|
BlueCoyote
Beyond


Registered: 05/07/04
Posts: 6,697
Loc: Between
Last seen: 3 years, 16 days
|
Re: Owning the earth, and other blasphemies against nature [Re: fireworks_god]
#5361478 - 03/03/06 12:56 PM (17 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
I don't want to elaborate on the view that the planet belongs to all people, because it is obvious to me. People are here to share the resources for all and for the better and of course for their own better, too. In german language, we have three more words, with the same meaning as predator: bandit, looter and robber. It is obvious to me when one overreachingly and consciously bears this mentality.
|
dblaney
Human Being

Registered: 10/03/04
Posts: 7,894
Loc: Here & Now
|
Re: Owning the earth, and other blasphemies against nature [Re: fireworks_god]
#5361538 - 03/03/06 01:17 PM (17 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
fireworks_god said: Ethics, as in, a set of human-defined principles that judge our actions and determine if they are "right", which is an identity that we also designate, correct? 
Thus, one must elaborate exactly what it is that makes it unethical. Feel free! 
Indeed. Perhaps "unethical" was not the best choice of diction. Such a system, in and of itself, is adequate and helpful in reducing potential violence among most people living in the appetitive level. However, it is not adequate nor is it equipped for dealing with their inevitable greed, beyond a very trivial level, when an economic system such as ours is imposed. This greed is the one and the same greed that has lead to classism throughout a lot of the world, most prominently in Western countries. And so long as man neglects his spiritual aspect, then he will allow greed to manifest in just about any economic system. So it is not so much unethical as it is poorly equipped for dealing with greed.
Quote:
Share with us any human-based thought system that has no possibility of allowing corruption, misapplication, or misinterpretation of it to occur?
Corruption and vice are not innate in the perennial philosophy. It's a system which allows for corruption and vice to exist, but in those who truly follow it, there is little corruption and vice to be found.
Quote:
A good business practice is observing the nature of your market and targeting one's goods and products towards them in order to maximize sales. It is interesting that the apparent tendency nowadays is such that individuals also seek something from owning a product beyond the product itself, such as a sense of identity. It tends to be more effective to create supplies for demands, as opposed to creating demand for supplies. 
Okay, I agree with you that the potential for these demands and desires is present in most, if not all. However, I disagree that they would be expressed in as strong and widespread of a manner as they presently are if it weren't for marketers. We are in a society where brand name clothes, cars, medicines, etc. etc. are highly valued by most. They are highly valued because marketers convince people that they need such items (by giving them the impression that they would be much better off if they had whatever they happen to be selling). Demand isn't too difficult to create, and it is very profitable.
Quote:
Jada jada jada, the nature of physical existance and the fact that we have spatial dimensions implies that we need to have space within which to exist.
I'm glad you understand
-------------------- "What is in us that turns a deaf ear to the cries of human suffering?" "Belief is a beautiful armor But makes for the heaviest sword" - John Mayer Making the noise "penicillin" is no substitute for actually taking penicillin. "This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it, or their revolutionary right to dismember or overthrow it." -Abraham Lincoln
|
fireworks_god
Sexy.Butt.McDanger


Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 24,855
Loc: Pandurn
Last seen: 1 year, 13 days
|
Re: Owning the earth, and other blasphemies against nature [Re: BlueCoyote]
#5361604 - 03/03/06 01:37 PM (17 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
BlueCoyote said: I don't want to elaborate on the view that the planet belongs to all people, because it is obvious to me.
That is to say, that you have no reasoning upon which your belief that the planet belongs to all people, therefore you can't elaborate.
Whether or not your belief is obvious to you, you asserted that everyone has a 'natural' birth right, presumably to live or to have a right to have land. I have asked what exact aspect of nature bestows upon us this right. I have went further to demonstrate that nature has no concern with whether or not some aspect of it lives or dies, has land or starves from lack of resources.
If you wish to express one's opinion on such without demonstrating that your opinion actually reflects reality, then do not expect anyone to think your opinion has any merit in its ability to reflect reality.
Quote:
People are here to share the resources for all and for the better and of course for their own better, too.
Wait, a much shorter statement is simply "People are here.". Stopping after the word "here" allows one to not assume that we have a purpose to our existance beyond the purpose that we actively create for ourselves. Who are you to tell us why we are here?
Quote:
In german language, we have three more words, with the same meaning as predator: bandit, looter and robber. It is obvious to me when one overreachingly and consciously bears this mentality.
And yet any aspect of reality that exhibits the traits of life is a predator, consuming resources of energy, the act of the transfer of this energy almost completely in the form of predation.
Deer, as herbivores, prey upon the grass in the meadow and the bushes in the forest. I don't accuse my pet rabbit with negative connotations everytime it feasts upon the timothy hay I provide for it.
Regardless of your language's multiple definitions for one single word, the fact remains that life and predation go hand-in-hand, and the fact that something is a predator does not define something as wrong or negative.
 Peace.
--------------------
If I should die this very moment I wouldn't fear For I've never known completeness Like being here Wrapped in the warmth of you Loving every breath of you
|
fireworks_god
Sexy.Butt.McDanger


Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 24,855
Loc: Pandurn
Last seen: 1 year, 13 days
|
Re: Owning the earth, and other blasphemies against nature [Re: dblaney]
#5361640 - 03/03/06 01:51 PM (17 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
dblaney said: However, it is not adequate nor is it equipped for dealing with their inevitable greed, beyond a very trivial level, when an economic system such as ours is imposed. This greed is the one and the same greed that has lead to classism throughout a lot of the world, most prominently in Western countries. And so long as man neglects his spiritual aspect, then he will allow greed to manifest in just about any economic system. So it is not so much unethical as it is poorly equipped for dealing with greed.
I thought, first and foremost, that we were discussing the concept of ownership, and not our current economic system that springs forth as a result of the concept of ownership? Well, I guess I did just state that they are intricately linked. 
An economic system or concept of ownership shouldn't be equipped with dealing with the possibillity that those humans who participate within the system might exhibit certain traits, such as greed. Those who own and participate as an economic system should equip themselves to effectively conduct themselves in different matters. Regulating said economic system to prevent individuals from allowing greed to influence their decisions is an action that, by its nature, exists as the taking away of one's ability to exercise choice. When it comes to our property, I think we should have a wide open realm of choice in regards to that property.
Naturally, this is personal preference - some like to be able to own their own truck as their own, while others prefer to have their truck be owned by the state. Its relative anyways, most systems will limit your ownership (for example, the requirement to register one's truck with one's government, in order for the truck's value to be taxed ).
Quote:
Corruption and vice are not innate in the perennial philosophy. It's a system which allows for corruption and vice to exist, but in those who truly follow it, there is little corruption and vice to be found.
The perrenial philosophy? And what is that? If anything springs forth perennially, it seems to be greed and corruption. 
Quote:
We are in a society where brand name clothes, cars, medicines, etc. etc. are highly valued by most. They are highly valued because marketers convince people that they need such items (by giving them the impression that they would be much better off if they had whatever they happen to be selling). Demand isn't too difficult to create, and it is very profitable.
Demand isn't too difficult to create if one's market consists of undeveloped humans who are unable to discern for themselves value, relative to their situation. You can't "give" someone an impression, they can only form an impression. They are the ones with the minds, suspossedly. 
Quote:
I'm glad you understand
Do you understand that the fact that you have quoted does not imply that one has a right to continue accessing and existing within that space? 
 Peace.
--------------------
If I should die this very moment I wouldn't fear For I've never known completeness Like being here Wrapped in the warmth of you Loving every breath of you
|
eligal
Noobie


Registered: 05/25/05
Posts: 7,021
Loc: California
|
Re: Owning the earth, and other blasphemies against nature [Re: Silversoul]
#5361866 - 03/03/06 02:55 PM (17 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
sorry it has taken me so long to reply, been gone for a while...
Quote:
Paradigm said:
Quote:
eligal said:
Quote:
Paradigm said: You, sir, are extremely ignorant of history.
tell us when we did not think like this
Well, for starters, they definitely did not think like this when there were no permanent settlements. And although permanent settlements developed during the agricultural revolution, they did not conceptualize land as a commodity the way we do now. In fact, the concept of land ownership has changed over time quite a bit. It was different in feudal times too. Our modern conception of land ownership has been around only for as long as capitalism has been around(since the Renaissance). This is not to say that other conceptions of it were not as bad. In fact, the capitalist conception of land ownership was somewhat of an improvement over that of the feudal system. But still, both systems were a perversion of how people had traditionally understood the Earth, and our relationship to it.
my comment has to do with people claiming to own land. we have done this way before capitalism. when we were cavemen we preserved land areas to ourselves and if other tribes/groups (or even earlier "bands") came into ourterritory we would make them leave or fight them off. this is because there is only so much food in one area, and for us and our families to survive, we had to make sure that that food was kept for our consumption, and not consumed by others. thus, we claimed our territory. thus, we claimed the land as ours. we controlled that land. and we are not the only anumals who do this, obviously, but we do it to a greater extent. but its just the way humans are, its natural, we as animals cannot do anything unnatural.
-------------------- \m/ Spanksta \m/ "do you have the freedom to do with your nervous system what you want?" "MolokoMilkPlus said: I'll respect you if you let me give you a blow job" "tactik said: respect the can."
|
dblaney
Human Being

Registered: 10/03/04
Posts: 7,894
Loc: Here & Now
|
Re: Owning the earth, and other blasphemies against nature [Re: fireworks_god]
#5361886 - 03/03/06 03:01 PM (17 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Those who own and participate as an economic system should equip themselves to effectively conduct themselves in different matters.
I agree, they should, but the overwhelming majority don't. I think it would be nice to have a system that helps to control vices, but as you say, such a system would be taking away much free-will and choice. And to me that's too great a sacrifice, so I think I'll agree with you, that it is the individual's responsibility to equip themselves. Perhaps the state could do a slightly better job of showing them the need for such self-discipline, but even that would be bordering on propaganda. Continuing by the same line of reasoning, a state ought not infringe upon a person's will, unless it directly interferes with another's will. A person ought to take upon themselves the role of adopting a functional philosophy/moral system so that they can peacefully interact and resolve conflicts of interest without necessitating a third party state. That probably won't be happening anytime soon though 
The perrenial philosophy? And what is that? If anything springs forth perennially, it seems to be greed and corruption.
As articulated by Huxley, it is the philosophy which lies at the core of all major world philosophies/religions (from Buddhism to Christianity). If you haven't read the book yet, I would highly recommend you do, if for nothing more than mere scholarly value.
Demand isn't too difficult to create if one's market consists of undeveloped humans who are unable to discern for themselves value, relative to their situation.
Oh, you'd be surprised. From my own observations, it's not that people aren't able to discern value for themselves, it's that they simply don't bother to do so. I agree with Plato that most people live in the appetative, and it's really these people that most marketers target. And their strategies are reinforced all the time, all over the place. For instance, advertisements and messages hinting at products can be found everywhere from the newspaper, the radio, the TV, all forms of public transportation, sometimes even private transportation, all over the internet, magazines, stores, schools, even clothing etc. Everywhere there are signs and subtle suggestions to consume. Why should one consume? "Because you need ______!" You'd be surprised how little the average person questions what messages they are presented with, and in such a person, reinforcement from every angle proves very successful in creating demand.
Do you understand that the fact that you have quoted does not imply that one has a right to continue accessing and existing within that space?
Absolutely, there are no 'rights' inherently bestowed upon a being upon coming out of the earth.
-------------------- "What is in us that turns a deaf ear to the cries of human suffering?" "Belief is a beautiful armor But makes for the heaviest sword" - John Mayer Making the noise "penicillin" is no substitute for actually taking penicillin. "This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it, or their revolutionary right to dismember or overthrow it." -Abraham Lincoln
|
Silversoul
Rhizome


Registered: 01/01/05
Posts: 23,576
Loc: The Barricades
|
Re: Owning the earth, and other blasphemies against nature [Re: eligal]
#5361915 - 03/03/06 03:09 PM (17 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
eligal said: my comment has to do with people claiming to own land. we have done this way before capitalism. when we were cavemen we preserved land areas to ourselves and if other tribes/groups (or even earlier "bands") came into ourterritory we would make them leave or fight them off. this is because there is only so much food in one area, and for us and our families to survive, we had to make sure that that food was kept for our consumption, and not consumed by others. thus, we claimed our territory. thus, we claimed the land as ours. we controlled that land. and we are not the only anumals who do this, obviously, but we do it to a greater extent. but its just the way humans are, its natural, we as animals cannot do anything unnatural.
You misunderstand the concept of ownership. If you're in a public bathroom, it's perfectly reasonable to expect other people not to use the same stall as you while you're in it, but does that mean you own the stall? No. It means you're using it, and are entitled to your own personal space. But if you tried to sell that stall to someone, or make them pay you for using it, they'd look at you like had three heads. This is how land was once thought of. There is a difference between territoriality and commodification.
BTW: When different groups of prehistoric humans came together, it is true that sometimes they fought, but at least as frequently, they would come together, and mate with one another. It is generally acknowledged that while they sometimes made war, more often they made love.
--------------------
|
BlueCoyote
Beyond


Registered: 05/07/04
Posts: 6,697
Loc: Between
Last seen: 3 years, 16 days
|
Re: Owning the earth, and other blasphemies against nature [Re: Silversoul]
#5361999 - 03/03/06 03:31 PM (17 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
to fireworks, Want does not mean can. With 'obvious' I say, that anyone should ask himself what is wrong with him or wrong with me, if he does not see it like that. Obvious for me must not mean it to you, but can give you a hint.
Staying here does imply that you don't rob off anything of anyone.
Edited by BlueCoyote (03/03/06 03:37 PM)
|
fireworks_god
Sexy.Butt.McDanger


Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 24,855
Loc: Pandurn
Last seen: 1 year, 13 days
|
Re: Owning the earth, and other blasphemies against nature [Re: BlueCoyote]
#5363658 - 03/04/06 02:10 AM (17 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
BlueCoyote said: Want does not mean can. With 'obvious' I say, that anyone should ask himself what is wrong with him or wrong with me, if he does not see it like that. Obvious for me must not mean it to you, but can give you a hint.
If some thought or concept is "obvious" to you, than surely you can explain by what reasoning it is clearly obvious. Otherwise, your simple assertion that it is obvious, and nothing more, has no basis and no power to share any idea.
The only hint of reasoning you shared was in regards to a natural birth-right, and that it is obvious that we have it. Which is why so many people die, right? Nature doesn't support any notion of any birth-right, a quick glance as to what nature is clearly makes such obvious. 
Quote:
Staying here does imply that you don't rob off anything of anyone.
Oh does it? You've already made it clear that "rob" and "predation" mean the same thing. Existing on earth implies that one doesn't prey upon anything else, eh? Bzzzzzt. Incorrect.
 Peace.
--------------------
If I should die this very moment I wouldn't fear For I've never known completeness Like being here Wrapped in the warmth of you Loving every breath of you
|
BlueCoyote
Beyond


Registered: 05/07/04
Posts: 6,697
Loc: Between
Last seen: 3 years, 16 days
|
Re: Owning the earth, and other blasphemies against nature [Re: fireworks_god]
#5363725 - 03/04/06 03:43 AM (17 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Man, you really don't know ? You can't imagine ? you really want to know ? What follows is perhaps not in proper english, but I think, what I want to say is obvious anyway. So, as you said for yourself, the only rules which claim possession unto something, is meant by abstract laws. These laws were constructed in regard of might, what could be seen as 'natural law' if we would not have our intelligence. Every might creates an opposed counter might, if someone thinks the law is unjust. Unjust are all laws that don't take regards to birth-right. I am more loose with the property-concept regarding constructed things, but I see natural resources, like land, not created by man. It was there, before any man was here and then it started that the first one to get there, claimed property. Another one saw that and got a friend to use the same claim and get the intruder away. Now the land was owned by two people. This gets on and on until someone developed weapons, which which he would not use so many people to defend his virtual right. Needless to say that the others got better weapons, so it went forward and backward until the means get speeded up again by the invention of money. The logic herein is, that I will get more power, then the land is mine. Some blind their opponents by saying the land will belong to the benefit of the people, but those people also only see their group, not the others, and regularly, inside these groups there raised poorness and injustice again, as the people were fooled by their leaders. This all leads to the situation of today, where war for land and resources is standing in front of the door, every day. Only by some artificial, manmade laws ! I see the earth as supplier for the needs of every human, as noone has invented earth and no one invented the humans, so the earth does not belong to anybody as well as the humans do not. Industry and politics want to break that natural law, to make the humans dependent upon them. It is time to counteract, by claiming the resources of the earth for every human, to stop rising slavery of the poor nations. Perhaps 'invention' and 'creation' are the keyword here. As noone invented or created the natural earth of the human, no one has the exclusive rights of property or unlimited usage of them. Simple as that. But I see you not discerning natural resources and man made stuff, so this concept will be surely alien to you.
Staying here does imply that you don't rob off anything of anyone. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Oh does it? You've already made it clear that "rob" and "predation" mean the same thing. Existing on earth implies that one doesn't prey upon anything else, eh? Bzzzzzt. Incorrect. BZZT, yawn, wrong. That counts for human until you don't want to end in prison or get shot. But you seem to copy the animistic concept of predatory upon humans. Again, if humans consciously use this primitive concept, they have nothing lost in a human social society.
|
fireworks_god
Sexy.Butt.McDanger


Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 24,855
Loc: Pandurn
Last seen: 1 year, 13 days
|
Re: Owning the earth, and other blasphemies against nature [Re: BlueCoyote]
#5363738 - 03/04/06 03:56 AM (17 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
BlueCoyote said: Unjust are all laws that don't take regards to birth-right.
Yes, you've already asserted this, but you continue to fail to demonstrate what this birth-right is and exactly what makes this birth-right "right".
Quote:
I see the earth as supplier for the needs of every human
The earth is not our supplier. We supply ourselves from the resources of the earth. It is not as though the Earth "grants" us these supplies, we ourselves assert that they are for us to utilize and we establish our own right to do so.
Quote:
Industry and politics want to break that natural law
What natural law? I'm still waiting for that one to be explained. Perhaps it should be obvious? 
Quote:
Perhaps 'invention' and 'creation' are the keyword here. As noone invented or created the natural earth of the human, no one has the exclusive rights of propperty or unlimited usage of them.
Thus, it necessarily follows that no one has any right of any property or any usage of that property. Any invention or creation is a manipulation of natural resources. When someone constructs a guitar, it doesn't magically appear out of the air. It results from the technological application that utilizes resources that we did not create in order to create something "new".
Quote:
Simple as that. But I see you not discerning natural resources and man made stuff, so this concept will be surely alien to you.
There is no distinction to be discerned that is relevant to this discussion as any fabrication that man has created is simply natural resources being manipulated by us. You state that if we take natural resources, which we have no rights to own as our property, and perform work to make it useful to us, we suddenly have rights to own it? Wow, it sounds as though you are stating that we have rights to own land. 
Quote:
That counts for human until you don't want to end in prison or get shot. But you seem to copy the animalistic concept of predatory upon humans. Again, if humans consciously use this primitive concept, they have nothing lost in a human social society.
Primitve concept? Oh, you must refer to the natural fact that, when we consume resources in order to continue our survival, we are preying upon the previous form that contained those resources (energy). The nature of the fact that resources are limited implies that, if we consume this specific resources ourselves, it is no longer there, in that form, for anyone else to consume.
I don't recall ever being threatened with prison time or with a gun shot to the head the last time I ate a salad. I wasn't aware that Germany was becoming that fascist again. 
 Peace.
--------------------
If I should die this very moment I wouldn't fear For I've never known completeness Like being here Wrapped in the warmth of you Loving every breath of you
|
BlueCoyote
Beyond


Registered: 05/07/04
Posts: 6,697
Loc: Between
Last seen: 3 years, 16 days
|
Re: Owning the earth, and other blasphemies against nature [Re: fireworks_god]
#5363762 - 03/04/06 04:30 AM (17 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
The earth is not our supplier. We supply ourselves from the resources of the earth. It is not as though the Earth "grants" us these supplies, we ourselves assert that they are for us to utilize and we establish our own right to do so. You will have to reconsider.
You simply dont want to understand and try to turn my words atround. That makes discussion senseless for me.
And your unpropper and uncorrect absolutism bores me a lot. Of course some natural resources are not limited, as they can regrow. Ever heard of that ? Man
|
fireworks_god
Sexy.Butt.McDanger


Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 24,855
Loc: Pandurn
Last seen: 1 year, 13 days
|
Re: Owning the earth, and other blasphemies against nature [Re: BlueCoyote]
#5363768 - 03/04/06 05:03 AM (17 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
BlueCoyote said: You simply dont want to understand and try to turn my words atround. That makes discussion senseless for me.
At this point in time, when one does not, for whatever reason, properly discuss the ideas that are being presented for discussion, when one does not seem to wish to engage in the discussion that is resulting from such presentation, one starts to question the other's personal qualities and traits, their actions and behaviors.
Why are we attempting to discussing fireworks_god as a person, which does not exist as a person, more of an archetype, instead of the ideas springing forth from the discussion of the thoughts that one has presented?
Regardless of what I do or do not do as a person, which is a realm entirely seperate from the idea exchange that is occuring, I have asked questions and made points of my own, which are within the spirit of the nature of this forum, and they have failed to be addressed in a pertinent matter.
Quote:
And your unpropper and uncorrect absolutism bores me a lot.
I really do not care what your inner, mental state of being in regards to your attitude towards experience is. It has nothing to do with this thread. The intent is to engage in a discussion and exchange of ideas as they are presented, not brush them aside and instead proclaim your emotional reactions to such ideas. 
Quote:
Of course some natural resources are not limited, as they can regrow. Ever heard of that ? Man
Certainly. The concept of renewable resources is basic enough to grasp a sense of it. At any given moment, of course, there is a finite amount of said resources, which places their availability in this moment as being of a limited amount, hence, the reference to these resources as being limited. 
There isn't an infinite amount of wind, water isn't truly renewable, but transferrable, and even though the Sun emits a captivating amount of energy, it isn't an infinite amount.
None of this changes the fact that one's consumption or utilization of a resource naturally prevents another from consuming or utilizing that resource at the same moment, either. When one's giraffe consumes the leaves of a tree, it is preying upon it. The giraffe is a bandit, a thief, correct? 
 Peace.
--------------------
If I should die this very moment I wouldn't fear For I've never known completeness Like being here Wrapped in the warmth of you Loving every breath of you
|
psyka
Praetorian


Registered: 06/09/03
Posts: 1,652
|
Re: Owning the earth, and other blasphemies against nature [Re: BlueCoyote]
#5363868 - 03/04/06 08:04 AM (17 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
The Earth doesn't give you shit. I assure you, you have to work for everything you do. Go live in the woods with nothing and see how much the Earth gives you. Nothing is given, and nothing is free.
-------------------- As the life of a candle, my wick will burn out. But, the fire of my mind shall beam into infinite.

|
Silversoul
Rhizome


Registered: 01/01/05
Posts: 23,576
Loc: The Barricades
|
Re: Owning the earth, and other blasphemies against nature [Re: psyka]
#5364287 - 03/04/06 11:18 AM (17 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
psyka said: The Earth doesn't give you shit.
Am I to assume that you are floating through empty space as you type this?
--------------------
|
BlueCoyote
Beyond


Registered: 05/07/04
Posts: 6,697
Loc: Between
Last seen: 3 years, 16 days
|
Re: Owning the earth, and other blasphemies against nature [Re: psyka]
#5364374 - 03/04/06 11:46 AM (17 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
If I want support from humans, I will ask or pay them. If some human refuses me to get my support from nature only to sell his shit, I become angry. Why are humans so smug on themselves ? They are dependent on nature and want to break loose from that, to be only dependend on themselves. Meanwhile they try to cut off those, who don't want to be dependend on humans, from their interconnection with nature, to make them dependent on humans, too. I don't trust humans, as I find trust in nature. Yada you will say, humans are from nature. But there is something, what seperates them from it, perhaps it is called conscious intelligence 
fire, I did not know that fireworks_god as a person doesn't exist. That makes everything clear (thank you for clearing that up) as it is hard for me debating with 'puppets', as they represent only a part of reality, by definition
|
fireworks_god
Sexy.Butt.McDanger


Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 24,855
Loc: Pandurn
Last seen: 1 year, 13 days
|
Re: Owning the earth, and other blasphemies against nature [Re: BlueCoyote]
#5364612 - 03/04/06 01:31 PM (17 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
BlueCoyote said: If I want support from humans, I will ask or pay them. If some human refuses me to get my support from nature only to sell his shit, I become angry.
You emotionally react when a natural aspect of life continues to transpire. So what?
Quote:
Why are humans so smug on themselves ? They are dependent on nature and want to break loose from that, to be only dependend on themselves.
I thought we were discussing how we suspossedly have a birth-right to live and to utilize natural resources, and how your claim that such a natural birth-right exists is false. Instead you keep analyzing myself and "humans". 
Quote:
Meanwhile they try to cut off those, who don't want to be dependend on humans, from their interconnection with nature, to make them dependent on humans, too.
The nature of operating within a society and that of specialization of tasks ensures that we are dependant on other humans, and that there is practically no manner in which one could escape being dependant on others.
Our interactions as human beings amongst ourselves is our interconnection with nature. It is impossible to be "independant" from nature, and it is a vauge generalization to assert that human beings attempt to seperate themselves from it.
Quote:
Yada you will say, humans are from nature. But there is something, what seperates them from it, perhaps it is called conscious intelligence 
Consciousness or intelligence is an emergent trait from nature, of course.
Quote:
fire, I did not know that fireworks_god as a person doesn't exist.
Oh, I would have thought that recognizing that an identity referred to as "fireworks_god" whose existance lies solely contingent upon written text within an Internet forum does not actually exist as a person would be quite obvious.
Quote:
That makes everything clear (thank you for clearing that up) as it is hard for me debating with 'puppets', as they represent only a part of reality, by definition
Truly baffling statement. I'd suggest starting with the definition of archetype resultant from psychology. It is strange that you would expect a single aspect of reality to represent more than "a part" of reality. I think you simply have trouble with being questioned and being expected to explain the reasoning behind concepts when such reasoning does not exist.
 Peace.
--------------------
If I should die this very moment I wouldn't fear For I've never known completeness Like being here Wrapped in the warmth of you Loving every breath of you
|
BlueCoyote
Beyond


Registered: 05/07/04
Posts: 6,697
Loc: Between
Last seen: 3 years, 16 days
|
Re: Owning the earth, and other blasphemies against nature [Re: fireworks_god]
#5364781 - 03/04/06 02:30 PM (17 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
then read my post again, perhaps next time you will get what I have to say. You know what ? BlueCoyote is just another name for someone who truely exist and that person gives immense support for himself to be as much real as the person behind that name, as BlueCoyote himself is. I let BlueCoyote be a true representation of the person behind him..not just only a puppet to test out one aspect of reality, as many puppets here do 
edit to thread: I have few to do with humans and so they have nothing to tell me. What I have to do with humans are forced issues upon me, which ever stay a compromise. All I have to do is with nature itself, best uninfluenced from humans, as I see, the intelligent consciousness does not good for every human, for the good of earth and the other humans. I try to not been influenced by humans in that predatorive egocentric and greedy matter, as I try to manage to go through life doing as less harm to others, as possible. So I keep my birthright and thank g*d, that I am not invented by any human and am no property myself to anybody, except myself and g*d. Everyone who thinks I have to follow some bad intended laws of humans ill spirit, will eat granite from me.
Edited by BlueCoyote (03/04/06 03:03 PM)
|
fireworks_god
Sexy.Butt.McDanger


Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 24,855
Loc: Pandurn
Last seen: 1 year, 13 days
|
Re: Owning the earth, and other blasphemies against nature [Re: BlueCoyote]
#5364889 - 03/04/06 03:02 PM (17 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
BlueCoyote said: then read my post again, perhaps next time you will get what I have to say.
I regret the fact that you choose to not discuss the topic at hand, the one that you yourself brought forth, suspossedly for discussion. Were you simply looking for agreement without questioning?
Perhaps next time I will get what you have to say if you actually engage in discussion of what you have to say in order to promote understanding. My mind doesn't mysteriously interlock with yours and I instantly grok what you are implying. 
Quote:
You know what ? BlueCoyote is just another name for someone who truely exist and that person gives immense support for himself to be as much real as the person behind that name, as BlueCoyote himself is.
You believe in a singular identity for who you are? Such a limited sense of oneself doesn't exactly reflect the reality of the matter. If you do not understand the concept of an archetype, then don't dismiss its mention out of ignorance. Usually the first step towards understanding is to question, provided, of course, that the person being asked about that which they proclaimed actually cares enough to answer.
Refering to an abstract sense of identity as an archetype is not of the same matter as that of simple "puppetry". A heightend sense of symbolism and representation of pattern cannot be reduced to such.
Quote:
I let BlueCoyote be a true representation of the person behind him..not just only a puppet to test out one aspect of reality, as many puppets here do
Someone of such reassurance of themselves and their character wouldn't become distracted by a mere "puppet" and abandon the topic they suspossedly wanted to discuss.
That said, what exactly is this "natural birth-right", and what aspect of it designates it as being granted by what aspect of nature? The simple fact that you have been born extends to mean that one has an inalienable right to access resources and to continue living?
Since you do not answer such questioning, I am left to infer that you referring to such a "right" as being respected by a certain, unnamed natural law. I am requesting how such a law directly contradicts the fact that nature has no respect for life and its needs, that it is strictly an impartial system of interaction, and that one has to establish for themselves the right to consume resources and to ensure his life continues to remain.
Try not to be distracted by the pink bunny wiggling its arms back and forth and focus on the ideas, please. 
 Peace.
--------------------
If I should die this very moment I wouldn't fear For I've never known completeness Like being here Wrapped in the warmth of you Loving every breath of you
|
BlueCoyote
Beyond


Registered: 05/07/04
Posts: 6,697
Loc: Between
Last seen: 3 years, 16 days
|
Re: Owning the earth, and other blasphemies against nature [Re: fireworks_god]
#5364902 - 03/04/06 03:11 PM (17 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
sorry fire, I added something while you were writing your post: edit to thread: I have few to do with humans and so they have nothing to tell me. What I have to do with humans are forced issues upon me, which ever stay a compromise. All I have to do is with nature itself, best uninfluenced from humans, as I see, the intelligent consciousness does not good for every human, for the good of earth and the other humans. I try to not been influenced by humans in that predatorive egocentric and greedy matter, as I try to manage to go through life doing as less harm to others, as possible. So I keep my birthright and thank g*d, that I am not invented by any human and am no property myself to anybody, except myself and g*d. Everyone who thinks I have to follow some bad intended laws of humans ill spirit, will eat granite from me.
Perhaps I will try to get the concept of birth-right into some words, comming from me, but I am sure, that many philosophers have stated something about that (like Jean-Jacques Rousseau ), so I have to reread that too. The simplest view on that is, as I said before, too, the perspective of most native cultures who live in harmony with nature. Haven't you occupied yourself with that ?
|
|