3 ms·

I suspect you come from a culture that portrays itself as disconnected from nature. You think of civilization as a kind of nihilistic growth machine that is tot

I suspect you come from a culture that portrays itself as disconnected from nature. You think of civilization as a kind of nihilistic growth machine that is totally devoid of meaning. That makes sense. I see a lot of that when I look at the world too. But not every civilization is like that. There is a form of civilization which exists in deference to nature. There is a form of enlightenment which doesn't worship blind reproduction, but instead worships harmony with nature. It sees our role as humans not as an all-conquering virus, but as gardeners, shepherds of life. Not über-wolves, but über-trees. Some people call this "permaculture" but it has lots of other names, and has existed for millennia. I think the culmination of human civilization is to reach a kind of pinnacle of progressive efficiency, combined with an almost regressive reverence for the past and our bodies and the ecologies which sustain them. I suspect other alien life may also be similarly inclined. And this notion you have that planet pollution is the only way to exist is very sad. It's no better than climate denial. It's arguably more destructive, because you are suckering in smart people who would otherwise balk at denialists. I would urge you to spend some time learning about ways of living which nurture ecologies. There many such traditions, spanning every biome.

stcredzero 10y ago
You think of civilization as a kind of nihilistic growth machine that is totally devoid of meaning. Oh, ho! Look who's showing up, projecting some biases! Excuse me, but would you please point out where I said that we were nihilistic or devoid of meaning? Please provide a quote. Well, you can't, because I didn't. I was implying that our current civilization is obnoxious, not nihilist. There are many children who are obnoxious, but I wouldn't say they are without meaning, beauty or potential. A child can have all of those and still be annoying as frack. progressive efficiency, combined with an almost regressive reverence for the past You can eliminate the "almost" from that. And this notion you have that planet pollution is the only way to exist is very sad. I never said it was the only way. More projection? Again, my point is that in a galactic context, there are good arguments for why 21st century human civilization might come across as a chav.
- erikpukinskis 10y ago
  I said "I suspect" to leave open the possibility I was wrong, which appears to be the case. I could've been clearer about that (my punctuation is ambiguous, and "suspect" was not ambivalent enough). I regret not phrasing it as a straight question. I would still be interested to know how your position differs from mine and from my (poor) characterization of you, if you have the time.

stcredzero 10y ago

You think of civilization as a kind of nihilistic growth machine that is totally devoid of meaning. Oh, ho! Look who's showing up, projecting some biases! Excuse me, but would you please point out where I said that we were nihilistic or devoid of meaning? Please provide a quote. Well, you can't, because I didn't. I was implying that our current civilization is obnoxious, not nihilist. There are many children who are obnoxious, but I wouldn't say they are without meaning, beauty or potential. A child can have all of those and still be annoying as frack. progressive efficiency, combined with an almost regressive reverence for the past You can eliminate the "almost" from that. And this notion you have that planet pollution is the only way to exist is very sad. I never said it was the only way. More projection? Again, my point is that in a galactic context, there are good arguments for why 21st century human civilization might come across as a chav.

erikpukinskis 10y ago
I said "I suspect" to leave open the possibility I was wrong, which appears to be the case. I could've been clearer about that (my punctuation is ambiguous, and "suspect" was not ambivalent enough). I regret not phrasing it as a straight question. I would still be interested to know how your position differs from mine and from my (poor) characterization of you, if you have the time.