Said Philosophical Convo

[Ratatosk]

It's a bit ragtag, but here goes. It's mainly about where the world is heading.

[Ratatosk] Can't think straight anymore. I feel like a stoner w/o the 'woah' effect. Not cool. Not cool at all. Just can't think of life as concrete or structured anymore. I don't have that 'college, job, money' mindset. Not that I'd ever want to return to that. It seems more than ever, that what felt like everyday thought is now being riddled with deeper psychedelia and intrinsic nature and value of the thing in question
* Ratatosk chuckles madly
[Ratatosk] Maybe I am going crazy. I wonder if anyone else is putting up with this. I feel so tired all the time. Tired of life kind of tired
[Drago_sanguinante] I’m tired....same kind of tired
[Ratatosk] No more 'sex, drugs and rock and roll.' The only things that seem to interest me anymore have to do with spiritual growth, and answers to life's big questions. The mysteries of the universe, and personal phenomena.
[Drago_sanguinante] so, do you believe that there is something to be learned? From nature?
[Ratatosk] Yes, Easily. Simplicity.
[Drago_sanguinante] Interesting. And nature teaches us so?
[Ratatosk] But I've been pondering the complexity of the world we've been setting up for ourselves.
[Drago_sanguinante] the world is quite complex, so maybe simplicity is the key, but i ask of you: The key to what?
[Ratatosk] Living? In a state of happiness and fulfillment?
[Drago_sanguinante] that makes sense
[Ratatosk] But we've nearly destroyed that for ourselves. Are we even allowed to live like barbarians anymore?
[Drago_sanguinante] is "barbarian" what were shooting for here?
[Ratatosk] No, not really. A more simplistic lifestyle. Can we just transition back to hunting and gathering and makeshift shelters? Or would that violate certain laws?
[Drago_sanguinante] Well we can transition back. A few of us, but not the masses
[Ratatosk] Where?
[Drago_sanguinante] there are too many of us. I’m not sure where
[Ratatosk] Maybe some national parks, and that's wishful thinking. Maybe we could generate enough income somehow to permanently live in campgrounds, or reservations. Out of the sight of the masses.
[Drago_sanguinante] but we would be using that income somehow…buying things, you see...
[Ratatosk] Yes that's what bothers me.
[Drago_sanguinante] if you look at Thoreau: im not really sure that by simplicity, he meant isolation. one can simplify things greatly
[Ratatosk] There's only one kind of set up in many countries. A materialistic version of ‘Survival of the Fittest.’ I think I might agree with you there. It wouldn't be a full transition back. We'd keep ourselves educated somehow. What is this world turning into? Just look at the masses. How they cannot keep up with us.
[Atazoth] a cesspool of human waste
[Ratatosk] Yes, what is this world we are creating that separates us from the rest? We should all be able to advance together without hardship. But our current situation is so confusing to many individuals, and I fear they will never be able to catch up to modern technologies.
[Atazoth] we're neck deep in it, and as the time passes it only gets deeper. until we finally drown in our own waste and life will perish
[Ratatosk] I agree. We need to stop this movement of madness before only the elite are leading us to our own doom.
[Atazoth] Nay Ratcock, we have tread this path for too long. Turning back is no longer an option
[Ratatosk] Shoot straight ahead, yes? Try to be one of the frontrunners? And turn, hoping they will follow us? Or maybe find a way to seclude ourselves from the rest? Out of sight, out of mind?
[Atazoth] humanity will not take the actions to undo what we have done. the best thing to do is to speed up the inevitable and end it quickly. An option is to give all countries the means to make nuclear/biological/chemical weapons and let them fight it out. …No, humanity as a whole does not deserve to live on this planet
[Ratatosk] I agree, as cruel as it may seem. But my love has so far gone unheard. And I am tired of wasting it
[Atazoth] We should die out, leave it to the plants and animals since they live in a symbiotic nature with the planet
[ben__kalith] die?
[Ratatosk] Yeah, hope for the best. Maybe if there were some other way to stop humanity…subconsciously maybe… You'd think those elite would be smart enough to herd the masses away from alienation and destruction, but...I don't think government or businesswould allow that.
* Atazoth will follow into oblivion happily as long as he has front row seats for it
[Drago_sanguinante] we should devise a plan, like the plan in the Simpsons, when they were trying to get rid of all of the HOMERs
[Ratatosk] What do you think would happen Atazoth? How would we end ourselves?
[Atazoth] i'd like to have a black hole suck the earth up. i think that'd win
[Ratatosk] And would we alienate our bodies in name of technology before that?
[Drago_sanguinante] so, as i was saying, we were on Thoreau and how he wanted us all to simplify everything. I’m not sure that means living like an old Indian nomad. I just think that meant simplifying the horridly complex reality we have created for ourselves
[Ratatosk] They sure had a good example going. Fulfilling our needs with spirituality, and passing down information by culture and storytelling.
[Drago_sanguinante] well yes, but I also believe that he is wrong. There is nothing that can be learned by observing nature. Not looking at nature as "an entity"
[Ratatosk] What do you mean by that?
[Drago_sanguinante] I don’t believe that it’s this majikal entity with the answers to everything. We can’t look towards nature as a source of knowledge. There is no way that we can become "one with nature.” Nature isn’t a tangible or intangible being that we can associate with. Nature is simply a collection of trees, animals, weather, an assortment of different things. what thoreau and others like him have done, is assigned to nature a feeling of It............im not sure how to explain this
[Kage Bunshin no Jutsu] But it acts in a unique way does it not?
[Ratatosk] A feeling of consciousness?

Maybe it lost some meaning in the shortening, but the question still stands.

[animascura]

Okay lets do this, those last two lines are where i left off.

[Kage Bunshin no Jutsu] But it acts in a unique way does it not?
[Ratatosk] A feeling of consciousness?


so, megh, read the last post above.


This is exactly where i was trying to get with my previous argument.Nature is nothing but that, just nature, a random assortment of twigs, leaves, and animals. The fact is that it does not act in a unique way, it does not have a conciousness. Nature is not a complete and single being that can be characterized with having a "way of acting" or a conciousness. Thoreau and walden, and the rest of the writers showed nature as existing in the form of a "being" or "entity."

I now quote Joyce Carol Oates in her excerpt, "against Nature" "...there is no other word for it but presence...Nothing to be said about it [nature] expresses it, nothing touches it, it's an absolute against which nothing human can be measured...In this fantastical structure the "I" is deluded as to its sovereignty, let alone its autonomy in the (oustisde) world; the most astoniching secret is that the "I" doesnt exist! - but behaves as if it does, as if it were one and not many."

I believe this to be true. Nature is not an "I" yet humans have made it up to be so. It is legitimately an "I" in their eyes and thus must exist in order to be. Nature as an "I" is a perfectly legitimate reality, a reality that we ourselve have created and held to be true. But in another reality, nature is not one, but a combination of many, which cannot hold a collective "personality, connotation, feel, or conciousness."

As in regards to nature being a fountain of truth. The reality (and again i am throwing that word around liberaly and keep in mind it is relative to whatever assumptions you are holding true about what is "real") of nature is that it is not a fountain of truth, yet it is "indirectly" at the same time. Nature is a mirror upon which we reflect ourselves. Nature that pleases us becuase it mirrors our souls, or gives the comforting illusion of doing so. All of the knowledge that nature has to offer, we have given to nature in the first place, and allowed it to decieve us into creating of itself a teacher. The fountain of knowledge does not come from a sinlge entity called "nature" that presents itself in the form of nature. The fountain of knowledge is in fact something within us all. It is too strong for some of us to understand all at once, so we allow it to leave onto other intangible things and then let it seep back in slowly. Nature, if it can be categorized as a collective, is a mere bystander that has nothing to do with the ultimate truth.

anyways, those are my confusing thoughts. Just lettin ya kno.

[Pimpmaster McSlap-Bitch]

Buddha might disagree ;D

And by buddha, I mean my weedsack, not the guy who pushes ideas of total interdependance.

[animascura]

Ha ha ha! XD

Of course people are gonna disagree with me. But my argument, as well with theirs can be easily shatterred in the easiest manner.

There is one simple flaw with each side of the arguments, depending on what you side with. keep in mind it is relative to whatever assumptions you are holding true about what is "real") The basic assumptiion that thoreaugh and walden are making is that there is a deep connection between man and nature, assuming that nature is a being to which we are connected through are souls. My assumption about the connection of man and nature is a different one. Simply put....there is none. Both are just things that happen to be next to each other, there is no connection whatsoever between man and nature besides the physicall one. After one assumes other wise, it is quite easy to disagree with me and prove me wrong.