More in the therm of letting nature do its own thing, leave things just
be, being in accordance with nature, being part of it, fitting in the
right place.
Sorry, sometimes for me language is a barrier, I know exactly what I
want to say but lack the words for it. At the end of the day, English is
not my native language and I'm still learning

Invisible wrote....(huh? How cool does that sound???)

Preserve as in leaving things going their natural way instead of
interfering and destroying.
All our life long the way before us forks constantly and each time we
have the choice. I can choose the way of destruction or the way of
preservation. Humankind as a whole has chosen the way of destruction by
building weapons, huge powerstations and things like that.
Only a minority chooses preservation, they are called dreamers or given
other names.
If we as a whole would choose preservation, would try to make things
more in accordance with nature, would that make us a stronger link in
the chain, or would we just be the same?
***************************************************************

In my understanding, to 'preserve', is to hold in it's natural state,
and to protect.... when speaking from an environmental, ecological
perspective.

To rehabilitate, and to rescusitate, are I feel necessary to assist in
returning a natural order, and in the context of your points of
reference I can see how humans could be seen as a stronker link in the
evolutionary chain...

For me personally....we blew it, we broke it, we as a species do need to
rectify it, and find a way of living in harmony with this
earth...doesn't make humans superior, perhaps just remorseful.

That is more or less what I mean, just a language block on my side
sometimes

Invisible,

You were very clear, nothing to apologize for.

I simply wanted to know from your point of view, if the two notions were
related, and I conlclude form your reply, that even the 'caretaker'
notion holds a moderate interventionistic approach, whereas the notion
of preserver you present might not intervene at all. Is that correct?

Just curious!

That is absolutely correct. In far earlier times human beings were doing
just that, hunting for food, gathering roots and fruit, always leaving
enough for other species to live. I'm not so far into it as to determine
when this stopped and for what reason it stopped, but humankind used to
live as an equal link in the chain.

'Invisible':

YOU WROTE:
' I'm not so far into it as to determine when this stopped and for what
reason it stopped, but humankind used to live as an equal link in the
chain.'


Way earlier in this post,

... I had brought up the point that humans 'perceiving' themselves and
'feeling the need' to consider themselves 'SUPERIOR', 'special',
'chosen', 'unique',
... IS the ILLUSIONARY NOTION or belief, and SELF-ACCLAIMED ASPECT of
humans that DISANFRANCHISED US from 'being' one with the universal order
or chain.

Ironically, insisting on the 'superiority' lie, results in not honoring
OUR place (any place) in the chain.

Given this resulting dissonection from the whole, 'superior' couldn't
even start to apply!!! Superior to what??? We've have disconnected
ourslves from the context we are claiming to be superior to!!!

No, it makes as rather inferior in the sense that we don't fit in,
and I don't see a way back to where we have been once upon a time, when
we were at least equal.

Sorry, it's "us" not "as"

In a word......Yes.


Although from whichever angle,point of reference, position, we come
from, many agree in this thread at the arrival of your summation, Voil.
We are kind of preaching to the choir here....however, trying to
understand the process by which we all arrived with a similar belief
system, even though some are based in science, philosophy, anthropology,
spiritual, intuitive, is fascinating, and as diverse as each of us in
this thread.

Jess,

'Choir' maybe, but the singers hold quite diversified backgrounds and
life experiences, and the task huge!!!

Reverg the current trend of 'abuse', back to a mode of preservation as
'invisible' points to, is going to take a 'big choir'!!!

And thanks JESS, I like the metaphor of the choir for this project!!!

Sorry: Keyboard playing tricks!!!

Here it is again:

Jess,

'Choir' maybe, but the singers hold quite diversified backgrounds and
life experiences, as you point out,
... and the task ahead is huge!!!

Reversing the current trend of 'abuse', back to a mode of preservation
as 'invisible' points to, is going to take a 'big choir'!!!

And thanks JESS, I like the metaphor of the choir for this project!!!

May I point out that the choir has to sing from the same hymn sheet as
well?
We all have different ideas, perceive things different, work them out in
our heads different even thought the result may be the same, but in our
different ways we may work against each other because or different
perceptions.


Now I'm going to hate the word different

Uh oh.....


What have I done?

For whatever personal perceptions, beliefs, etc, maybe, the portion of
posters who agree humankind is not superior is what I meant...and yes,
the reasons, are all as diverse as we are...

As to the evidence (?), beliefs we hold in an ecological sense, we are
as a species, in deep trouble with how to rectify the natural balanc.

For me, it does not feel like a pendulum swing, but rather scales,
tipped way out of balance...and I fear, short of Nature hitting the
reset button, the task for the 'Choir', is huge, and globally difficult
to unify.

You're right 'Invisible',

... and there is nothing like a shared project, for which we are all
passionate,
... with an intent that is so much bigger than any one individual view,
... for all involved to put their differences aside and focus on the
bigger picture.

And you're also right about singing from the same hymn sheet,
... which by the way, WE need to WRITE (COMPOSE) AND AGREE TO SIGN ALL
OVER THE PLACE!!! (one small step of communicationg at a time!!!)

What ever we do will cause change.

Even the act of just observing will cause a change in the system
observed unless it is observed from outside.

If you trek deep in the jungle you make a new trail which will cause a
change in that environment.

If you watch a pack of wolves in their daily lives (even with a 'boulder
cam') that very observation will cause some change in their lives
because you are something that has entered their part existance.

We are an integral part of the natural cycles of nature on this planet
(and will be on any other planet that we reach within this universe).

We exist therefore we are part all that exists.

Like the bacteria mentioned earlier in this topic we can be either a
good change or a bad one. That is up to us.

Superior or inferior matters not. What matters is that we have the
ability to gently or drastically change all that is around us. Such an
ability requires responsibility.

Do you think as a species we are ready to step into that responsibility?

Or are we (as a species) still as a small child playing at childish
things?

Sorry, time zone issues, I've missed a lot. The theory that Voil set
forth has to begin with an explanation of how the brain is divided and
how it works. In an effort to avoid another very long post I have cut
and paset the following from my previous post. It was to set up, as in
explanation, why there is a seperate concept at all and begin to
understand why language is required at all.
Please read and let me know if this holds any explanation as to why
we might have a seperate 'illusionary' view of the things we sense and
why we require language.

The two have no direct physical connection within the human system.
HERE WE GO. The last statment means that they do not serve the same
functions or fill in or take over for each other. They are not linked
physically. They do communicate, or actually it would seem that the
primitive brain
feeds the neo-cortex. How does it do this? First it receives all the
data, the input comes from all our senses, sight, sound, smell, touch.
These are the processed that the primitive brain understands. It makes
sense to me that the primitive brain would be the first to recieve such
information as it is already programmed with all the instinct to react,
without any thought, to save our lives should it 'feel' it needs to
'fight or fly'. Now, because the primitive part of the brain gets this
information FIRST, it also makes sense that the neo-cortex is going to
get a 'picture' of what just occured, second hand. Because the primitive
brain is a first line of defence, it has no reason to have the
ability to 'think' beyond the emotional, therefore it does not require a
language at all. What it does require is a way to communicate what is
happening to the being it is trying to protect, after all, it has to run
when the emotion run is que'd up to the neo-cortex. It does this by
sending emotional pictures. The neo-cortex must make sence of this
picture, it does this somewhat like a computerer uses a program. It
feels the emotion, which give it a picture, THIS IS THE PICTURE THAT
VOIL SAYS is the time delayed illusion of reality. The neo-cortex
continues by putting the event into words, the words that language
provided. HERE WE SEE the reason why we find it necessary to create
labels, words, written and verbal AND COMMON communication. It's because
it's necessary for our two brains to function together.

AB wrote..

Do you think as a species we are ready to step into that responsibility?

Or are we (as a species) still as a small child playing at childish
things?
*****************************************************************

No, I don't believe we as a species are ready to gently make changes to
the global damage that has been created...

Some of the indicators for that, for me, are the belief structure that
the earth is a playground here for the benefit of the species.

For example, China's gallop into Western practices of production, and
massive designs on bringing their country up to speed, as such, with
what are seen as modern conveniences of electricity, household
consumerism, and vehicle ownership.

Their massive consumption of the world's resources to power their
populations dwellings, and industry, plus added pollution to the common
stratosphere of all, will have vast impacts on us all.

That is just one example, that comes to mind,...albeit, in sheer
population alone, a massive one...

You have a point jess.

Within all the horror I felt about the 9/11 situation I noticed
something that had nothing to do with wars, rumors, or bombs.

Did any one else notice that while the planes were not flying the air
became crystal clear.

The damage we do can be cleared by the earth systems way quicker the we
might think.

And soon we will have no choice. All the things we are digging,
sucking, and dragging from the earth will be consumed. At that point we
will have no choice but to learn to live within the system as it exists.
The earth will clense itself. We can either adapt and assist or be
gone.

Graduation Finals.

Either graduate or die (as a viable species). Which sucks cause some
people are ready to become grads and some are not.

And this ain't an individual test. It is a test the whole class needs
to pass - the kind of test the Army calls GO/NO GO.

AB
I think for most of our species the world is still a playground and will
be that for a very long time to come.
The few that have outgrown this and try to change things are called
spoilsport or dreamer or even worse.
Their voices are not loud enough yet to be heard, but one day they will.
Let's just hope it will not be too late then

What I foresee happening is that many will cry out.

Many will not hear or heed.

And when the time comes that there is no more ore, nor oil, nor gold,
nor rare earths, nor copper, no minerals left to wrest from the earth.
Then and only then will they realize - as their 'civilisation' built
upon these finite resources fails them...

there is a better way.

and the only way to find that better way is to put aside childish
things.