This chapter proposes laying out the case for taking our cue from natural science in the aesthetic appreciation of nature. It identifies problems with three aspects of Carlson's proposal. The chapter explains the supposition that knowing the etiology either of an artwork or of an aspect of nature is necessary or sufficient for their respective aesthetic appreciation. It points out that in many cases scientific knowledge may be neutral, or even harmful, for the aesthetic appreciation of nature, because it directs our attention to the theoretical level and the general case, diverting us from the personal level and the particular case. The explores that importing the categories of science into aesthetic appreciation of nature may constitute a hindrance to our capacity for discovery, through aesthetic appreciation, of what nature is. It concludes that such an approach may well be more effective in drawing considerate attention to nature's diverse splendors.