trying to conceive of something 'divorced' from another thing can often lead to the exact opposite! If you wipe out all consideration of one factor in the analysis -- then all the workings of the concept curl around the empty space of your deliberately chosen blind spot, creating a machine centred around the very blind spot. So we try to conceive of nature 'as it was without humans'... and we forget that we are the people thinking aboout this, having our ideas, and nature comes to be seen as 'everything which is opposite to what we consider "of us"'-- which obviously is something that centres around human beings, and isn't really related to how 'the mass of the mecanical-geological-biological systems on earth and in space' actually go about moving and working. Similarly, when people go on about 'ahh humans are insignificant, the universe is huge, it doesn't matter what we do' ... It's a very strange way of looking at things. First you have the wrongheaded polar 'anti-human' concept of nature/the universe described above, and then you're imagining this specific idea of 'God or nature' as if it was a unitary human-type 'consideration generator' which like a social human being generates values attached to objects whereby things that are on the same scale as it are 'important' and things that are small or rare are 'not important'. As if the universe is a person who looks at all the giant galaxies and nebulas but can't see the small planets or the things on it. No, nature is just 'everything that is here', and you and i happen to be here, just as much as any star, and it happens that you and i live and enjoy subjectivity, a subjectivity which is of us and which is therefore to us the most important thing in the world...
