Thursday, June 24, 2004
What is NATURE?
I just made another of my semi-regular visits to the Nature's First Law forum to receive my semi-regular dose of live and raw foods commentary. As usual, it was a mix of effulgent inspiration and ebullient wingnuttery. [Thank you, Spike, for teaching me the words ebullient and effulgent!] In response to both the good and the bad, I feel called to play the role of the philosopher again and ask one of my favorite Infrequently Asked Questions.
What is NATURE? By extension, what is natural?
Unlike many philosophers, I don't ask these questions simply to pass the time, or because I have some perverse desire for guests of this site to lose themselves in swirling circles of somnambulating sophistry. I ask these questions because I truly believe that the way in which we answer them -- both with our words and with our lives -- can mean the difference between happiness and suffering in our lives on this wonderful planet of ours.
So, what is NATURE?
Most people have very vague ideas of what this means. "Oh, trees, plants, I don't know. The way stuff is when people aren't doing anything to it." But aren't human beings a part of this NATURE thing too? If so, how does our own inner chunk of it relate to the rest?
The big debate among live/raw foodists that triggered today's philosophical musings on my part was a debate of what constitutes a "natural" and/or "healthy" diet. As for what NATURE is, I'll leave it up to you to finish pondering that one. On a more practical note, I have a few thoughts on "natural" living.
Most people tend to see me as an optimist. However, I see myself as one of the few realists I've ever come across. My downright PECULIAR psychological makeup [especially the Schizoid component] allows me to hold seemingly contradictory viewpoints in my mind simultaneously. This is why I'm a big fan of the true definition of the word "paradox" -- a SEEMING contradiction that reveals a higher truth when the conflict is resolved.
So, here's my two-part paradoxical view on "natural living":
(1) We are WAY beyond what I've termed the "poodle effect." Our species is so mutant and dysfunctional at this point that we're in the process of mutating the entire planet in our own ghoulish image. The best that we can do is make a conscious effort to spark ecological and social revolution in the hope that our children's children will figure out a way to empower their children's children to live "naturally."
(2) We are beautiful, creative, living beings who have an unlimited potential for deep greatness. Even in our moments of crisis, we are still "natural" beings, and always will be. All that we need to do is unleash our already-existing inner potential for harmony with each other and the rest of nature. If we make the right choices, we can heal ourselves and the rest of the planet, thus creating a new shared reality that will seem like a utopia in comparison to the current one.
Both views are based on lived realities I see "on the ground" on a daily basis. In any given moment, the way I lean between them just depends on what mood I'm in. But far more importantly:
Our choices are determining which of these two aspects of today's world flourishes!
So, to make a long story short, it's pointless to sit around debating just how mutated we are and whether or not our choices meet some vague definiton of "natural." Take it from me -- we're all hovering in the grey area between 1 and 2. That's about all that we CAN do given the current shared reality.
The more important question is this: how can I contribute to the success of World 2 rather World 1?
Once again, I leave that question for you to decide. [However, here's a hint about my views on the topic!]
0 comments
What is NATURE? By extension, what is natural?
Unlike many philosophers, I don't ask these questions simply to pass the time, or because I have some perverse desire for guests of this site to lose themselves in swirling circles of somnambulating sophistry. I ask these questions because I truly believe that the way in which we answer them -- both with our words and with our lives -- can mean the difference between happiness and suffering in our lives on this wonderful planet of ours.
So, what is NATURE?
Most people have very vague ideas of what this means. "Oh, trees, plants, I don't know. The way stuff is when people aren't doing anything to it." But aren't human beings a part of this NATURE thing too? If so, how does our own inner chunk of it relate to the rest?
The big debate among live/raw foodists that triggered today's philosophical musings on my part was a debate of what constitutes a "natural" and/or "healthy" diet. As for what NATURE is, I'll leave it up to you to finish pondering that one. On a more practical note, I have a few thoughts on "natural" living.
Most people tend to see me as an optimist. However, I see myself as one of the few realists I've ever come across. My downright PECULIAR psychological makeup [especially the Schizoid component] allows me to hold seemingly contradictory viewpoints in my mind simultaneously. This is why I'm a big fan of the true definition of the word "paradox" -- a SEEMING contradiction that reveals a higher truth when the conflict is resolved.
So, here's my two-part paradoxical view on "natural living":
(1) We are WAY beyond what I've termed the "poodle effect." Our species is so mutant and dysfunctional at this point that we're in the process of mutating the entire planet in our own ghoulish image. The best that we can do is make a conscious effort to spark ecological and social revolution in the hope that our children's children will figure out a way to empower their children's children to live "naturally."
(2) We are beautiful, creative, living beings who have an unlimited potential for deep greatness. Even in our moments of crisis, we are still "natural" beings, and always will be. All that we need to do is unleash our already-existing inner potential for harmony with each other and the rest of nature. If we make the right choices, we can heal ourselves and the rest of the planet, thus creating a new shared reality that will seem like a utopia in comparison to the current one.
Both views are based on lived realities I see "on the ground" on a daily basis. In any given moment, the way I lean between them just depends on what mood I'm in. But far more importantly:
Our choices are determining which of these two aspects of today's world flourishes!
So, to make a long story short, it's pointless to sit around debating just how mutated we are and whether or not our choices meet some vague definiton of "natural." Take it from me -- we're all hovering in the grey area between 1 and 2. That's about all that we CAN do given the current shared reality.
The more important question is this: how can I contribute to the success of World 2 rather World 1?
Once again, I leave that question for you to decide. [However, here's a hint about my views on the topic!]
0 comments
Comments:
Post a Comment
