[DMB] There is that bit about being an enemy of nature rather than a part of it so I think John has a point.
[Arlo] OK. This reduces the sentence to "SOM causes man to become disharmonious with nature". This would also make "man" unique in the cosmos as being the only creature/pattern able to act "against nature". Doesn't this just foster S/O based thinking, though? Here is this pristine nature, and then along comes "man" to go against it? My opinion is that this style terminology is a whole can of worms ,that costs a lot more than it gives. A rabid wolf is "harmonious with reality" when it attacks its pups? What about a insane person who murders his children? Both harmonious? One, but not the other? Why? I go to a bar with friends, I am having a great time, get drunk, hurting no one, go home, wake up with happy memories... "harmonious with nature"? What if the exact same scenario, but I hit a pedestrian who I didn't see and kill them? At what point did I become "disharmonious with nature"? And if this is ONLY something that can apply to human thought, then it sets man outside, or the lone antagonist, in an otherwise "harmonious" cosmos. I don't buy that. I'd say that "harmonious" is an level-based evaluation, a judgment made from a particular "focus" about patterns around us. A "hammer" may or may NOT be "harmonious" based on the contextual evaluation we focus from. Same with anything else. Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
