The Way It Is-----Life Consumes life.

Hi Boagie,

I don't understand your first sentence. Is it that you are saying US (and Canadian) citizens are losing touch with nature?

What type of reality are you thinking is very dangerous?

And tell us who do you think should live, or not? (From your previous post).

i believe everything happens for a reason
because it exists it obviously is present for a reason
to me pointing out the differences in cultures just gives me more reason to ask "why is this happening"
Why does western culture do this
why does eastern culture do this
why does conflict exist in general?
it all has a purpose
especially automation and industrialization
these are in the long run harmful decisions
but they have been made! so why argue over that and try to say one way is better than the other way?
i like to look forward with questions like
why have they been made? these decisions are going to lead to something else
but where is that something else? where are we going with these decisions if survival is something that a species must concern itself over?
we know we must survive
we know we cant survive physically
so our will is to survive spiritually
which we will
and this whole process is that
you cannot know a quality of the absolute without first knowing its absence
we cannot know we are eternal without first being absent of that quality
without first feeling separated
and that is what this is
everything is in a state of constant perfection one quality leading to the other
we must look forward at the path we are following rather than debate whether we are following it or not

septium,

The western industrialized world you might say is out of touch with nature. When I find people who think it a revealation that life lives on life or that the country is vital to the city. The type of reality that is dangerous is one that does not concur with physical reality. A reality that really is not aware of how essential it is to reduce our populations. A reality that is not aware of the degree of its interdependences. "Your last question, who do you think should live or not?" That really is not part of the problem, no one should be able make such a god like selection. The fact that humanity does not have the intellegence to control his own population seems to indicate that man like all other animals, will leave it up to the wrath of nature.:eek:

If you mean coca cola or mcdonalds, then I agree with you. However, I understand that there is a majority in society that isn't interested in anything other than what they see on the TV. I also happen to think that these people are not required to know more than they do. Their role in society is not to think, but work and consume (junk in general). Although most have the freedom to break out of this role, very few do.

I still do not understand your saying that there is a need to reduce the population. Do you think that there are more inhabitants on the planet than it can hold? When I travel I see huge uninhabited areas, and I live in what is called a densely populated region. I think that the human being still has a lot of room to grow. Which it undoubtedly will. If at some distant point adjustments have to be made, they will be, but that will be long after you and I will ever experience it. What you are saying now, it could have been said thousands of years ago, and we are still here. I have great faith in the human being, and the resources it seems to pull out of a hat when wanted.

Eugenics has been surpassed and forgotten, are you trying to resuscitate it? And lastly, I see no wrath of nature, just plain nature.

lol
i just felt like we shouldnt be discussing who gets to live or who doesnt
that just seems unreasonable to me

What is it about this proposition that entertains you so? Please try not to put words into the mouths of others that they do not own.

septium,

The world you apparently live in is precisely the world I have termed out of touch with reality. It is difficult to know where to begin. I have never met an individual that lived in such a delightful delusion. You speak about the general population as if they were the great unwashed, how have you gained such a lofty perspective? Over population of the planet has been a concern for decades, our numbers are driving other species out of existence, we are presently swimming in our own waste, clean water has become a commodity and global warmering a threat to the future existence of humanity. Are you perchance a holyroller,where no matter how wretched the conditions, you still believe there is a puppeteer in the sky to make sure things turnout well in the long run? We are so far apart on this bussiness of a world view that there is little to no room for discussion. Have you somehow formed these views you have in a context somewhat removed,a group of like thinking people whom keep their own company?

You cannot say that the world is over populated because no one has ever put a limit on the population.

Why, then, 'tis none to you; for there is nothing
either good or bad, but thinking makes it so: to me
it is a prison.

:rolleyes:

:confused:

Socrates:

"And what is good, Phaedrus, and what is not good-
need we ask anyone to tell us these things?"

The World is "apparently" overpopulated via the "The Self Multiplication Principle."

Ask Walter and Lao - they knew!!

Brett.