the prevalent direction of this vector in cultural evolution, in other words the ideal toward which human beings unconsciously strive.” And after examining humankind’s original life on the savannas of Africa, the question, “is the mind also predisposed to life on the savanna, such that beauty in some fashion can be said to be in the genes of the beholder?” He explores the work of three scientists who “have independently suggested that this is the case”: Gordon Orians, Yi-Fu Tuan and Rene Dubos; and concludes these pages, “Arcturian zoologists visiting this planet could make no sense of our morality and art until they reconstructed our genetic history – nor can we.”
Finally, The Conservation Ethic brings Wilson’s argument to a close, by turning the analysis into a search for an ethical grounding. “The future of the conservation movement depends on an advance in moral reasoning. Its maturation is linked to that of biology and a new hybrid field, bioethics.”
Wilson concludes, and wraps up his case for biophilia and a conservation ethic, by writing
Numerous times during my read I thought of two other authors I’ve read in recent years: Annie Dillard and Jacob Bronowski. Dillard because many of Wilson’s descriptions of the way in which a naturalist does field work were echoes of Dillard’s descriptions of how she observed nature in Pilgrim at Tinker Creek; and Bronowski (Science and Human Values) because I sensed an agreement between them of the importance, the very deep, fundamental importance, of science for the human species – not simply as a way of knowing reality, but as a foundation upon which to build a description of what it is to be human.
from the Prologue
E.O. Wilson, September 2009 (Wiki, Acghost)
Edward Osborne Wilson (born June 10, 1929) is an American biologist, researcher (sociobiology, biodiversity, island biogeography), theorist (consilience, biophilia), naturalist (conservationist) and author. (Wiki)
When I started reading Biophilia I was wary of the possibility that it might be dated. He addresses the question of species extinction and loss of biodiversity throughout the book, and though he expresses vast concern about both, Wilson is also (here and there) optimistic. What would he think now, thirty years on? the reader may wonder, as I did.
But fortunately that question can be answered (though you won’t find the answer here), because Wilson has been writing throughout that period, and as the situation has become more dire, his views and hopes have evolved. So, to digress briefly, his best books by decade (according to the reviewer, who has only read one of them)
Pre-1990s: Biophilia
1990s: Consilience: The Unity of Knowledge The Diversity of Life Naturalist
2000s: The Future of Life
2010s: The Meaning of Human Existence The Social Conquest of Earth A Window on Eternity Letters to a Young Scientist
Biophilia is not simply a book about the life sciences. It is a memoir, a statement of philosophical and ethical positions, sprinkled with themes from years of field observations.
Mostly it is a book with an overarching idea, expressed in Wilson’s concept of “biophilia” as that innate tendency to focus on life and lifelike processes - a tendency, he doesn’t bother saying, which he ascribes to the human animal. Going a little further in his introduction, he says that the case he will make is that “to explore and affiliate with life is a deep and complicated process of mental development … our existence depends on this propensity, our spirit is woven from it, hope rises on its currents … to the degree that we come to understand other organisms, we will place a greater value on them, and on ourselves.”
In the first few chapters Wilson veers off on other paths. In The Superorganism he uses his world famous knowledge of the field of myrmecology (the study of ants) to relate many of the astounding details of the workings of leafcutter ants, emphasizing the idea that both individually (if that even makes sense for these creatures) and collectively, the life cycle of a colony is like nothing so much as the workings of a chemical machine. Another chapter tells of the male Emperor of Germany bird of paradise, and its elaborate courtship ritual. Over the last few pages Wilson presents a small essay on the way in which science can focus in on the details of all the microscopic events which culminate in the courting dance; and then backs off from this description to explain how this analytic part of the science can be followed by a synthetic step which will return to the beauty of the image we perceive:
The excitement of the scientist’s search for the true material nature of the species recedes, to be replaced in part by the more enduring responses of the hunter and poet … With each new phase of synthesis to emerge from biological inquiry, the humanities will expand their reach and capability. I symmetric fashion, with each redirection of the humanities, science will add dimensions to human biology.
This leads directly into The Poetic Species, a lengthy narrative which includes reflections about Carl Sagan, Einstein, Max Plank; the importance of elegance and metaphor in the scientific enterprise; thoughts and ideas of T.S. Eliot, the Mexican poet Octavio Paz, Albert Camus, as they apply to science; and much more, having to do with “the common, human origin of science and art.”
He reconstructs a fascinating description of the give and take that went on between him and the mathematician/ecologist Robert MacArthur over a period of time in the early 1960s in which they were gradually and jointly coming up with the founding ideas of the field of insular biogeography.
Finally, by adding more strands from the Irish poet Thomas Kinsella, the philosopher Richard Rorty, the astounding Indian mathematician and autodidact Srinivasa Ramanujan, the Belgian psychologist Gerda Smets, and a reference to Joseph Stella’s “Tree of My Life” (below), Wilson makes his way to
The fiery circle of disciplines will be closed [completed] if science looks at the inward journey of the artist's mind, making art and culture objects of study in the biological mold, and if the artist and critic are informed of the workings of the mind and the natural world as illuminated by the scientific method. In principle at least, nothing can be denied to the humanities, nothing to science.
In the final three chapters Wilson begins to turn back toward a deeper examination of biophilia.
In The Serpent, he admits that, regarding this innate urge, “evidence for it is not strong in a formal scientific sense … nevertheless so clearly evinced in daily life as to deserve serious attention … It unfolds in the predictable fantasies and responses of individuals from early childhood onward. It cascades into repetitive patterns of culture across most or all societies, a consistency often noted in the literature of anthropology. These processes appear to be part of the programs of the brain. They are marked by the quickness and decisiveness with which we learn particular things about certain types of plants and animals. They are too consistent to be dismissed as the result of purely historical events working on a mental blank slate. … Perhaps the most bizarre of the biophilic traits is awe and veneration of the serpent”. And at the end of this chapter, a dense page, too much to quote, linking culture, the mind, consciousness, the biases “built into the sensory apparatus and brain by particularities in cellular architecture.”
Next, The Right Place. Animals have a built in (genetic) ability to seek out the environment that maximizes their chances to survive (example as minute as colon bacteria). The connection of this to the “preferred habitat of human beings … With aesthetics we return to the central issue of biophilia … and inquire about the prevalent direction of this vector in cultural evolution, in other words the ideal toward which human beings unconsciously strive.” And after examining humankind’s original life on the savannas of Africa, the question, “is the mind also predisposed to life on the savanna, such that beauty in some fashion can be said to be in the genes of the beholder?” He explores the work of three scientists who “have independently suggested that this is the case”: Gordon Orians, Yi-Fu Tuan and Rene Dubos; and concludes these pages, “Arcturian zoologists visiting this planet could make no sense of our morality and art until they reconstructed our genetic history – nor can we.”
Finally, The Conservation Ethic brings Wilson’s argument to a close, by turning the analysis into a search for an ethical grounding. “The future of the conservation movement depends on an advance in moral reasoning. Its maturation is linked to that of biology and a new hybrid field, bioethics.”
Wilson concludes, and wraps up his case for biophilia and a conservation ethic, by writing
Natural philosophy has brought into clear relief the following paradox of human existence. The drive toward perpetual expansion – or personal freedom – is basic to the human spirit. But to sustain it we need the most delicate, knowing stewardship of the living world that can be devised. Expansion and stewardship may appear at first to be conflicting goals, but they are not. The depth of the conservation ethic will be measured by the extent to which each of the two approaches to nature is used to reshape and reinforce the other. The paradox can be resolved by changing its premises into forms more suited to ultimate survival, by which I mean protection of the human spirit.
Numerous times during my read I thought of two other authors I’ve read in recent years: Annie Dillard and Jacob Bronowski. Dillard because many of Wilson’s descriptions of the way in which a naturalist does field work were echoes of Dillard’s descriptions of how she observed nature in Pilgrim at Tinker Creek; and Bronowski (Science and Human Values) because I sensed an agreement between them of the importance, the very deep, fundamental importance, of science for the human species – not simply as a way of knowing reality, but as a foundation upon which to build a description of what it is to be human.
February 23, 2011
Do you suppose, if I admit that I find it a bit difficult to hold my attention to an E.O. Wilson book for long periods of time, that they will take away my science writing license?
I sure hope not, because I'm about to do just that.
This is not, however, I think Wilson's fault. Wilson is a god, a Titan, among science communications and general scientists, and I adore him as a human being and a leader. I've heard him speak, and it was wonderful. I think, for me, his books suffer from being almost too true. So much of Biophilia is so fundamental to my life and belief system that it's a little difficult to read. It'd be like if someone tried to get you to read a treatise on why recycling or composing is a good idea. You support them, clearly, but reading the arguments you've heard (and given!) gets old.
Wilson is a very gifted writer and communicator, and much of his text is eminently quotable, but . . . well, perhaps that is the trouble. It is very quotable, and at some point you sacrifice the flow of the narrative to it.
These are meant to be essays, though, so perhaps the flow isn't as important as the quotability at all. Perhaps these are meant to be more savored than read, meditations and poems rather than stories. After all, no one complains that the "Battle Hymn of the Republic" or the "Star-Spangled Banner" aren't sufficiently easy to sing.
In fact, perhaps its churlish of me to complain. Maybe I'm not Wilson's target audience at all. I've already been converted. I believe with all my heart and soul and body and existence that humans are drawn to, and part of, the natural world, and that we would shrivel without it. I support superorganisms, and evolution at the group level, and altruism.
With all that said, this is a tremendously important book, and a colossally important idea. It's very important to have read, even if you don't luxuriate in the reading of it. And perhaps I am too jaded to appreciate the work properly.
I sure hope not, because I'm about to do just that.
This is not, however, I think Wilson's fault. Wilson is a god, a Titan, among science communications and general scientists, and I adore him as a human being and a leader. I've heard him speak, and it was wonderful. I think, for me, his books suffer from being almost too true. So much of Biophilia is so fundamental to my life and belief system that it's a little difficult to read. It'd be like if someone tried to get you to read a treatise on why recycling or composing is a good idea. You support them, clearly, but reading the arguments you've heard (and given!) gets old.
Wilson is a very gifted writer and communicator, and much of his text is eminently quotable, but . . . well, perhaps that is the trouble. It is very quotable, and at some point you sacrifice the flow of the narrative to it.
These are meant to be essays, though, so perhaps the flow isn't as important as the quotability at all. Perhaps these are meant to be more savored than read, meditations and poems rather than stories. After all, no one complains that the "Battle Hymn of the Republic" or the "Star-Spangled Banner" aren't sufficiently easy to sing.
In fact, perhaps its churlish of me to complain. Maybe I'm not Wilson's target audience at all. I've already been converted. I believe with all my heart and soul and body and existence that humans are drawn to, and part of, the natural world, and that we would shrivel without it. I support superorganisms, and evolution at the group level, and altruism.
With all that said, this is a tremendously important book, and a colossally important idea. It's very important to have read, even if you don't luxuriate in the reading of it. And perhaps I am too jaded to appreciate the work properly.
March 12, 2021
Biofilija je usađena težnja nekog organizma da stupi u kontakt sa drugim životnim oblicima. Ljubav prema životu u svim njegovim oblicima.
Pozivajući se na Ričarda Rortija, Vilson tvrdi da je čovekova posebnost to što je poetsko biće. I ne samo to – um je biološki stvoren tako da iznova stvara misaone mehanizme sopstvenog prevazilaženja. Kao osnovu imaginacije Vilson izdvaja analogiju, a kao osnovu naučnog mišljenja (ali i umetničkog stvaranja) – sinegdohu. Neobično i nadahnjujuće deluje sve ovo imajući u vidu da je napisano od strane jednog biologa.
Mada, sasvim je već jasno – ne bilo kakvog biologa. Vilson je utemeljivač socijalne biologije, čuveni ekolog posvećen terenskom radu i jedan od vodećih stručnjaka za proučavanje mrava. Tako i „Biofilija” prati njegov životni put: to je knjiga izvrsnih eseja o prirodi, napojenih iskustvom i lucidnim razmišljanjima. Takođe, to je i izuzetno komunikativno delo, bogato zanimljivostima: od 30 miliona insekata i pojedinosti o evoluciji rajske ptice, erupcije Krakataua, digestivnom traktu lenjivca, sve do podatka da jedan grumen zemlje sadrži oko 15 tomova Enciklopedije Britanike (a ja ću još jednom podsetiti na savršena „Pisma iz Nemačke” Ljube Nenadovića gde se tvrdi da u jednoj kapljici vode ima više života nego ljudi u čitavoj Evropi).
Ima ovde i divnih razmišljanja o relativnosti vremena. Vilson razlikuje proticanje vremena na više bioloških planova – realno vreme, vreme organizma, biohemijsko i ekološko vreme. Svaki pomenuti vremenski kompleks ima svoj (pro)tok i svoje zakonitosti. Ovde bi divno došla koja reč o Ikskilovoj biosemiotici, ali Vilson se, makar ovom prilikom, nije bavio time.
I inače, iako delo ima respektabilnu bibliografiju, lep i inspirativan pregled materije, kao i važne ideje, ono, istini za volju, ne pomera horizont razmišljanja o filozofiji prirode. To, doduše, nije bila, siguran sam, ni namera autora, ali moja očekivanja su navijala da ovo bude i jedan duboki, suštinski nov, filozofski tres koji će temeljno promeniti moj doživljaj sveta. Ipak, iako to nije „Biofilija” je, najviše od svega, ljubavno pismo prirodi i poziv da se ta ljubav neguje, što nipošto nije za odbacivanje.
Mala primedba može da se uputi i tome što Vilson izričito tvrdi da naučnici nisu nipošto romantične figure, iako je veza romantizma i nauke nesporna (videti, između ostalog i knjigu Ričarda Holmsa „Doba čuda”), kao i to da su ljudi koji se bave humanistikom šamani intelektualnog plemena čovečanstva koji interpretacijama prenose različite ritualne prakse. Iza naizgled sasvim jasnih pojmova krije se mogućnost za sasvim drukčija sagledavanja, što je slično jednom od Vilsonovih neobjašnjenih ekoloških zakona: što veće ostrvo, to na njemu živi više vrsta ptica i mrava.
Inače, sa biofilijom sam se upoznao zaobilazno – preko albuma moje omiljene Bjork. Na tom albumu koji se baš tako i zove – Biophillia – 10 pesama govori o različitim prirodnim fenomenima (od lunarnih ciklusa, DNK, virusa, sve do tamne materije i tektonskih ploča), a za svaku je napravljena po aplikacija, koje su povezane u sistem. Narator uvoda u matičnu aplikaciju je niko drugi do Dejvid Atenboro, koji svojim savršenim glasom objašnjava šta znači sama biofilija (Welcome to Biophilia: A love for nature in all her manifestations. From the tiniest organism, to the greatest red giant floating in the farthest realm of the universe.) Album/aplikacija se inače koristi u mnogim skandinavskim školama kao nastavno sredstvo, jer učenike postavlja u stvaralačku i istraživačku poziciju – oni nisu više samo pasivni slušaoci, već stvaraoci i istraživači. Ko hoće može sve da prouči ovde: https://biophiliaeducational.org/#about (Btw. Bjork je za ovaj album napravila i niz novih instrumenata, npr. orgulje napravljene od Teslinih kalemova: munje u izlomljenim akordima sviraju melodije.)
I za kraj, bilo bi divno kada bi se Vilsonova dela prevodila na srpski. Ista je priča sa Lavlokom i Rejčel Karson. Prevodi kvalitetne literatura istaknutih biologa bi bili obogaćujući ne samo za užu struku nego, evo, i za sve nas znatiželjnike. A ovaj susret je bio više nego takav.
Pozivajući se na Ričarda Rortija, Vilson tvrdi da je čovekova posebnost to što je poetsko biće. I ne samo to – um je biološki stvoren tako da iznova stvara misaone mehanizme sopstvenog prevazilaženja. Kao osnovu imaginacije Vilson izdvaja analogiju, a kao osnovu naučnog mišljenja (ali i umetničkog stvaranja) – sinegdohu. Neobično i nadahnjujuće deluje sve ovo imajući u vidu da je napisano od strane jednog biologa.
Mada, sasvim je već jasno – ne bilo kakvog biologa. Vilson je utemeljivač socijalne biologije, čuveni ekolog posvećen terenskom radu i jedan od vodećih stručnjaka za proučavanje mrava. Tako i „Biofilija” prati njegov životni put: to je knjiga izvrsnih eseja o prirodi, napojenih iskustvom i lucidnim razmišljanjima. Takođe, to je i izuzetno komunikativno delo, bogato zanimljivostima: od 30 miliona insekata i pojedinosti o evoluciji rajske ptice, erupcije Krakataua, digestivnom traktu lenjivca, sve do podatka da jedan grumen zemlje sadrži oko 15 tomova Enciklopedije Britanike (a ja ću još jednom podsetiti na savršena „Pisma iz Nemačke” Ljube Nenadovića gde se tvrdi da u jednoj kapljici vode ima više života nego ljudi u čitavoj Evropi).
Ima ovde i divnih razmišljanja o relativnosti vremena. Vilson razlikuje proticanje vremena na više bioloških planova – realno vreme, vreme organizma, biohemijsko i ekološko vreme. Svaki pomenuti vremenski kompleks ima svoj (pro)tok i svoje zakonitosti. Ovde bi divno došla koja reč o Ikskilovoj biosemiotici, ali Vilson se, makar ovom prilikom, nije bavio time.
I inače, iako delo ima respektabilnu bibliografiju, lep i inspirativan pregled materije, kao i važne ideje, ono, istini za volju, ne pomera horizont razmišljanja o filozofiji prirode. To, doduše, nije bila, siguran sam, ni namera autora, ali moja očekivanja su navijala da ovo bude i jedan duboki, suštinski nov, filozofski tres koji će temeljno promeniti moj doživljaj sveta. Ipak, iako to nije „Biofilija” je, najviše od svega, ljubavno pismo prirodi i poziv da se ta ljubav neguje, što nipošto nije za odbacivanje.
Mala primedba može da se uputi i tome što Vilson izričito tvrdi da naučnici nisu nipošto romantične figure, iako je veza romantizma i nauke nesporna (videti, između ostalog i knjigu Ričarda Holmsa „Doba čuda”), kao i to da su ljudi koji se bave humanistikom šamani intelektualnog plemena čovečanstva koji interpretacijama prenose različite ritualne prakse. Iza naizgled sasvim jasnih pojmova krije se mogućnost za sasvim drukčija sagledavanja, što je slično jednom od Vilsonovih neobjašnjenih ekoloških zakona: što veće ostrvo, to na njemu živi više vrsta ptica i mrava.
Inače, sa biofilijom sam se upoznao zaobilazno – preko albuma moje omiljene Bjork. Na tom albumu koji se baš tako i zove – Biophillia – 10 pesama govori o različitim prirodnim fenomenima (od lunarnih ciklusa, DNK, virusa, sve do tamne materije i tektonskih ploča), a za svaku je napravljena po aplikacija, koje su povezane u sistem. Narator uvoda u matičnu aplikaciju je niko drugi do Dejvid Atenboro, koji svojim savršenim glasom objašnjava šta znači sama biofilija (Welcome to Biophilia: A love for nature in all her manifestations. From the tiniest organism, to the greatest red giant floating in the farthest realm of the universe.) Album/aplikacija se inače koristi u mnogim skandinavskim školama kao nastavno sredstvo, jer učenike postavlja u stvaralačku i istraživačku poziciju – oni nisu više samo pasivni slušaoci, već stvaraoci i istraživači. Ko hoće može sve da prouči ovde: https://biophiliaeducational.org/#about (Btw. Bjork je za ovaj album napravila i niz novih instrumenata, npr. orgulje napravljene od Teslinih kalemova: munje u izlomljenim akordima sviraju melodije.)
I za kraj, bilo bi divno kada bi se Vilsonova dela prevodila na srpski. Ista je priča sa Lavlokom i Rejčel Karson. Prevodi kvalitetne literatura istaknutih biologa bi bili obogaćujući ne samo za užu struku nego, evo, i za sve nas znatiželjnike. A ovaj susret je bio više nego takav.
August 16, 2025
Too often a screed, a platform for an evolution which has been ignored, perhaps only Al Gore reversed such. The reasons for said apathy are included within: as a species we are unable to sever ties with genetic memory, it is our core. We do have kinship and all sorts of relations with other species but this series of dynamics are all filtered through a prism of vulnerabilities and trauma.
The opening two sections focus on Wilson’s field work and are amazing. The sheer density of organic activity is boggling. Wilson finds a melody in the existence. He then turns to poets and ultimately Aldo Leopold to sound at times like Joseph Campbell (not exactly a compliment in these circumstances) at others like Carl Sagan.
3.2 stars
The opening two sections focus on Wilson’s field work and are amazing. The sheer density of organic activity is boggling. Wilson finds a melody in the existence. He then turns to poets and ultimately Aldo Leopold to sound at times like Joseph Campbell (not exactly a compliment in these circumstances) at others like Carl Sagan.
3.2 stars
March 4, 2008
This a book about an important idea. So before giving that away, I want to add a disclaimer. I am not trained as a philosopher or historian of science, but I am a academic biologists and a "concerned citizen" when it comes to ideas. My impression looking back at the 20th century is that is was characterized by the use of science as a justification to divorce humanity from the natural world. Wilson argues in Biophilia that this is a misappropriation of science, particularly biology. He argues that humanity's future just as its origins must be rooted in a co-existance with nature. This is the intellectual idea, but beyond this he argues passionately that the happiness and psychological well-being of each of us is tied to our relationship with nature. This seems to me to be a very important idea for everyone to consider seriously and feel deeply.
April 4, 2019
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.
December 30, 2020
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!
February 2, 2022
Biofilia è un saggio scritto dal grande Edward O. Wilson nel 1984 che contiene i semi del suo profondo pensiero circa la natura e la relazione che l'uomo deve mantenere con essa. L'autore con questo termine definisce "la tendenza innata a concentrare il propio interesse sulla vita e sui processi". Nonostante l'intimo legame con la natura, che ha visto i natali della nostra specie, siamo sempre più propensi, a causa del nostro sviluppo culturale e tecnologico, ad escluderla fino ad estraniarci completamente da essa. "Il mondo naturale è il rifugio dello spirito, remoto, statico, assai più ricco della stessa immaginazione umana, ma noi non possiamo vivere in questo paradiso senza la macchina, e la macchina lo fa a pezzi". Tuttavia "Ben pochi potrebbero resistere per un certo tempo senza subire una perdita notevole in un mondo formato esclusivamente da se stessi e dalle loro macchine" Wilson sprona tutti noi a ricercare il legame intimo che abbiamo con il mondo naturale e sottolinea come questa tendenza sia una caratteristica innata nella nostra specie, che va semplicemente stimolata. La prova di ciò viene fornita nel capitolo in cui l'autore sostiene come la nostra specie, come tutte le altre presenti nel nostro pianeta, ha la tendenza a ricercare il propio habitat elettivo. Nel nostro caso si ha la tendenza a ricreare un ambiente simile a quello della savana. Chi ha la possibilità di scelta predilige esclusivamente lande aperte, in cui sorgano degli alberi sparsi, situate su qualche altura sovrastata da acqua; una descrizione che ricalca molto bene l'ambiente di savana che ha assistito all'evoluzione della specie Homo sapiens. L'autore termina il propio saggio con una profonda riflessione sull'etica della conservazione, tema che svilupperà in alcuni suoi saggi pubblicati successivamente quali "Il futuro della vita" e "La diversità della vita". Il vero nucleo del problema è la nostra totale incapacità a percepire eventuali problemi che si possono manifestare a medio-lungo termine. La selezione naturale ha programmato gli individui in modo che pensino per lo più in un tempo fisiologico e non ecologico e/o evolutivo. Da qui nasce l'incapacità di comprendere la tragicità della costante perdita di diversità che avrà ripercussione negative nei secoli a venire. Wilson sostiene che l'unico modo per portare l'etica della conservazione all'attenzione dell'opinione pubblica sta nel porre le fondamenta in un ragionamento che sia egoistico. La biodiversità che sta scomparendo custodisce un'infinità di risorse non ancora sfruttate che potrebbero aiutare l'umanità a superare future sfide per la propia sopravvivenza. "In questo libro ho sostenuto che noi siamo umani in buona parte in virtù del particolare modo con cui ci rapportiamo agli altri organismi; questi ultimi costituiscono la matrice in cui la mente umana ha avuto origine e in cui mantiene permanentemente le sue radici; essi offrono l'occasione l'occasione e la libertà a cui gli esseri umani aspirano in modo innato" "La verità e che non abbiamo mai conquistato il mondo, che mai lo abbiamo compreso: crediamo, soltanto, di averne il controllo"
April 4, 2014
E.O. Wilson, one of the preeminent naturalists of our time, proposed the idea of biophilia in this landmark book in 1984. Wilson defines biophilia "as the urge to associate with other forms of life." In the last 30 years, the idea of Biophilia has become common place in design and other creative fields, approaching the level of a meme. The book is a collection of short essays reflecting on his experiences and observations over his long and distinguished career studying social insects, particularly ants. I found "The Right Place" essay to be particularly compelling.
Wilson successfully argues in "The Right Place" that humanity's roots and biological connection with our origins in the savannas of Africa and elsewhere is strongly reflected in our sense of parks and the most desirable places to live. The savanna offers wide open space with good visibility in all directions and isolated clumps of trees for shelter from the sun. Our ancestors chose the savanna over the adjoining forest and desert to live. High ground offers a particular advantage on the savannas due to its prominence for both hunting and defense. And of course, water is also a very desirable resource. Parks, our idealized sense of nature, strongly reflect these principles of open space punctuated with stands of trees with elevations and water. Wilson also notes that the wealthy, those of us least encumbered by economic restraints, frequently choose to live in areas that are on high ground with an exceptional view and often times overlooking bodies of water. This is all in response to our biological coding of our deep native habitat.
The essays "The Superorganism" about leaf cutter ants in the Amazon and their physical and social behaviors is also noteworthy as is the chapter "The Serpent" which examines mankind's and our close cousins powerful and fraught relationship with snakes.
Biophilia, is a compelling book about our natural human relationship to the world that surrounds us. Wilson is a keen humanist and highly observant scientist who illuminates some of our deeper connections with the natural world and ourselves.
Wilson successfully argues in "The Right Place" that humanity's roots and biological connection with our origins in the savannas of Africa and elsewhere is strongly reflected in our sense of parks and the most desirable places to live. The savanna offers wide open space with good visibility in all directions and isolated clumps of trees for shelter from the sun. Our ancestors chose the savanna over the adjoining forest and desert to live. High ground offers a particular advantage on the savannas due to its prominence for both hunting and defense. And of course, water is also a very desirable resource. Parks, our idealized sense of nature, strongly reflect these principles of open space punctuated with stands of trees with elevations and water. Wilson also notes that the wealthy, those of us least encumbered by economic restraints, frequently choose to live in areas that are on high ground with an exceptional view and often times overlooking bodies of water. This is all in response to our biological coding of our deep native habitat.
The essays "The Superorganism" about leaf cutter ants in the Amazon and their physical and social behaviors is also noteworthy as is the chapter "The Serpent" which examines mankind's and our close cousins powerful and fraught relationship with snakes.
Biophilia, is a compelling book about our natural human relationship to the world that surrounds us. Wilson is a keen humanist and highly observant scientist who illuminates some of our deeper connections with the natural world and ourselves.
October 1, 2024
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.
February 7, 2008
If you like biological philosophy books, then this book is for you!
The first few chapters of this book were amazing to me. I've always thought that my interest and love of nature is inherent to my humanity, as this book focuses on convincing readers.
Towards the end of the book, it became apparent how dated some of the information is. Because science is always evoloving, this couldn't be helped. Unfortunately, it made my attention wane.
The first chapters were so strong that I expected to be very impressed by the persuasive techniques of the author. My expectations were not met. I generally agreed with many of the authors points, but was disappointed that there wasn't more substance -- more philosophy.
Overall, I recommend reading the first few chapters. The rest can be skipped, unless you feel compelled.
The first few chapters of this book were amazing to me. I've always thought that my interest and love of nature is inherent to my humanity, as this book focuses on convincing readers.
Towards the end of the book, it became apparent how dated some of the information is. Because science is always evoloving, this couldn't be helped. Unfortunately, it made my attention wane.
The first chapters were so strong that I expected to be very impressed by the persuasive techniques of the author. My expectations were not met. I generally agreed with many of the authors points, but was disappointed that there wasn't more substance -- more philosophy.
Overall, I recommend reading the first few chapters. The rest can be skipped, unless you feel compelled.
May 23, 2013
This skinny little book is a thought-provoking exercise in seeing the world in different ways. It is beautifully written, scientifically engaging, and politically inspiring. Wilson's glimpse into the hidden world of ants and disappearing mosses should give us all pause. Extinction could be significantly slowed by humans who have until now instead tended to act as though we exist outside of nature rather than within it. He reminds us all that we are very much a part of the natural world and could have a more positive impact on the planet. His stricter sociobiological side aside, his work is very helpful for understanding the animal in us we prefer to ignore.
June 28, 2024
3,5 ⭐️
August 19, 2025
Awesome
August 21, 2008
A series of personal essays from one of America's foremost entomologists and naturalists. The book is now twenty years old and a contemporary reading reveals a great deal of prescience: things that Wilson was regarding as urgent and important in the 80s (saving rain forests, reducing greenhouse gas emissions) are only now becoming culturally fashionable. It's just a shame it took so long. He also describes some fascinating imaginative tools for comprehending the vast range and mass of our planet's life.
December 4, 2007
I really do love Wilson. This book is a toned down way to gain perspective on the environment and the changes we as a species need to make in order to survive. Wilson doesn't protest outright but merely gives you the information you need to make the decision yourself. Wilson also touches on the subject of alien life and space exploration, possibly not as optimistically as one might hope but realistically. I think everyone should read this book.
November 10, 2013
Nov 2013... I first read this book in 2011, but since I didn't leave any kind of comment here, I couldn't remember what it was about! ha. And now I remember why. Each chapter is a separate essay about random things. One is about science and art, another is about snakes, there are some ants of course, genes, why humans like savannas, the scientific beginnings of biogeography. Even tho the book is short, it's all over the place, and a couple sentence review seems inadequate. :)
July 27, 2010
A fun book that is easy for me to identify with. Wilson sees mankind as blight on nature. Although I would certainly hesitate to submit to this borderline deep ecology philosophy, it is important to remember that we do not always need to "conquer nature" and that nothing is more pleasant than a wonderful day spent immersed in the natural world.
February 20, 2013
When I first read Biophilia in 2007, it affected me deeply. Since then I have referred to it often as my favorite book. Six years later, it still surprises and delights me. Is it still my number one favorite book? I suppose not anymore, but it is one of many favorites, one that I recommend to everyone with the hopes that it will serve as a source of inspiration and hope does for me.
August 28, 2013
A quiet but thoughtful book, making the case that humans, having evolved in the midst of a natural realm replete with species diversity, need that environment for our basic well-being. I was already familiar with the premise, as it has been repeated in so many other books by now, but I am glad I finally read this one. There are many good nuggets of insight and thoughts to ponder here.
March 12, 2008
Biophilia is one of the most amazing books I have ever read through school. It is ultimately one of my favs. Go onto youtube and google his speeches on it.....you won't believe what you'll hear!
Book has slightly ficticious feel to it.
Book has slightly ficticious feel to it.
May 24, 2010
157 pages. Donated 2010 May.
The eminent biologist reflects on his own response to nature and the aesthetic aspects of his exploration of natural systems in an intensely personal essay that examines the essential links between mankind and the rest of the living world.
The eminent biologist reflects on his own response to nature and the aesthetic aspects of his exploration of natural systems in an intensely personal essay that examines the essential links between mankind and the rest of the living world.
May 24, 2015
I've read Biophilia several times, it has had a major influence on my thinking about our environment and how we treat the world around us.
Very enjoyable style for me. Some anecdotes, science, thoughts all blended together nicely.
Very enjoyable style for me. Some anecdotes, science, thoughts all blended together nicely.
October 24, 2020
pretty boring and dense read, sprinkled with weird attributions to colonialism as being a form of wanderlust, and a very strange few paragraphs claiming that socialism is antithetical to environmental conservation. very very white patriarchal view of the environment, would give 0 stars if i could
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
November 7, 2007
I'm uncertain why I haven't read this book, but now that I have, I'm ashamed to have called myself a nature writer. I doubt I'll ever have the skill or scientific depth of Wilson.
March 12, 2008
This was a great book, written by a biologist who I had the good fortune to meet. He reminds you of your grandfather and is a fantastic writer!
August 1, 2008
I love this book. E.O Wilson, a scientist, discusses the death of many species and the changes that happen with each new disappearance.
June 24, 2024
I think Wilson’s concept of biophilia is true and fascinating, and many of the sections in this book were extremely interesting to read.
Unfortunately other sections felt like unclear tangents and I found it hard to remain engaged, until suddenly the writing would appear to shift back to the topic at hand and my interest would resume.
So, unfortunately I found the book somewhat underwhelming and the structure confusing, but I know Wilson’s a phenomenal biologist and I’ll give another one of his books a try again in the future.
Unfortunately other sections felt like unclear tangents and I found it hard to remain engaged, until suddenly the writing would appear to shift back to the topic at hand and my interest would resume.
So, unfortunately I found the book somewhat underwhelming and the structure confusing, but I know Wilson’s a phenomenal biologist and I’ll give another one of his books a try again in the future.
October 19, 2025
"The poet-in-biologist will add that life is an exceedingly improbable state, metastable, open to other systems, thus ephemeral—and worth any price to keep"
This guy rocks. Gorgeous writing and a HUGE love for nature and its every detail. Only such love can devise the primordial filaments that tightly knit all living creatures.
This guy rocks. Gorgeous writing and a HUGE love for nature and its every detail. Only such love can devise the primordial filaments that tightly knit all living creatures.
June 30, 2025
Put into words a feeling I know many, including myself, have long felt. Biophilia, or the love of nature, explains the powerful often innate sense of wonder and curiosity that nature and living things give a naturalist.
Great read and very insightful. Only 4 stars because some of the language was overly tangled, confsing, and sometimes redundant.
Great read and very insightful. Only 4 stars because some of the language was overly tangled, confsing, and sometimes redundant.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 111 reviews