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.   
   >   
   >What I'm saying though?  Do you have a clue?   
      
   In other words, the lion would be exactly as frustrated whether he put   
   himself in a zoo or we did it to him.   
      
   Noah Sombrero   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)