XPost: alt.buddha.short.fat.guy, alt.philosophy.taoism, alt.supp
rt.schizophrenia
From: fedora@fea.st
On Sat, 10 Jul 2021 10:47:27 -0400, Wilson wrote:
>On 7/9/2021 3:40 PM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
>> 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.
>
>That's what you're saying, not what I'm saying.
>
>I take it from your response you might not have a clue.
>
>You said, "Humans were not meant be able to stand a distance away and
>kill buffalo with guns."
>
>And I say, yes we are.
>
>Your idea that we're not meant to do certain things that we are clearly
>doing is a denial of reality.
What I say is that when humans lived as hunter gatherers with pointy
sticks for weapons and the ability to outlast a deer sometimes, they
were living within natural systems, not destructive to them. That is
no longer the case. And I also say that the human brain has not had
time to adapt to civilized life.
It is true that I did not say that very well. Here is another
attempt.
Noah Sombrero
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
