Interview with Delija Steinberg Guzmán, President of the International New Acropolis
What is the connection between philosophy and Nature?
If we understand philosophy in the widest possible sense as the love for wisdom, we must include all the laws of Nature in this wisdom. We cannot ignore these laws; what we need to do is to become acquainted with them and strive to understand them in essence. This desire to understand them in essence involves love – not love as an emotional reaction, but love as understanding, as acceptance of these laws, and above all, as a way of cooperating with them.
Do you believe philosophy is not only concerned with abstractions?
Absolutely. That is why we adopted the concept of love for wisdom that existed in the classical world. According to this concept, love for wisdom is not just the study, but the study combined with an active relationship with all the things we study. Abstract concepts distance us from the world, from our environment, from people, and even from ourselves; that is why philosophy also needs to be about To be and to be active.
What does philosophy deal with? Everything: from the moment we focus on man, on his reality and possibilities, how can we limit the field of philosophy? Therefore, it must be broader than all sciences and arts.
What would be man’s place within this living world, within Nature?
If it were as man wishes, we would seek a privileged place, the best and most prominent, because we are accustomed to thinking that man is the pinnacle of all possible evolution.
I do not deny that compared to animals, plants, or minerals, man shows more developed traits.
But we should not occupy a place in Nature out of arrogance – because we believe we are the best, the only ones at the highest point of evolution – but precisely because we feel that we are different from minerals, plants, and animals, we should feel a greater responsibility.
What is our place in Nature? The one with the greatest responsibility: what minerals, trees, and animals cannot do, we can do. And that is man’s place: the ability to think, the ability to harmonize with Nature and act in conjunction with it, instead of violating its laws.
From a philosophical standpoint, I would assign man the role of support and responsibility, never the role of destruction and exploitation of Nature.
How can we understand natural laws and act in accordance with them? What are these laws?
Every day we see the sun appear on the horizon and disappear in the west. We are accustomed to the seasons, to their changes; we are accustomed to storms, the consequences of storms; we are accustomed to sudden volcanic eruptions, the rising of the seas and the devastation of coastlines. Do we think all of this happens without reason? Do we think our digestion works without reason, that our heart rate increases without reason, or that sometimes it feels like our heart is about to burst out of our chest without reason?
Understanding laws to me means unraveling the ways in which Nature operates and why it operates that way. It must be based on philosophical observation. In other words, instead of just wanting to know “what,” I also want to know “why.”
That is why we must be patient and carefully observe and approach everything we see with respect; it is simply not just observing a series of experiences and noting how often they repeat, but understanding that things do not happen by chance. This means understanding Nature. This means discovering certain laws, a systematic way of functioning, as we accept for other living beings.
So, it leads us not only to understanding but also to action.
Yes, to action. Just understanding would mean taking a passive recipient’s stance, an observer of Nature; however, as I mentioned before, humans have been given responsibility, and someone who feels responsibility cannot just stand by and watch. If we only watch, we do nothing. However, if we are part of Nature and if Nature is alive, in motion, and evolving, then we need to be alive, we need to move and evolve. In this way, we act and As human beings and as part of Nature.
So you believe that life evolves with purpose and is not a product of chance?
It is impossible for the beauty that we see around us every day, on Earth and in the sky, to be a product of chance.
It would be a waste if it were mere chance. Similarly, we could say that by studying the universe and the Nature that surrounds us today, we have “accidentally” discovered and created similar phenomena.
Something that clearly and precisely shows before our own eyes that there are cycles, and that these cycles repeat themselves but never entirely the same, proves to us that they lead towards a goal. The fact that we do not fully understand the goal does not mean it is by chance. We should reject the idea of chance and instead seek causes.
If there is a goal, why do I not understand it? If I do not understand it now, is it even possible for me to understand it? If I discover harmony and a consistent direction in everything around me, where do I get the right to think about chance? Would it not be It would be better for me to try to find the underlying causes of these phenomena, wouldn’t it?
This is really not a matter of belief, it’s a matter of logic. What we see has a direction, and everything that has a direction also has a purpose. On the other hand, randomness is a multitude of things scattered without order, and only human beings create random events, but not always even then…
The fact is that in today’s human being, the concept of culture is deeply ingrained, which is, like their own culture, very separated from the understanding of Nature as a whole. From a philosophical standpoint, what would the relationship be between humans, Nature, and culture, and between culture and Nature?
Culture has become a concept that is almost as empty as philosophy, which is abstract enough to not study anything except remnants left from other sciences.
What is not covered by any science, what no science can explain, is left to philosophy to consider how to solve with a few empty definitions. I think we’re doing the same with culture.
What i Culture is more than just the product of an individual’s thoughts and feelings. Can a person feel and think while completely disconnecting from Nature? Impossible, we are immersed in Nature. Can we create a culture that separates itself from Nature, can we create an abstract culture? I think that would be difficult.
To me, it seems as difficult as believing that the world exists by chance. Is there a science that can separate itself from Nature? Is there art that can separate itself from Nature? Is there an internal concept of human evolution, human development that can be separated from Nature? There isn’t.
Therefore, if culture is the expression of our experiences that we can transmit to future generations, be it as science or art, or philosophy, as different forms of thinking or belief, that culture is necessarily connected to the world around us, to the environment in which we live. To separate it from that means losing its meaning, it ceases to be culture.
Many people think that in the pursuit of material wealth, in the advancement of technology, we can distance ourselves from Nature. But in reality, we are only damaging ourselves and our potential for growth and fulfillment. Our culture should not be detached from Nature, but should embrace it, respect it, and learn from it. Only then can it truly flourish and benefit both individuals and society as a whole. desire to become part of Nature without losing our typical human characteristics. How can we become part of it without ceasing to be humans, human beings?
Becoming part of it while continuing to think, intelligently becoming part of Nature, means the merging of integration and identity. Man can be, and actually is, part of Nature, but he can also think about it, understand it, and intelligently participate in it. So how can he lose his identity?
If I were to now bend down and pick up a leaf or a snail, which just a few moments ago was crawling on the ground and is now hiding in the bushes, has that snail lost its identity because it is concealed behind the leaves? Does a leaf like these leaves lose its identity, can I replace it with a horse or a dog? However, it harmoniously aligns with Nature to the point where I believe that its way of existence is such that it is part of Nature and naturally is what it is.
Man thinks that he must be different in order not to lose his identity, and I I believe that a person should rather ‘be’ than be different. When a person is able to understand themselves and be who they truly are, they will find their rightful place in Nature and no one will be able to mistake them for a stone, leaf, or horse.