Basic Tenets of Naturalism, An Uphill Battle

by Shawn Hassen

When you introduce worldview to students, remind them that every worldview requires, at some point, a leap of faith. Racism, gender discrimination, corporate greed, corporate generosity, the birth of a baby, the death of a loved one—instances of these can be observed and recorded throughout history, but no one observed or could record the formation of the universe, our planet, or life on it. Some of the big questions we ask about life’s origins and about human nature cannot be answered with empirical evidence, so we must incorporate faith, the act of believing something that we cannot definitively prove through observation. Most of us believe that the sun will rise tomorrow. But we can’t prove it. Every belief system calls on science and history to assemble bits and pieces of life origins and human origins, but every system falls short of irrefutable evidence. We always take a leap of faith to believe what we believe, and this is true of both religious worldviews and secular philosophies.   

Let’s dive into the basic tenets of naturalism, an uphill battle.

 When you introduce naturalism to students, begin with the technical aspects about the word, itself. Explain the logic for not capitalizing the term. Perhaps pointing out that this is not a person’s name will help them remember that it is not a proper noun. Then teach them the adjective form of the word. Once upon a time, the adjective form of naturalism was naturalist. So, once upon a time, you might have written, “Steinbeck demonstrates naturalist ideas in his novel.” I am old enough to still be on board with this adjective choice, and I always accepted it from my students. In fact, I encouraged it. Time, and perhaps the fact that a “naturalist” can also merely be someone who studies or is dedicated to nature, gave rise to the -ic ending. Today, it is common to read “Steinbeck demonstrates naturalistic ideas in his novel.” If you decide to go here with your students, however, be careful—naturalism is the only philosophy we will be discussing that can add the -ic. You certainly won’t want them writing “feministic” or “Marxistic,” in our future studies, so be prepared to spearhead confusion. Also, address the aforementioned double use of the term naturalist. On one level, a naturalist might be someone who studies or works with “nature”—think science, forestry service, state or national parks, and so forth. (This is more commonly how we hear the term used today in culture.) On an ideological level, however, the term naturalist refers to someone who ascribes to the philosophy by the same name. This, of course, is what we will be concerned with in this article.

Naturalism is an outstanding starting point for students; not only is it prevalent throughout history and in literature, but our modern culture is saturated with it. Do we ever hear the term naturalism as it pertains to philosophy? Not really. Assure students that they will not meet anyone who says, “Good morning. I’m John Doe. And I’m a naturalist.” But naturalist thinking has permeated culture and arguably contributed to modern-day moral relativism. Despite being wholly unrecognized or named, aspects of naturalism are woven into the very fabric of America—politics, movies, music, television, and literature.  

Not only is naturalism an excellent starting point for students because of its prevalence, but it is also a springboard for several other philosophies that we are going to study. Think of it as the soup stock. Marxism and feminism, introduced in later posts, will just be different varieties of soup made from the same stock. When students understand the basics of naturalism, they will more easily see how feminism and Marxism evolved from similar thinking. Let’s cover the basic tenets of naturalism in keeping with our worldview framework:

How did humans originate? 

Are humans animals?

What value do humans have?

What is “human nature–” what are we like in our most natural state?  

What defines us?  Nature? Nurture?  

Is anyone or anything in charge here?  

Is this world/life as good as it gets? 

Why does so much seem to be upside down?  What’s wrong? 

Can’t we just all get along?  What’s the solution? 

Naturalists believe that life began spontaneously with cosmic events such as Big Bang or other recent, similar theories. Primitive life forms evolved into more sophisticated and varied life forms, with humans topping the evolutionary chain in terms of reasoning and advanced abilities. Key to this evolutionary process is survival of the fittest. The world is a difficult place with natural forces and cycles that challenge species—weather, climate, disease, hunger, competition for resources. Society adds to the conflict. Humans born tabla rasa are just as capable of learning greed, anger, cruelty, jealousy, or dishonesty from their environment as they are capable of learning kindness or compassion. Constantly battling nature/the cosmos (including other members of society), the strong will dominate and survive (until the cycle of life ends in death). In more human, day-to-day terms:  people are constantly beset with challenges, struggles, and tragedies from some cosmic forces beyond their control, i.e. luck, fate, the universe. Nature is awe-inspiring, yet capricious and cavalier—those who are more adept at managing their environment will be the most likely to survive or possibly conquer the challenges and constant setbacks of life. Everyone else will find themselves victims, to some degree, of hard luck. and circumstances beyond their control.  

Naturalism typically takes one of two forms in literature. Some writers such as Jack London or Daphne du Maurier create foolish, arrogant, or weak characters who succumb to the power of literal nature (time, weather, climate, water, the elements, animals whose instincts surpass human reason). Other literature will express an indomitable nature in terms of luck, fate, or dysfunctional environments. Characters are typically isolated and somewhat powerless. They may have dreams, desires, and aspirations, but they will continually battle uphill and ultimately lose to powerful forces beyond their control or to environments for which they are ill-suited.  Key terms or phrases to associate with naturalism include nature, power(s), fate, luck, “the cards (stacked against me),” environment, survival of the fittest, evolution, species, biology, instinct. John Steinbeck, F. Scott Fitzgerald, Willa Cather, and Kate Chopin are only a few of the many writers whose works demonstrate aspects of naturalism and whose works we will study on this website.

Continuing with our introduction to the basics of core philosophies, a future post will introduce feminism, a slightly different soup from the same stock as naturalism . . .