XPost: alt.buddha.short.fat.guy, alt.philosophy.taoism, alt.supp   
   rt.schizophrenia   
   From: fedora@fea.st   
      
   On Fri, 9 Jul 2021 15:31:35 -0400, Wilson  wrote:   
      
   >On 7/9/2021 3:04 PM, Noah Sombrero wrote:   
   >> On Fri, 9 Jul 2021 13:18:00 -0400, Wilson  wrote:   
   >>   
   >>> On 7/9/2021 1:04 PM, Noah Sombrero wrote:   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> Humans are dangerous animals, but there are others far better equipped   
   >>>>>> to be predators.  Humans are omnivores, not lions who must hunt.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> Humans in groups can kill large herbivores like buffalos with pointy   
   >>>>>> sticks, but it is a dangerous undertaking.  Humans were not meant be   
   >>>>>> able to stand a distance away and kill buffalo with guns.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Who are you to say what is "meant to be"?  Who are any of us?  If it is,   
   >>>>> it is meant to be.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Talking about what was and what is, does not mean that I think I can   
   >>>> say what is meant to be.   
   >>>   
   >>> Yet somehow one paragraph above you said, "Humans were not meant be   
   >>> able to stand a distance away and kill buffalo with guns."   
   >>   
   >> That is not how it was done when the earth was young.  When humans   
   >> were in tune with nature.   
   >>   
   >>> Look.  I know you're a fan of Biden but that's no reason to act like a   
   >>> demented doddering old fool.   
   >>   
   >> How about if I act like a president doing a perfectly good job?   
   >>   
   >>>> The statement I quoted was, "civilization is an unnatural act."   
   >>>> Perhaps the problem is that some people are applying their value   
   >>>> judgments to "unnatural".   
   >>>   
   >>> More weasel words.   
   >>   
   >> If you don't like what they say.   
   >>   
   >>> Here's a fact for you:  If it exists it is natural.  Because humans are   
   >>> a part of nature, the end result of natural processes.  Who are you, in   
   >>> your tiny bubble of the finite, to say otherwise?  The separation of   
   >>> what humans create from what is "natural" is artificial and a   
   >>> destruction of the tapestry of creation and nature.   
   >>   
   >> It is not about what can be defined as natural if you manage your   
   >> words well enough.  It is about how we feel about the world we have   
   >> created for ourselves.  Like the lion in the zoo going back and forth   
   >> in frustration.  Don't see a parallel?  That's ok, I didn't expect you   
   >> would.   
   >   
   >I do understand exactly what you're saying.  To be out of harmony with   
   >the world around us as it is, is to soak in despair.  The lion in   
   >captivity feels despair and frustration because his nature is to be free   
   >and bounded only by the abilities that nature gave him.   
      
   Great.   
      
   >What I'm saying though?  Do you have a clue?   
      
   And it is also our nature to be free and bounded only by abilities   
   nature gave us.  Nature did not give us cities to live in and workaday   
   jobs.  Humans did that to themselves.   
      
   Noah Sombrero   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)