FrenchMachine said:

We should be embracing Nature, not destroying it.

Quote:

Are we supposed to be separated from nature?

---

Great topic.

To answer the question, obviously not. Separation from nature means death, for us but also for any other life form sharing the eco-system with us. The interesting thing is that questioning ourselves about such things as well as basically all questioning relating to other philosophical questions began at the same time we began acting recklessly towards it. By that I mean the relationship we had with the ecosystem went from a very simple, naive, symbiosis-like relationship to a relationship based on abuse by the time our mind emerged from this symbiotic innocence and we began looking at ourselves as separate entities.

A bit like what Julian Jaynes discussed in his book The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind.

Personally, I don't think this " mental breakthrough " is a bad thing and that we should devolve back to simple monkeys. What happened to us is a wonderful thing a thing that we should cherish. What I do think though, is that our minds, even though they are evolved and developped, are often misused... or understimulated.

For some reason, we developped the bad habit of using these new mental abilities for grotesque purposes like harvesting natural ressources for material profit and acting with unrivaled stupidity when it comes to planning the future. What went wrong? I won't pretend to know the answer to that one but one thing is for sure, progress has an end, a close one at that if we do not reconsider our place in the scheme of things and our role in the natural cycle.

Quote:

I may be sounding like some tree hugging hippy, but it's the honest truth.

---

Quote:

All animals besides us create a balance in nature yet humans on the whole go from place to place using and abusing resources until they are depleted. It's a fact that is obviously going to need to change in the future.

---

Quote:

smoke peyote

---

I would personally eat it.

TeamAmerica said:

To say what exactly nature is and how we relate to it is a hell of a question that I spend most of my time thinking about...


We were created from this nature of things, we are bound by it, but as for the natural laws and animals of earth, I think we are apart from it, we as humans are from the nature of the stars. If we are apart from harmony with nature, I think that it is because man himself, or part of man is soul bound to another nature, of another source of creation.

Nature is both creation and destruction. But which nature is "natural?"

"Nature" can be a dangerous opposition to any life form, if by dangerous you mean fatal, see that is the cycle, life~death~life~death, rest and motion, that is the nature of nature, or of law, of form.

To answer any of this you have to understand the true nature of all laws and of all nature everywhere, and again, that is one hell of a question.

Just the time it takes to think about this subject could last a lifetime.

---

Quote:

I would personally eat it.

---

_myconaut_ said:

Quote:

I would personally eat it.

---

no man you gotta SMOKE that shit!

---

If you say so

Quote:

Maybe this cycle was non-existant when there was balance, because I'm pretty sure it was not God's intent to create death, or opposing laws of nature.

---

That's interesting! Care to expand on that idea?

solstice said:

That's interesting! Care to expand on that idea?

---

auxiliary said:

TeamAmerica said:

To say what exactly nature is and how we relate to it is a hell of a question that I spend most of my time thinking about...


We were created from this nature of things, we are bound by it, but as for the natural laws and animals of earth, I think we are apart from it, we as humans are from the nature of the stars. If we are apart from harmony with nature, I think that it is because man himself, or part of man is soul bound to another nature, of another source of creation.

Nature is both creation and destruction. But which nature is "natural?"

"Nature" can be a dangerous opposition to any life form, if by dangerous you mean fatal, see that is the cycle, life~death~life~death, rest and motion, that is the nature of nature, or of law, of form.

To answer any of this you have to understand the true nature of all laws and of all nature everywhere, and again, that is one hell of a question.

Just the time it takes to think about this subject could last a lifetime.

---

I really do believe there is supposed to be a natrual balance. Life~death~life~death I think is a cycle we've created by our own perversion of nature. Maybe this cycle was non-existant when there was balance, because I'm pretty sure it was not God's intent to create death, or opposing laws of nature.

---

auxiliary said:

Are we supposed to be separated from nature? I have a feeling we've forced separation over our time here on Earth and thats why nature can be a dangerous opposition. Just a thought.

---

Zebratek said:

auxiliary said:

Are we supposed to be separated from nature? I have a feeling we've forced separation over our time here on Earth and thats why nature can be a dangerous opposition. Just a thought.

---

Nature can be a deadly opponent to any living creature.  Hurricanes, floods, fires, disease, drought, nature can decimate or even annihilate a plant or animal population just as easily as a human one.  The dinosaurs were as much a part of nature as any creatures and look where that got them.

Nature gives no fuck.

---