A key issue Molly.  We probably have the accounting techniques to do
this now but are still stuck with the wrong ones.

On 7 Sep, 17:29, Molly Brogan <[email protected]> wrote:
> A peace fit to survive in, yes.  And if we can find this within
> ourselves, it will be reflected to us in our experience.  We can learn
> this in our families or not, but to learn it, somewhere along the way
> we must learn that what effects me effects you, and visa versa.
>
> On Sep 7, 12:03 pm, archytas <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > We probably all 'began' in the same cell - though this leaves open
> > questions about why amino-acids and such developed in the universe.
> > The genetic connections between all people on the Indian sub-continent
> > are closer than elsewhere because of a catastrophe 74,000 years ago
> > that wiped most people there out.  What might make a difference is
> > better understanding of what we are vulnerable to and might work
> > towards as humanity.  Siblings are often nasty to each other, and
> > often unite against others for survival reasons.  What we need is a
> > peace fit to survive in.
>
> > On 7 Sep, 16:45, Molly Brogan <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > The difference that it makes, kid, is that if we truly understand that
> > > we are all related in a way that means what happens to you happens to
> > > me, we see the world differently, we act differently toward each
> > > other, we live differently.  Most of us learn this first in our
> > > families, but if we have the misfortune of being born into a family
> > > that does not provide a loving foundation or give us this lesson, it
> > > is up to us to learn it from the greater community (or not.)
>
> > > On Sep 7, 10:03 am, "pol.science kid" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > my point is.. how does it matter whether one is a relative or not... 
> > > > where
> > > > does this obligation of being good to our relatives come from.. it was 
> > > > the
> > > > accident of birth that made them our relatives... why should that make 
> > > > them
> > > > special... wat if they were not our relatives.. would we behave 
> > > > differently
> > > > towards them?
>
> > > > On 9/7/09, Molly Brogan <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > that might be how it feels kid, but someone capable of being rude and
> > > > > indifferent to family is also prone to this behavior in public,
> > > > > although they might be more selective and use the behavior to promote
> > > > > personal agenda...
>
> > > > > On Sep 7, 9:35 am, "pol.science kid" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > > i dont thinkit would.... we can be rude and indifferent to our
> > > > > > relatives like we can be to neone else.
>
> > > > > > On Sep 6, 2:50 pm, retiredjim34 <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > >      Have you ever thought about those to whom you are related? Of
> > > > > > > course you have, but maybe not in this way.
> > > > > > >      We all have four grandparents, eight great grandparents, etc.
> > > > > > > This geometric progression continues as we go back from 
> > > > > > > generation to
> > > > > > > generation until, in about 1400 AD it equals the entire 
> > > > > > > population of
> > > > > > > the human species at that time. In other words, each of us is 
> > > > > > > related
> > > > > > > to everyone else if we look back far enough.
> > > > > > >      Similarly, if we go forward, from children to grandchildren 
> > > > > > > etc.,
> > > > > > > making some reasonable assumptions and using the current 
> > > > > > > projections
> > > > > > > for the future human population, our direct progeny will equal
> > > > > > > everyone living in about 2900 AD. If we include in this 
> > > > > > > calculation
> > > > > > > brothers, sisters, aunts, uncles and cousins, we will be related 
> > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > everyone living in about 2700 AD.
> > > > > > >      So at present we seem least related to friends, neighbors, 
> > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > those in our community and country. But in fact we are all 
> > > > > > > related. It
> > > > > > > is just that it seems now that we’re not. Would it change 
> > > > > > > anything if
> > > > > > > we but acknowledged our relationship to everyone, ancestors and
> > > > > > > descendants?  Jim
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
""Minds Eye"" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to