From the cosmic dust unsettled by the cataclysmic formation of time and space, the human species arose;

inexorable in its durability and ability to withstand conditions of trial and adversity. Throughout the span of millions of years, the human race has changed not only in physique, but also in philosophy. From the development of early god and goddess figureheads in ancient Mesopotamian culture, to Empedocles cosmological theory of the four elements of life, civilization has striven to understand the properties inherent to this universe. Whereas many modern cultures somehow take pride in having found an ability to manipulate and exploit the fruits of the Earth's native bounty, I argue that we have yet much to learn from the natural world. Often perceived as inferior to our fast-paced technological world, it is nonetheless beautiful in its simplicity, elegance, and actual functionality. Indeed, elegance is one of the inherent qualities of the natural world, and the simplicity thereof most accurately characterizes the way evolution has led to the development of efficient and functional systems. In fact, it can be argued that natural systems are yet more efficient than the man-made ones whose genesis can be traced to the industrial revolutions of the 19th century. While the natural machines of the world are conducive to maintaining a global homeostasis, our industrial ones, of which we seem to have some kind of pride, are only conducive to the deterioration and eventual destruction of our surroundings. Since most of my philosophy is purely contrived from introspection, the most accurate

method for highlighting its unique traits is by cross-examination with both similar and dissimilar philosophies. Admittedly, it is often difficult to generalize an entire belief system into polar categories of "similar" and "dissimilar"; it is prudent, for the sake of conciseness, to define a "belief system" or "religion" simply as the collective sum of all of its major principal beliefs. Only then can we examine the beliefs specific to the corresponding religion without fear of seemingly characterizing a religion by that belief, or characterizing a religion's followers in the same way. Also for the sake of conciseness, I chose the New Thought Movement and Christianity to further research the subject in question. In my world, there is nothing sacred: everything that we can perceive has arisen from a single event of inconceivable proportion and is thus, in some way, equal. In this regard, there are several belief systems that would fundamentally disagree with me; most religions incorporate some kind of omnipotent (and certainly sacred) prophet into their moral teachings. Currently, the most popular religion is Christianity, or some form thereof. The inherent belief of most Christian-based belief systems is that people must seek salvation from a prophet (Jesus Christ), or God himself whenever a predefined "sin" has been perpetrated. This is fundamentally contradictory to my belief that life is better spent learning, as opposed to seeking redemption from an allegedly omniscient being. However, there are also many religions that would agree with me on the premise that beauty and elegance is observable in nature, albeit allegedly by the doing of a divine being. One such religion is known as the New Thought Movement, and is often typified by its belief that God is ubiquitous and can be perceived in any of his creations. Although I do not agree with this assumption of creation, we do indeed share the belief that the systems apparent in the natural and physical worlds are of utmost sacrity: in my opinion not actually "sacred" by any definition, but

more deserving of that term than any other material entity. After examining the specific beliefs of other religions, I can safely say that I still stand by my assertion that nature is the source of utmost elegance, beauty, and functioning. However, I have also discovered that there is a surprising number of different philosophies whose ideals differ greatly from each others', and from mine. And with difference of opinion comes conict; with conict comes war; and with war comes death and the eventual perpetuation of social entropy. The Christian Crusades, fought to regain control of the Israeli-Palestinian area ("Holy Land"), were a succession of military campaigns whose death toll has been estimated as anywhere between one and two million lives. Although there are several perspectives that differ between my beliefs and those of the aforementioned religions, I must emphasize that my belief in nature is neither hostile nor contradictory to some of the moral principles that guide the actions of all cultures. I believe that, as I had previously mentioned, we are all in some way equal since we, along with all matter, are ultimately derived from the same cosmological event. There is no reason why disagreement on principle should be destructive to harmony and progress. In the same way that the biological and physical worlds of nature find a balance between opposite forces, human civilization must find such an equilibrium.