探寻自然的秩序读后感1000字
《探寻自然的秩序》是一本由[美] 保罗·劳伦斯·法伯著作，商务印书馆出版的平装图书，本书定价：38.00元，页数：196，特精心从网络上整理的一些读者的读后感，希望对大家能有帮助。
《探寻自然的秩序》精选点评：
●挺好的博物学简史，读了了解到林奈探寻自然秩序以感受上帝的创造，布丰赋予博物学启蒙的价值，接着地理大发现，对物种发现的竞赛，博物学裂变成各门学科以及和它们的关系。博物学影响对公众开放的博物馆，动物园，植物园，最后还介绍现今博物学生物学对人文思潮的影响
●博物学演变简史，是对背景认知的补遗，不过只能算概述。
●科学即观察与实验。做这两件事的学科很多，这大概就是为什么我们会觉得有一种更高阶的统一理论存在的原因吧。
●薄薄一册博物学史 参考书目很详尽
●博物学的起步原来是基于对宗教的诠释而来的。
●不错的博物学入门导论。林奈和布丰的叙述过于简洁，两位祖师爷应当占据更大篇幅。前四章相对平淡，达尔文的崛起令全书精彩起来。延伸推荐阅读非常有用，可惜有中译的太少。
●第一本汉译西方博物学史著作。
●除了逸闻，可迁移的东西着实少，可能这个
●梳理博物学发展史的一册
●还算有趣，更像历史叙述，而不是知识传授
《探寻自然的秩序》读后感(一)：读书所获
整本书不厚，阅读起来不难，主要是历史性回顾与简单评论。
读过全书，我更愿意将科学中数理化以外的部分称为新科学，也就是那些最近二三百年迅猛发展、并逐渐被公众认识、进而影响整个社会的部分。
科学是历史的，与世俗的结合激发了更多人的热情，更加稳固了自己的根基。
这些新科学或新学科，整合的不单单是一小撮人的利益，当然这正是它们的起点。或者我想说它们蓬勃发展的合理性正来自人们之间更紧密的结合。
附：
最后几章是没做笔记，印象比较深的是：一，进化论的发展与变化没大读懂；二，不要轻易扩展生物学推论以解释更广泛的世界，这应该算是一个很严谨的科学态度。
《探寻自然的秩序》读后感(二)：差一口气
两星半，三星很勉强，好久没看本专业相关的书了。
作为一个接受了现代生物学科细分体系教育的本科生，我觉得这书十分囫囵吞枣……实际上博物学就只是万物的分类而已，内容极其单薄，一个林奈双名法（当年植物学的噩梦呜呜呜）差不多了，最多加个进化论（这其实又是生态学里的东西）讲讲以什么为依据进行分类。
内容前三分之二属于“生物学”概念出现以前的“原始生物学发展史”，以此来投射对应世界秩序的变化历史，其实是野心挺大的选题，弄得再接地气一点可以搞成“生物界的《艺术的故事》”这种感觉的通识读本。但是，但是！
专业部分涉及太少太少了，达尔文的进化论都没有“一段话概括”的环节，与之对立的拉马克到底蠢在哪里也丝毫不提，从博物学发展出去的二级学科也没有任何简单介绍，所有知识性脉络都浅尝辄止，这导致这本书在普及博物学（原始的生物学）基本常识方面非常失败。而在由于上下文需要深入讨论某一个很小的专业领域知识点的时候，又一下子挖得很深，术语解释也很少，翻译的小问题很多，该有的注解都没有（我一边看一边疯狂脑补这里该补什么那里该补什么），对于非生物专业的读者非常不友好。
反观人文关怀方面，这书主打的是博物学的学科精神产物发展历史梳理，副标题整个“探寻自然的秩序”，口气超级大，但是全书基本都在表彰18—19世纪那些在当时宗教背景下勇于提出突破性新观点的博物学“始祖”们，太啰嗦了……现在的读者谁都会承认在当时能提出这些惊天理论非常不容易，但是作者一边吹他们牛逼一边又不肯上这些牛逼理论的名词解释，就很隔靴搔痒。
整本书其实就是作者独家视角的生物学科历史书，加一点世界史的评论，讲到19世纪出现“生物学”这个概念后的生物界大事件梳理也非常缺斤短两，到了20世纪的部分又硬生生变成了“动物博物馆史”，上一页还在讲时尚芭莎，下一页突然开始讲模式生物果蝇和孟德尔的豌豆（高中理科生都睡醒了吧！），由于和现代生理学接轨，整本书画风突变，突然就学术了起来。全书对于进化论出现前后生物相关历史事件的梳理看似侧重点清晰，但其实十分偏颇；相关生物理论代系发展折射出的历史规律影射，有些很牵强，有些又过于浅薄。如果有人要再做这件事，这书可以作为史料参考材料。用我们直属领导的话来说，这本书就是最典型的“差一口气”。用我们直属领导的话来说，这本书就是最典型的“差一口气”。
总之这书给我的感觉就像资生堂某个很牛逼的面部精华，吹嘘自己有美白、抗衰老、XXXX功效，卖得死贵，然后一扒拉成分表，前几位都是用来稳定溶液环境体系和提升使用感的物料，能实际有效的化学成分的添加百分比非常非常低，换言之就是性价比很低，白送我会往脸上抹，让我花钱是不可能的。大概就是这样。
《探寻自然的秩序》读后感(三)：博物学：为万事万物建立秩序
《圣经·创世纪》说：神造出海里的鱼、空中的鸟、地上的牲畜，并地上所爬的一切昆虫。然后，神按照自己的形象创造了亚当，亚当便给一切牲畜、和空中飞鸟、野地走兽都起了名。每个名字都有它的意义。
如何解释万物的起源，神话可以大而化之。但是，从科学的角度，如何设计一套万物全面分类的体系，这件事情非常困难。从亚里士多德之后的将近两千年时间，欧洲人对于各种生物的定义始终笼罩着一层无法穿透的迷雾。亚里士多德动物学的粗略方案之所以维持如许长久，主要因为那段时期的欧洲处于封闭的环境之中，博物学家们只需致力于钻研本地区的动植物和古书中所介绍的动植物即可。
地理大发现的时代，也是生物大发现的时代。欧洲人的眼界突然打开，原来在视线之外，竟有那么多从不知晓、缤纷繁杂的新鲜事物。这些东西应该怎样称呼？怎样排列？怎样研究它们的亲缘关系？怎样比较它们的异同？这些问题亟待解决。
作为一门学科的近代博物学兴起于18世纪。美国科学史博士、作家保罗·劳伦斯·法伯的著作《探寻自然的秩序》，梳理了18世纪至今的博物学传统，围绕几位重要的博物学家的成就以及他们身处其中的历史背景，清晰呈现近代博物学的发展历程。
拉开序幕的是两位重要人物：瑞典植物学家林奈和法国贵族、自然研究者布丰伯爵。他们各自代表了不同的认识自然的途径，但他们都追求理解自然的秩序。
如果说亚当是命名上帝造物的第一人，那么，林奈就是为各种命名建立恰当的秩序的功臣。林奈的改革使得植物的名字接近欧洲人的姓名：同属的所有种有一个共同的名字（属名），另外还有一个种加词区分同属内的不同种。今天看来，双名法（如“人类”二字既有种又有属）实在很简单，似乎根本称不上发明。但要知道，在此之前，人们习惯采用特征法来命名，比如，花呈漏斗状、瓣呈圆环、叶呈圆形或宽卵状的旋花蔓状植物，可以想见，这种冗长的叫法多么累赘又多么混乱，称呼它为“圆叶牵牛”多么清晰。
布丰的《博物学》促进了一种新传统的创立。他总结了最新的有关分布、繁殖习性、生活阶段、变异、行为和环境背景的各类知识，并列出了数代以来博物学家们所起的各种名称，这显然是一项百科全书式的浩繁但非常有益的工作。这个工作的另一层意义还在于布丰提供了一种新的、世俗的博物学观念：在精确信息的基础上进行清晰的、大众化的讲述，让受过中等程度教育的读者都可以读懂。作者评价，“布丰以启蒙思想家的方式做出他的解释”，事实上，布丰的博物学的确是当时启蒙运动的思想武器之一，从此之后，博物学研究越来越脱离神学的世界，通向知识的理性途径。
沿着林奈和布丰开辟的道路，我们在书里还会逐一认识居维叶的比较解剖学、卡尔·冯·贝尔的胚胎学、夏尔·波拿巴的鸟类调查、贝尔纳的实验生理学、魏斯曼的细胞学……他们的理论各成体系，同时相互交叉，其中的一些部分渐趋综合，构成近代科学最伟大的理论——进化论的基础。达尔文的进化论源于他理解不同的物种如何存在以及他们之间的相互关系的尝试。博物学传统致力于描述生物世界并辨识其秩序，进化论以一种早前的博物学家希望的方式统一了以上学科，继续证明了博物学传统的重要性。这项传统延伸至当代，集中体现在E.O.威尔逊的身上。威尔逊呼吁重新重视记录生物多样性，尊重生物的多样性是解决生态问题的关键，对物种命运的关心仍将继续着生命的发展历程。
博物学在近代的迅速发展还得益于整个大环境。如前所述，欧洲的扩张和帝国的愿景为那些迫切地想要获得地球各处植物和动物的博物学家创造了机会。从亚洲、非洲、大洋洲和南北美洲传来有关奇异植物如西红柿、玉蜀黍、马铃薯、金鸡纳和烟草的消息，还有新的动物如企鹅（又称“麦哲伦鹅”）、海牛、渡渡鸟、袋鼠等，每一种新物种的发现都鼓励人们去研究它们，全球性的物种交换网络形成。生物学家在当时地位崇高，他们所派遣的植物猎人，比如传奇的库克船长，为帝国寻找适宜种植的作物，推动了欧洲经济的起飞。
此外，作者也提醒我们注意技术带来的影响。手抄本时代的插图距原状越来越远，能不能画得像是一回事儿，为了美观凭空添枝加叶或者修改删减乃是常态。印刷术的技术更新和19世纪下半叶摄影术出现的意义就不必多言了。对采集者和博物馆工作者而言，如何保存成果也是极大的挑战。之前很多珍贵的标本毁于微生物和虫之口，或者不当的人为处理。恰当的标本剥制术和药物，解决了这个难题，博物馆管理学的兴起有了物质层面的保障。新闻传播和报业媒体的扩散功能，让很多贵族人士，比如维多利亚女王，成为了博物爱好者。18~19世纪末，博物学最好的黄金时代，蓬勃如万物生长。20世纪之后有所延缓，但近几十年以来生命科学的欣欣向荣，无可否认是建立在博物学基础之上。
近代博物学发展的时间并不算长，但它取得的成就可以说开辟了一个新纪元。从林奈到E.O.威尔逊的博物学传统，既是探寻自然秩序的科学之路，也是一条寻求生物学知识的深层哲学含义和社会含义的道路。它意味着，知识的普遍统一可以跨越思想的边界，重新思考人类在自然中的地位以及人和其他生物的关系。
《探寻自然的秩序》读后感(四)：Introduction
In the second chapter of Genesis we read that “out of the ground the LORD God
formed every beast of the field and every bird of the air, and brought them to
the man [Adam] to see what he would call them; and whatever the man called
every living creature, that was its name” (Gen. 2.19 RSV). Jewish and Christian
theologians have traditionally interpreted this oft-quoted passage to mean
that God thereby gave man (still without a wife, but shortly to have one) dominion
over nature. Humans thereafter legitimately possessed the right to control
the natural world and to exploit it for their own use. Those concerned with
the origins of the current environmental degradation view that dominion with
considerable ambivalence, and some cite this alleged transfer of authority as a
root cause of the attitudes responsible for our long history of mismanagement
of global resources.
Less controversial, but equally significant, the Genesis story also reflects the
long-standing importance of naming and characterizing things found in nature.
That one of Adam’s first tasks consisted of naming animals should not
urprise us. We all possess a curiosity about the natural objects on Earth—animals,
lants, minerals—and for good reason; they are a source of food, medicine,
clothing, shelter, and entertainment. Anthropologists, who study different
cultures of the world, find that all peoples name and categorize the objects
in their environment. And most, if not all, cultures share commonsense ways
of conceptualizing the natural world. The simple notion that living things that
fly constitute a natural group, for example, is shared by second-graders in Colorado
and village elders in southeast Asia.
aming and categorizing has concerned humans since ancient times, as the
Hebrew texts attest. Whether for the most basic requirements of communal
life or for the most sophisticated scientific exchanges, we have wanted to communicate
information that we have gained about the world. Starting in the
eighteenth century, however, a particular approach to this activity emerged as
a scientific discipline in Europe and has continued to the present day, the modern
tradition of natural history. What distinguishes natural history from the
“folk biology” of earlier studies is the attempt of naturalists to group animals,
lants, and minerals according to shared underlying features and to use rational,
ystematic methods to bring order to the otherwise overwhelming variation
found in nature. Although bats are living animals and fly, naturalists do
ot consider them “birds” because bats share certain characteristics with other
mammals. Nor do naturalists consider a simple alphabetical list of animals a
viable option for classifying them, given the enormous number of known animals
(750,000 insects alone). Instead, naturalists have been working since the
1700s to document the natural world, systematically naming and organizing
the myriad forms found there, as they attempted to discern an underlying order.
Although individuals before the eighteenth century pursued similar goals,
o large-scale, sustained, and organized effort had existed until then.
In the discipline of natural history, researchers systematically study natural
objects (animals, plants, minerals)—naming, describing, classifying, and uncovering
their overall order. They do this because such work is an essential first
tep before other, more complex analyses can be undertaken. We cannot start
discussing a wetland, or the interactions within it, until we know something
about what is there. Nor can we intelligently talk about the effect of an event
on a particular environment until we have a sense of the specific kinds of organisms
that inhabit it. Natural history does more, however, than just construct
catalogs and field guides, important as these are. It explores broader issues:
How do all the pieces fit together？ What interactions can we discover？
What changes？ What responsibilities does our knowledge confer upon us？
This book traces the fascinating story of the study of the natural world that
egan in the eighteenth century and has since captured the interest of an everwidening
circle of enthusiasts. Eighteenth-century society lavished attention on
atural history. The second most frequently owned item in private libraries in
France at that time was the naturalist Buffon’s monumental 36-volume encyclopedia
of animals. Cultured gentlemen and ladies normally owned collections
of stuffed birds and of shells, with the size of their “cabinet” (as these collections
were called) often reflecting their wealth, taste, and level of refinement.
Interest in natural history, however, extended beyond what was merely
fashionable. Beginning in the 1700s and extending well into the 1800s, major
European powers engaged in a worldwide scramble to identify natural products
of economic importance. Prime ministers believed that the fate of empires
rested on identifying, cultivating, and transporting specific plants, such
as tea shrubs and rubber trees. Thomas Jefferson sent Lewis and Clark across
the North American continent in part to survey the economic potential of the
atural products in the newly acquired Louisiana Purchase.
While imperial rivalries sent soldiers and explorers to steaming jungles
and exotic highlands, a different but equally ferocious contest took place in
the western badlands of America. The quest for dramatic fossil skeletons, particularly
dinosaurs, captivated a generation of naturalists in the United States.
It resulted in a competition for bones in the 1800s that rivaled battles fought
among the Fifth Avenue “robber barons” over coal, iron ore, and oil. The public
found the Jurassic treasures fascinating. To illustrate the point one need
only consider that, by the early twentieth century, more people visited natural
history museums to see these prehistoric remains than attended football
games.
atural history also provided the scene for competition among ideas. Conflict
etween religious and secular views has often fixed on interpretations of
ature. Society on both sides of the Atlantic, for example, argued bitterly over
the implications of Darwin’s theory of evolution. For some the theory threatened
to undermine accepted religion; for others it opened up the possibility of
revitalizing what they took to be a declining and outmoded set of religious
opinions. As in the searing debates over slavery, families literally fragmented
ecause of conflicting positions on evolution. Respectable men hurled insults
at one another at nineteenth-century scientific meetings (on one occasion the
intensity of the discourse caused a woman to faint).
The story of natural history does not end with the heyday of museum attendance
early in this century or with the breakup of colonial empires. Problems
in today’s world drive current research in natural history. Much of the impetus
for earlier natural history arose from European exploration of exotic
regions of the globe. Recent development, primarily to stimulate economic
growth, has destroyed many of the sites, such as the coastal forests of Brazil,
that formerly lured naturalists from the comforts of home and drew them to
dangerous expeditions (from which many did not return alive). Naturalists
worldwide fear that the pace of development threatens irreparable damage to
these formerly pristine locales and to the associated rich diversity of animal and
lant life on much of the planet. Exploitation of tropical rain forests destroys
about 76,000 square miles per year—roughly the size of the entire country of
Costa Rica. Naturalists such as E. O. Wilson, who are deeply concerned about
the issue, point out that the problem is compounded by our lack of knowledge.
We are wiping out unknown species, and consequently we have no idea
of the potential value of what is now gone forever. Scientists, politicians, and
economists differ significantly on what actions should be taken to arrest the
loss of biodiversity. At international meetings, however, they do agree that, as
gargantuan as the task may appear, a first step would be to complete a basic in-
ventory of Earth’s species. The environmental, economic, political, and social
well-being of humans may depend upon the success of such initiatives.
In spite of natural history’s close tie to the pressing ecological and environmental
issues of today, science writers and other commentators in this
“high-tech” age occasionally treat the subject primarily as a beginning stage in
the investigation of the natural world; being a naturalist means merely to name
and describe things found in nature. They patronizingly treat natural history
as old-fashioned; a pastime that conjures up images of men in knickers carrying
utterfly nets or Victorian ladies with plant presses. Research into the history
of the discipline however, quickly dispels such a simplistic caricature. To
e sure, naming, describing, and classifying continues to be a basic activity that
erves as a foundation for the study of nature. The quest for insight into the
order of nature, however, leads naturalists beyond classification to the creation
of general theories that explain the living world. Those naturalists who focus
on the order of nature inquire about the ecological relationships among
organisms and also among organisms and their surrounding environments.
They ask fundamental questions of evolution, about how change actually occurs
over short and long periods of time. Many naturalists are drawn, consequently,
to deeper philosophical and ethical issues: What is the extent of our
ability to understand nature？ And, understanding nature, will we be able to
reserve it？ Naturalists question the meaning of the order they discover and
onder our moral responsibility for it.
o, does natural history mean mere butterfly and flower collecting？ Only
in the sense that Alfred Tennyson referred to when he wrote, in “Flower in the
crannied wall”:
Flower in the crannied wall
I pluck you out of crannies
I hold you here, root and all, in my hand,
Little flower—but if I could understand
What you are, root and all, and all in all,
I should know what God and man is.
In the eighteenth century Buffon and the Swedish botanist Linnaeus, along
with a number of other students of nature, established a coherent tradition of
atural history. We trace that tradition to see how it expanded and interacted
with other traditions in the life sciences, examining some of its major achievements
and considering its present state in the world of science. We note the
extent to which it reflected the culture of the times and to what degree it had
its own history. In exploring these topics we also examine the institutions in
which naturalists performed their research and the source of their funding. We
ee how natural history has yielded the major unifying theory of the life sciences,
uncovered some of the deepest insights into nature, led to concern for
the environment, and attracted public interest for more than two and a half
centuries.
Fascination with nature led some naturalists to relinquish the comforts of
home for the hardships and danger of fieldwork; it drove others to spend days,
evenings, nights examining data. Indeed, this tradition has inspired, enlightened,
and delighted its practitioners and their audience.