 |
|
You are not logged in! F.A.Q Log in Register |
 |
|
 |
 Now online (1)dogboy ...and 132 guests Last 5 registered Oplandisks nothingstar N_loop yipe foxtrotromeo Browse members... |
 |
Members 8025Messages 2618562 Today 1 Topics 127845 |
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
how about that adaption thingy then? When did we get far from ideal, in your opinion? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
well, that is not my opinion. i see your point clearly i think but i don't think that's the end of the story. there is more to it - my point. and to the majority who think that everything human is 'natural': no, we have a strong natural side but that's not the important thing. you get nature right imo, but not our place in it. We partly are outside nature haha:) well, i guess we can leave it at that |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i can leave it at that i should say ;) |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
We partly are outside nature really? how did we manage to do that? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
it seems like a lot of posts here are read in a way they would not be interpreted if they were told, instead of typed. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
ehh .. ? .. mmm.. like your one? no i'm just heinously keen to know how we are partially out of nature ... and what the outside of nature looks like/feels like etc. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Well, as I read it, he's talking about the human behaviour.... like I was. but maybe I'm wrong... and if I'm wrong, I'm also curious about what he means... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
well it seems to be in contrast with Anythng humans do is natural, including paving the entire planet. BUt does sort of paint a yellow brick road type picture .. unless ofcourse one wants to make an arbitrary distinction between behaviour unique to humans (ie. unnatural) and other behaviour (natural)? Maybe i'm missing something here. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
or is it to do with the platonic forms and the joys of maths? the unnatural realm of numbers and perfect circles? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
That would just be silly! |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
how are you not dependent on anything key_secret? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
what do you mean by that, and what post (of mine) are you refering to? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
"how about that adaption thingy then?" biological organisms adapt to their environment in a manner that allows greater reproductive success. so we can have sex, give birth, and our offspring can do the same. ideal living conditions do not result from this genetic level process. if ideal living conditions are to be they would be the result of social/cultural/political... consciousness level processes. "When did we get far from ideal, in your opinion?" well, it's only opinion, but i would say that we peaked sometime before agriculture (gatherer hunters), because there was not such a problem with disease before then, there was spirtual freedom. there are things to learn from these societies, but obviously circumstances are different now and who's to say what "ideal" would be? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
biological organisms adapt to their environment in a manner that allows greater reproductive success. so we can have sex, give birth, and our offspring can do the same. We're all breeders. =) if ideal living conditions are to be they would be the result of social/cultural/political... consciousness level processes. Either I do not understand what you mean, or I do not agree. Ideal living conditions are the result of what is ideal to our organism - something that we cannot change ourselves. Our body has preferences when it comes to everything. Ideal conditions stays the same, you can't change what is ideal. well, it's only opinion, but i would say that we peaked sometime before agriculture (gatherer hunters), because there was not such a problem with disease before then, there was spirtual freedom. In my opinion we peaked way before that. But yeah, the agriculture situation is not very ideal. there are things to learn from these societies, but obviously circumstances are different now and who's to say what "ideal" would be? What circumstances are different now? OK, our individual freedom has been taken away by society, but I'm not sure that's what you meant. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I'm sorry... maybe I've missed something... are you saying that it would be better if we were to regress to an era somewhere before the hunter/gathers? Before the development of language? This sounds like a cop out to me. I believe that we are entirely natural beings in a natural world, and therefore our development must be natural. Which means that the situation in which we find ourselves now must be natural. This is not to say that we should just sit back and let the rainforests be destroyed and the tiger become extinct. We have the NATURAL need, and hence the potential ability to foresee mistakes in our cultural/social/environmental development, and make changes in our behaviour accordingly. Our current situation is not perfect, but it is never meant to be. Nature is a DYNAMIC COMPLEX SYSTEM that is, by definition constantly changing, and correcting its own mistakes. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
"there are things to learn from these societies, but obviously circumstances are different now and who's to say what "ideal" would be?" I think you've hit 2 important points here... There is much to be learnt from the way we have developed and progressed, but it is entirely flawed for any of us to say that a particular period in human evolution is/was 'ideal'. The universe is constantly changing. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
ideal for what or who? It clearly wasn't ideal for those living in that time, because if it was they wouldn't have changed it! |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Sure is interesting. I had read about it before, but not this article. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I'm sorry... maybe I've missed something... are you saying that it would be better if we were to regress to an era somewhere before the hunter/gathers? Before the development of language? Some things, like the language, is a product of our culture. Who saids we need to "regress to an era"? It's not about that. Did you not understand my post? This sounds like a cop out to me. I believe that we are entirely natural beings in a natural world, and therefore our development must be natural. well. This depends on how you define the words. If you mean that our behaviour, no matter what we do, is natural - then I defineatly do not agree. I'm talking about "natural" as what our organism is designed for. And the world we live in, and the way we live in that world, is far from ideal to what our organism is designed for. In this context it would mean our behaviour is very unnatural. What we're designed for = natural What we do = unnatural Which means that the situation in which we find ourselves now must be natural. I do not agree. And again, I think we use the word "natural" in two different ways... please read what I've written and if you can; come up with a better word, or use it in the same definition as I do. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
It clearly wasn't ideal for those living in that time, because if it was they wouldn't have changed it! What I mean is that our organism is designed for an environment/behvaiour. This environment/behaviour is ideal to us. --[behaviour = how much we're suppose to sleep/What we're suppose to eat, etc]-- Eventhough some disaster or something happeneds this environment is still ideal to us. It sill is today, eventhough we live in an environment very unlike the ideal one. So at some point there had to be some kind of natural disaster or something that made humans change their behaviour - but that change was not ideal. And this is the point I'm trying to make. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
lucky psycho, how is "natural" even relevant? you don't propose that natural = good do you? cause i'm pretty sure right and wrong have nothing to do with natural. snake venom is natural. i don't recomend you drink it. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
"Either I do not understand what you mean, or I do not agree. Ideal living conditions are the result of what is ideal to our organism - something that we cannot change ourselves. Our body has preferences when it comes to everything. Ideal conditions stays the same, you can't change what is ideal." i'm sorry key but you stopped making sense a while ago. it must be the language barrier. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
in terms of morality, thats how we do it. your mistake is to neglect the consequences of imagination, that is, responsibility. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
of course everything happens within nature and i see that we have a very strong 'nature' part, our physiognomy, everything we have to do to stay alive - but when mrs. eva bit into the apple of wisdom (? or knowledge? dunno exact translation) she had to leave her natural paradise because she knew, she gained responsibility and that is not always funny. the story is about mankind loosing its virginity, and i don't interpret is in a religious way, it's just an old thought it expresses, that we are different, we are outside the unconcious paradise of nature |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
"What we're designed for = natural What we do = unnatural" This is the fundamental problem with your arguement. "what we're designed for"... we were not designed. Therefore how can anything we do be unnatural? I had a discussion about this last night, and we decided that we had to make a distinction between, nature = the entire universe that we can experience, and, oldskool-nature = the world that humans hadn't yet affected. If we have to claim a design for humans... I would say that we are designed to adapt, and that is what has made us the most successful speices the world has ever known (apparently). We are constantly striving to improve our quality of life, and therefore extend our life and that of our offspring... it is this that has driven us to build cities, and cars, and nuclear weapons... and it is this drive that will (probably/hopefully) cause us to clean up our cities, and develop less harmful forms of transport, and dis-arm ourselves of the horrific weapons that threaten all of us. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Sorry... got off track in the middle there! You are talking about 'oldskool-nature' - which no longer exists, but which people seem to want to 'get back to'. We can learn from it, and attempt to understand it, but there is no point in striving for it because the world is different now, and the needs of world, and of our species have changed. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
No, I'm not saying natural is good! good and bad are totally irrelavant. I'm not sure which bit of my ramblings lead you to think that... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
You are talking about 'oldskool-nature' - which no longer exists, but which people seem to want to 'get back to'. We can learn from it, and attempt to understand it, but there is no point in striving for it because the world is different now, and the needs of world, and of our species have changed. Could you please tell me when we went from oldskool-nature to nature, and what we have adapted to? I still have a feeling that we haven't adapted much at all, that many of our demands (e.g. food) are still the same... Also it's kinda weird saying "it's no point striving for it", because if we do not quit destroying the environment we will get hurt aswell (like we are getting right now). |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
If we have to claim a design for humans... I would say that we are designed to adapt, and that is what has made us the most successful speices the world has ever known (apparently). Aren't all species designed to adapt? But yeah, we have a different will then other animals... But if you do not believe in that there's already an ideal environment in which you would feel best living in - decided already when you were born - then that would mean that you think we can create our own ideal environment... And that doesn't make much sense to me. If you can create your own "ideal" environment, therer is no such thing as an "ideal" environment - in fact, all environments/circumstanses are equally good; as long as you spend some time there to adapt... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
That is exactly my point... there is no ideal environment. Its a nonesense concept. If our environment were ideal we would all live forever in a state of eternal bliss... anything less than that would not be ideal. "Could you please tell me when we went from oldskool-nature to nature, and what we have adapted to?" my point was that 'oldskool-nature' is a concept that we have come up with to describe the world as it would have been without humans. A fake ideal that people seem to want to strive for. We seem to think that we have wronged the planet by living on it, because we have been taught to believe that we are outside of nature. The fact is that we are a part of this planet as much as the tree that I'm looking at. The fact that we have evolved the ability to analyze our behaviour, and understand the world around us, does not separate us from that world. It gives us the potential to work with the rest of nature to further its (and therefore our own) existence. That doesn't mean that we have or won't make mistakes, but that is how nature learns... all of nature... there is no plan... we work it out as we go along. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
That doesn't mean that we HAVEN'T or won't make mistakes, but that is how nature learns... all of nature... there is no plan... we work it out as we go along |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
designed to be self designing. we will follow the hand of the creator back to the source and find...what we have forgotten. the alpha and the omega. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
Messageboard index
|
|||||||||
