NationStates Jolt Archive

I posted what was below on another thread. It was a bit of a digression, so understandably it did not get much of a response. I am wondering what people think of this ... does it strike any chords, or is it a bit nuts?

My worldview is one where, whether they choose to be or not, all humans live in a complex world of interrelationships with all other humans as well as non-human life. These interrelationships create a complex web of rights and responsibilities. For example, I do not choose to enter into a social relationship with my family. But I am born into that relationship, and as a result of that and the fact that they raised me, I have obligations and duties toward my family, as well as rights as a family member. I also feel that I have obligations toward my ancestors and the past generations who have left me the world that I live in (which is in many regards better than the one they were born into) and to future generations, to ensure that the quality of life I have enjoyed as a result of the work of past generations is maintained (i.e. that I am going to leave the world at least as good of a place as I found it). I also have obligations towards animals, trees, and other forms of life. There is still plenty of room for individual choice; an individual still has obligations to themself, and there are many social obligations I can choose to assume, and corresponding rights I can receive. I can choose who I do business with and so forth. However, I recognize that there are many relationships and obligations over which I have little or no choice. My better world would be one in which more people recognized and accepted those obligations (and not just the rights which attach to them).

I posted what was below on another thread. It was a bit of a digression, so understandably it did not get much of a response. I am wondering what people think of this ... does it strike any chords, or is it a bit nuts?
I noticed you were talking about an obligation to animals and trees. I have two things to say about that: Vegetarianism makes no sense and I hate rabbits.

I agree, but for completely different and sometimes opposite reasons than the ones you listed.

Things to remember: If you get lost, pick someone who seems to know where they are going and follow them.
Also, do not allow your refrigerator to lurk.
And finally, Don't pick it up.

Cookie for the reference.

I noticed you were talking about an obligation to animals and trees. I have two things to say about that: Vegetarianism makes no sense and I hate rabbits.

I am not saying people shouldn't eat animals. But I do believe they should not use them except out of necessity. And be respectful about how they do it.

My worldview is one where, whether they choose to be or not, all humans live in a complex world of interrelationships with all other humans as well as non-human life. These interrelationships create a complex web of rights and responsibilities. For example, I do not choose to enter into a social relationship with my family. But I am born into that relationship, and as a result of that and the fact that they raised me, I have obligations and duties toward my family, as well as rights as a family member. I also feel that I have obligations toward my ancestors and the past generations who have left me the world that I live in (which is in many regards better than the one they were born into) and to future generations, to ensure that the quality of life I have enjoyed as a result of the work of past generations is maintained (i.e. that I am going to leave the world at least as good of a place as I found it). I also have obligations towards animals, trees, and other forms of life. There is still plenty of room for individual choice; an individual still has obligations to themself, and there are many social obligations I can choose to assume, and corresponding rights I can receive. I can choose who I do business with and so forth. However, I recognize that there are many relationships and obligations over which I have little or no choice. My better world would be one in which more people recognized and accepted those obligations (and not just the rights which attach to them).


These truths were self-evident.

Things to remember: If you get lost, pick someone who seems to know where they are going and follow them.
Also, do not allow your refrigerator to lurk.
And finally, Don't pick it up.

Cookie for the reference.


Well, the first one was, IIRC, "zen navigation" from Long Dark Tea Time of the Soul by Douglas Adams. But he may have gotten the idea from somewhere else.

Things to remember: If you get lost, pick someone who seems to know where they are going and follow them.
Also, do not allow your refrigerator to lurk.
And finally, Don't pick it up.

Cookie for the reference.The only one I know of is that the last one is the title of a song by the Offspring.

I am not saying people shouldn't eat animals. But I do believe they should not use them except out of necessity. And be respectful about how they do it.
But we get lots of good nutrients from animals. I'm all for eating em.

Well, the first one was, IIRC, "zen navigation" from Long Dark Tea Time of the Soul by Douglas Adams. But he may have gotten the idea from somewhere else.
Today 5:44 AM
A cookie for you! Though they were all in that book, inspired by the thread title, being that Dirk Gently, the main character, often expressed an appreciation for the "Deep interconnectedness of all things"

These truths were self-evident.

Not to everyone, apparently.

But we get lots of good nutrients from animals. I'm all for eating em.

I'm not saying we don't. But we also eat more meat than we need, and kill animals for sport.

Well, the first one was, IIRC, "zen navigation" from Long Dark Tea Time of the Soul by Douglas Adams. But he may have gotten the idea from somewhere else.

Damn! I knew I got that line from somewhere. It was too cool for me to have made up on my own.

I posted what was below on another thread. It was a bit of a digression, so understandably it did not get much of a response. I am wondering what people think of this ... does it strike any chords, or is it a bit nuts?

Nothing I or probably most other people have never thought of at some point in time during their lives, though I do believe the world would be a much better place if people recognised this and acted upon it, I dont think it would remove conflict from the world or anything spectacular.

Nothing I or probably most other people have never thought of at some point in time during their lives, though I do believe the world would be a much better place if people recognised this and acted upon it, I dont think it would remove conflict from the world or anything spectacular.

I'm sure most people have thought of it. I just wish more people would act on it.

I posted what was below on another thread. It was a bit of a digression, so understandably it did not get much of a response. I am wondering what people think of this ... does it strike any chords, or is it a bit nuts?
Well, if it's nuts, it's the right kind of nuts. Welcome to the club, paisano. :)

Nothing I or probably most other people have never thought of at some point in time during their lives, though I do believe the world would be a much better place if people recognised this and acted upon it, I dont think it would remove conflict from the world or anything spectacular.
In my opinion, it's a better way of viewing life, but it's certainly not a recipe for world peace, since people will often have very different and conflicting notions of just how they are supposed to fulfill their obligations.

Nothing I or probably most other people have never thought of at some point in time during their lives, though I do believe the world would be a much better place if people recognised this and acted upon it, I dont think it would remove conflict from the world or anything spectacular.

More to the point: if this has occurred to most people at some point, if these truths are really self-evident, then why don't more people act on it? Why does the vision of the world as a bunch of atomized individuals with inherent rights voluntarily entering into contracts with each other prevail? Why do most philosophies address the relationship between the individual and the state, or one individual and another, but not between the individual and nature?

Why do most philosophies address the relationship between the individual and the state, or one individual and another, but not between the individual and nature?
Religions address that. The whole bit where we own the planet and tend is part of the Judeo-Christian tradition. Id est: Don't destroy it. God said that in Genisis, that's before the 10 Commandments and before Jesus. I would guess that's pretty important part of the philosophy then.

I posted what was below on another thread. It was a bit of a digression, so understandably it did not get much of a response. I am wondering what people think of this ... does it strike any chords, or is it a bit nuts?
It is wonderful.

Religions address that. The whole bit where we own the planet and tend is part of the Judeo-Christian tradition. Id est: Don't destroy it. God said that in Genisis, that's before the 10 Commandments and before Jesus. I would guess that's pretty important part of the philosophy then.

Agreed. But I find the relationship proposed by the Judeo-Christian tradition to be a bit to heirarchical for my liking. I think Dominion over the birds and beasts is a bit different than what I am proposing. But I may be wrong.

I bet you would like the movie I <3 Huckabees.

I bet you would like the movie I <3 Huckabees.

I think your on to something there ... I haven't seen it yet, but some people that know me well have recommended it to me.

I'm not saying we don't. But we also eat more meat than we need, and kill animals for sport.
Most people don't kill for just sport. It is a rather small amount in comparison to the population. I REALLY don't like it when people kill for sport. It is sickening and should be outlawed. They should have to use or sell what they kill.
But I know I couldn't give up eating cow or pig( I know you're not saying to)...yummy steak...*drools*
I don't eat a lot of meat just for the fact that it can be expensive. I mainly eat chicken...*sigh, misses bacon and sausage*

I posted what was below on another thread. It was a bit of a digression, so understandably it did not get much of a response. I am wondering what people think of this ... does it strike any chords, or is it a bit nuts?
You should read The Web of Life, by Fritjof Capra (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0385476760/102-9066096-3390545?).

Most people don't kill for just sport. It is a rather small amount in comparison to the population. I REALLY don't like it when people kill for sport. It is sickening and should be outlawed. They should have to use or sell what they kill.
But I know I couldn't give up eating cow or pig( I know you're not saying to)...yummy steak...*drools*
I don't eat a lot of meat just for the fact that it can be expensive. I mainly eat chicken...*sigh, misses bacon and sausage*

I don't think people should stop eating meat. I think they should eat less of it. And hopefully froma more humane production process.