> Trying to improve on nature is the foundation of science.
This is an interesting statement. I would say, trying to improve on nature is one particular notion that was instrumental in the history of science. Specifically, we can trace this back to alchemical beliefs in the notion of perfecting the human soul/body/etc. via aqua regia and so on, which were about achieving an "art" which would exceed the limits of what we are given by Nature.
Much of what is "science", however, does not come from this school of thought. The quiet life of a naturalist, delighting in the observation of an ant colony or the nesting habits of a bird species, seems to have little to do with trying to improve on nature and is much more of a piece with simply enjoying being close to it.
I'd say, s/science/engineering/, or even s/science/technology/. A big motivator for the progress we've made as a species is that the natural state of life generally sucks, and we'd like to have it better than it is by default.
This is an interesting statement. I would say, trying to improve on nature is one particular notion that was instrumental in the history of science. Specifically, we can trace this back to alchemical beliefs in the notion of perfecting the human soul/body/etc. via aqua regia and so on, which were about achieving an "art" which would exceed the limits of what we are given by Nature.
Much of what is "science", however, does not come from this school of thought. The quiet life of a naturalist, delighting in the observation of an ant colony or the nesting habits of a bird species, seems to have little to do with trying to improve on nature and is much more of a piece with simply enjoying being close to it.