EXACTOMUNDO!
--- In [email protected], William Rintala <brintala@...> wrote:
>
> I agree Bill!. I have always been confused by people who say that humans
> are
> destroying the environment or are acting in a way that harms nature. Unless
> we
> came from another planet we are a part of nature and nature is and has
> always
> been in a stae of flux. Human beings are not the beginning or the end of
> the
> process of natural evolution. If we create a world that is toxic to us we
> will become unfit (to use Darwin's meaning of the word). As a part of
> nature it
> is in our own best interest to create and nurture an environment that is
> conducive to our survival as a species. However, from a geologic
> perspective
> homo sapien isn't very significant not even worthy of a footnote. Joe, when
> is
> it postulated that our sun will become a Red Giant? How long before that
> will
> life on Earth become unsustainable, something like 5 thousand million years?
>
> B
>
>
>
>
> Find what makes your heart singâ¦and do it!
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Bill! <BillSmart@...>
> To: [email protected]
> Sent: Sat, October 13, 2012 4:21:07 AM
> Subject: Re: [Zen] calm down
>
> Â
> Mike,
>
> I think you may have misread me, or I have misstated my position.
>
> My position is that EVERYTHING humans do is part of nature - is natural. This
> is
> as opposed to those who say that humans 'interfere with' nature or do
> 'unnatural' things.
>
> Oh! I just re-read your post and see what you're really pointing out is what
> you
> think is the inconsistency in the statements about 'nature' and then
> 'reality'.
>
> I do not consider 'nature' as 'reality'. 'Nature' is itself a mental
> construct
> (illusion).
>
> I suspect that you want to, as does Edgar, to say that 'reality' includes
> EVERYTHING including illusions, but I say no. Reality is Reality, or
> Emptiness
> is Emptiness. Illusions are Illusions, or Form is Form.
>
> That's the way it looks from my side of cyberspace anyway.
>
> ...Bill!
>
> --- In [email protected], mike brown <uerusuboyo@> wrote:
> >
> > Bill!,
> >
> >
> > >but your statement implies that human intervention and management is NOT
> > >part
> >of nature.
> >
> > Yet then you say:
> >
> >
> > >These mental constructs are NOT reality.
> >
> > In this big old universe of ours, what can stand apart/outside?
> >
> > Mike
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: Bill! <BillSmart@>
> > To: [email protected]
> > Sent: Saturday, 13 October 2012, 2:30
> > Subject: Re: [Zen] calm down
> >
> >
> > ÃÂ
> > Edgar,
> >
> > You're doing it AGAIN!
> >
> > You just stated: "...letting nature take care of itself with minimal human
> >intervention or 'management'. Now at least you said 'minimal', but your
> >statement implies that human intervention and management is NOT part of
> >nature.
> >
> > I'll give you an extreme, concrete example so there can be no wiggle room
> > for
> >either of us: Humans create nuclear power and then dispose of radioactive
> >nuclear waste in a manner that changes the environment.
> >
> > Is this human activity natural (part of nature) or not?
> >
> > ...Bill!
> >
> > --- In [email protected], Edgar Owen <edgarowen@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Bill,
> > >
> > > No, you have my views exactly backward. I'm supporting the NON human view
> > > of
> >the environment, the view of letting nature take care of itself with minimal
> >human intervention or 'management'.
> > >
> > > Edgar
> > >
> > >
> > > On Oct 12, 2012, at 3:00 AM, Bill! wrote:
> > >
> > > > Edgar,
> > > >
> > > > Action is indeed not inconsistent with zen.
> > > >
> > > > What I and I believe KG are trying to point out is most everything
> > > > you've
> >talked about concerning the environment is based on a human-centric point of
> >view. So when you throw around terms like 'interfering' and telling us to
> >'grow
> >up', my only response back to you would be 'grow out' - expand your
> >perspective...Bill!
> >
> > > >
> > > > --- In [email protected], Edgar Owen <edgarowen@> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > KG,
> > > > >
> > > > > Your notion that nothing can be done to save the planet is dangerous
> > > > > and
> >mistaken. There are many who are working diligently including myself. To
> >what
> >extent it succeeds remains to be seen.
> > > > >
> > > > > Zen is not equivalent to hopelessness, inaction and nihilism as you
> >imply. That's a serious Western misconception. Action can be done with Zen
> >quite
> >effectively... Action is NOT inconsistent with Zen.
> > > > >
> > > > > Edgar
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Oct 10, 2012, at 10:59 PM, Kristopher Grey wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I never said a wit about OK/not OK. That's your judgement.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I simply find the very premise, as you lay it out, to be formed of
> > > > > > the
> >same destructive impulse to control.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I might say planetary scale destruction is inevitable, as that
> > > > > > appears
> >a logical albeit pointless conclusion, but I certainly don't claim to know
> >so.
> >Nor do I have reason to be concerned in the way you appear to be. Righteous
> >indignation may feel good, but it's not a prerequisite for action. It only
> >acts
> >to spins the wheel.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > KG
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 10/10/2012 7:35 PM, Edgar Owen wrote:
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Merle,
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Yes, KG seems obsessively attached to this discussion and why
> >destroying the planet is OK...
> > > > > >> :-)
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Edgar
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> On Oct 10, 2012, at 5:56 PM, Merle Lester wrote:
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> hey hey lads...settle down..calm please!...KG your loosing the
> >pulse..merle
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> Yes, yes. That you hold a great many things to be of high
> > > > > >>> importance
> >is obvious to all but you. Thus you assume others are are talking about such
> >things, and assume they are ignorant of same, when they are only talking
> >about
> >your ignorant attachments to these forms of divisive thinking.
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> KG
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> On 10/10/2012 11:27 AM, Edgar Owen wrote:
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> KG,
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> I find it appalling you support the destruction of the planet by
> >humans and attack those who argue against it...
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> The lowest of the low...
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> Edgar
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> On Oct 10, 2012, at 10:52 AM, Kristopher Grey wrote:
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>> Definitive dependency - in other words you frame this in a
> >self-supporting way. The way a child argues when trying to sound all grown
> >up.
> >You might as well just say:
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>> "You are a stupid baby! Stop being such a stupid baby!" *L*
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>> No one is denying 'reality' but you Edgar. You are perverting
> >others words to fit your preconceptions. You frame things as being out of
> >control/needing to be controlled - which is the very divisive attitude that
> >causes all the shit you find so wrong in the world.
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>> Opposition distracts.
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>> KG
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>> On 10/10/2012 6:47 AM, Edgar Owen wrote:
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> Bill,
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> By your perverted logic it is totally OK for man to be
> > > > > >>>>>> destroying
> >the planet because that's just a natural process.
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> Grow up and get real. Zen is not clever sophisms, it's
> > > > > >>>>>> reality...
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> Edgar
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> On Oct 10, 2012, at 6:20 AM, Bill! wrote:
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>> Edgar,
> > > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>> What's REALLY important is that it's been framed wrong. It's
> > > > > >>>>>>> been
> >framed as humans vs. nature, or as you put it humans 'interfering' in
> >nature. As
> >long as humans think they are not part of nature and taht all their action
> >are
> >natural there will be this problem.
> > > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>> When a beaver builds a dam is that interfering with nature?
> > > > > >>>>>>> When
> >a squirrel shits in the woods is that interfering with nature? When a human
> >splits an atom is that interfering with nature? When a human manipulates DNA
> >is
> >that interfering with nature?
> > > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>> What is the quality that humans have that other animals don't
> >have that renders them capable of interference - IYO? (I just made that up,
> >IYO
> >= 'in your opinion')
> > > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>> ...Bill!
> > > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>> --- In [email protected], Edgar Owen <edgarowen@>
> > > > > >>>>>>> wrote:
> > > > > >>>>>>> >
> > > > > >>>>>>> > Come on Bill.
> > > > > >>>>>>> >
> > > > > >>>>>>> > In human discourse about Man's impact on nature, that's the
> > > > > >>>>>>> > way
> >it's defined, and the whole issue is framed, as you well know...
> > > > > >>>>>>> >
> > > > > >>>>>>> > Edgar
> > > > > >>>>>>> >
> > > > > >>>>>>> >
> > > > > >>>>>>> >
> > > > > >>>>>>> > On Oct 9, 2012, at 8:45 PM, Bill! wrote:
> > > > > >>>>>>> >
> > > > > >>>>>>> > > Edgar,
> > > > > >>>>>>> > >
> > > > > >>>>>>> > > This was a VERY SERIOUS response.
> > > > > >>>>>>> > >
> > > > > >>>>>>> > > Why is it that you think the things that humans do are
> >'unnatural' or against nature but the things that other life does is
> >'natural'
> >and okay? A friend of mine very wisely (IMO)once suggested that all ethics
> >should be applied to humans and other life forms equally.
> > > > > >>>>>>> > >
> > > > > >>>>>>> > > What is the quality that you believe separates humans
> > > > > >>>>>>> > > from
> >the rest of nature so that human activities and artifacts can be labeled as
> >'interference'?
> > > > > >>>>>>> > >
> > > > > >>>>>>> > > ...Bill!
> > > > > >>>>>>> > >
> > > > > >>>>>>> > > --- In [email protected], Edgar Owen <edgarowen@>
> >wrote:
> > > > > >>>>>>> > > >
> > > > > >>>>>>> > > > Joe,
> > > > > >>>>>>> > > >
> > > > > >>>>>>> > > > Come on, it's a serious issue...
> > > > > >>>>>>> > > >
> > > > > >>>>>>> > > > Edgar
> > > > > >>>>>>> > > >
> > > > > >>>>>>> > > >
> > > > > >>>>>>> > > > On Oct 9, 2012, at 11:26 AM, Joe wrote:
> > > > > >>>>>>> > > >
> > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > Edgar,
> > > > > >>>>>>> > > > >
> > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > And Humans are just the tip of the iceberg, too.
> > > > > >>>>>>> > > > >
> > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > I don't know why plants and animals insist on
> > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > interfering
> >with the way Nature works.
> > > > > >>>>>>> > > > >
> > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > For example, on the early earth there was a nice
> >atmosphere without oxygen. But blasted Cyanobacteria evolved which like to
> >sip
> >the methane and other gases there were back then, and started polluting the
> >atmosphere with ...Oxygen!
> >
> > > > > >>>>>>> > > > >
> > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > Then -- wouldn't you know -- other organisms formed
> > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > which
> >turned CO2 into even MORE Oxygen, with a help from light from the Sun. The
> >nerve! They got away with it, though, because there were no Police. The rug
> >was
> >pulled out from under Nature yet again!
> > > > > >>>>>>> > > > >
> > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > Later, some animals evolved, which USE the oxygen.
> > > > > >>>>>>> > > > >
> > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > Much later, some of these animals of the Mammal
> > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > variety
> >called "Beavers" began to INSIST that they interfere with the stately FLOW
> >of
> >river tributaries and streams, by ...damming them up! Such nerve. You may be
> >sure that this caused inundations upstream, and occasional floods downstream
> >when the dams burst. Havoc. Bye, bye, Nature!
> > > > > >>>>>>> > > > >
> > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > The nerve of these organisms: Micro-organisms,
> > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > Plants,
> >and Animals. Always interfering with the way Nature works!
> > > > > >>>>>>> > > > >
> > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > At least on the Moon there is no such interference,
> >there's just a continual, thin, rain of meteorites pummeling the surface,
> >and no
> >atmosphere to make things rust.
> > > > > >>>>>>> > > > >
> > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > Oops!, some exotic Mammals left some footprints on
> > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > the
> >Moon, and some machinery, during the last fifty years. WHY must there always
> >be
> >such interference? The Moon had been Nature's nice, quiet, haven for rock
> >and
> >dust for so long. Why must things always go downhill?
> > > > > >>>>>>> > > > >
> > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > --Joe
> > > > > >>>>>>> > > > >
> > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > On 10/7/2012 9:26 PM, Edgar Owen wrote:
> > > > > >>>>>>> > > > >
> > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > Why do humans always insist on interfering with
> > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > the
> >way nature works?
> > > > > >>>>>>> > > > >
> > > > > >>>>>>> > > > >
> > > > > >>>>>>> > > >
> > > > > >>>>>>> > >
> > > > > >>>>>>> > >
> > > > > >>>>>>> >
> > > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
------------------------------------
Current Book Discussion: any Zen book that you recently have read or are
reading! Talk about it today!Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
[email protected]
[email protected]
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[email protected]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
