The 'Why' in Wild

The Why Files takes a hard look at wilderness and asks, what's the big deal? Putting aside the obvious and essential ecosystem services -- clean water, oxygen, biodiversity and the like; things that, for better or worse, we take for granted -- the authors wonder just what it is we value in Nature. Here's an excerpt:

What explains the pull of the wild? One compelling answer comes from evolutionary psychology -- the idea that the human experience and the processes of evolution have shaped how our brains operate. We tend to favor situations that promoted our survival, and to fear the opposite type of situations.

The notion cannot be tested scientifically, but there are some intriguing arguments in its favor. Since the 1970s, says Roger Ulrich, a professor of landscape architecture at Texas A&M University, social scientists have found a striking similarity in human preferences for certain types of landscapes. "We now have more than 100 studies of esthetic preferences for different kinds of outdoor scenes, using roughly comparable methods, across very diversely different societies and locations, and we find a strong pattern of agreement. Almost all nature scenes are esthetically preferable to almost any built or urban scene lacking nature," he says.

In fact, preferences are much more specific. Studies show a near-universal preference for specific features in a nature scene, such as flowing water, small, innocuous animals, and an open, tree-studded view. Undesirable elements include large animals staring back at you, snakes, venomous insects, and deep, dark forests.

It seems an interesting and worthwhile inquiry, especially in an age when most of us now live in cities. For all the verbiage brought to bear, however, the 'why' remains elusive and the most satisfying answers are not so much answers as value statements, such as when David Brower says, "A world without wilderness is a cage."