Eric on ethics:
>it sets relative importance of one thing compared to another and therefore
>regulates our choices of action and belief.
Or... ethics are simple rules which express our basic beliefs.
>One tool is to
>look at what you ARE DOING NOW and see what that can tell you about your
>ethics.
This is difficult to do. We need a reference point to compare to
and introspection is very painful for some people. Hummm, this
needs some thought.
>Do branches of a tree compete with each
>other? Or are they cooperating? Since they each have the same objective
>(help supply nurishment to the tree as a whole) they loose their importance
>as an individual. Any given branch may be sacrificed if it is not helping
>the whole organism: loss of sufficient light, out of balance, disease, etc.
> As it allows the organism as a whole to flourish, it is not seen as a
>"loss". All try to do their best to accomplish the health of the tree.
>Perhaps it is our view of ourselves as individuals rather than a community
>or species or bioregion or planet that gives us this idea of competition.
>So you may say, but the different plant compete with each other for
>sunlight and nutrients. Here too, perhaps we need a larger view. Just as
>each branch help the whole tree, each tree helps the whole forest /
>ecology. They can be seen as cooperating to help continue the health of
>the bioregion. With this perspective, how can we as humans help continue
>the health of our bioregions. Our individual confort and prosperity
>becomes unimportant in so much as it is a subset of the health of the area
>as a whole. We should be doing our best to be human-as-part-of-Nature in
>support of the whole.
Eric, here is a contrary viewpoint. It will try to show where
balance between cooperation and competition is important.
The competition in nature could be viewed as Darwin's survival of
the fittest. The cooperation part could be diversity of life
supporting each other. Both are present in my view.
The idea of everyone working together in a cooperative mode is the
philosophy in parts of Asia. Singapore comes to mind. There is
little chaos and the rules are very strict. There are no classes
in politics and debate or dissent isn't encouraged. This can lead
to a group conscious and little individualism. Some might view this
as a colony of ants with little self actualization.
Too much competition reminds me of the local conditions where people
lie and hurt others all in the name of business and competition.
Individualism is king and some people have excessive power and privilege
due to wealth. This is the opposite of a group ethic where the
wealth would be shared.
The other day i watched a travelog on Singapore which was interesting.
At first the moderator was astounded by the lack of crime and the
way people interacted. Then, near the end of the video you could tell
they were bored and stifled by the lack of freedom. Another
argument here is that a group oriented society does not innovate and
explore the world. They are channeled into specific behavior. This
is somewhat like the Russian 5 year plans which can be very productive
but do not lead to new ideas or innovation.
Hummm, i'm wandering away from individual ethics. The question at
the individual level still seems to be when is competition useful
and when is cooperation useful. Here in America i think we need
more cooperation and for the short term that is the goal. All the
rest of this discussion is just philosophical ramblings.
----------
Jeff Owens ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Zone 7
Underground house, solar energy, reduced consumption, no TV
