Is Nature Man’s Enemy?

[thoughts from    ~burning woman~    by Sha’Tara]

“His little fleet was indeed going into battle, against the enemy that Man would face to the end of time. As he spread across the Universe from planet to planet and sun to sun, the forces of Nature would be arrayed against him in ever new and unexpected ways. Even Earth, after all these aeons, still had many traps for the unwary, and on a world that men had known for only a lifetime, death lurked in a thousand innocent disguises.” (A Fall of Moon Dust, Arthur C. Clark)

How many times have we read quotes like this?

I will admit that we do not as easily sync with such sentiments as we did, say, even fifty years ago, but overall, has anything regarding man’s relationship to nature actually changed?

Much has been ballyhooed in recent years about anthropological climate change; about the long-term, perhaps irreversible negative effects of large scale logging of rain forests, fracking, open pit mining, deep sea drilling, pipeline building, but based on electoral results, how much of that has even made a dent in the thinking of the rank and file Earthian and its rulers who put power and riches at the top of their list of priorities?

Even as the planet is showing serious signs of stress and weakening from over-extraction, over-use and over-consumption of manufactured “goods” most of the news media remains focused on entertainment, whether from organized sports and/or global political buffoonery.

There is some seriousness being expressed, but that remains marginal at best. Some entrepreneurs who would, or could, make a difference have to play the game according to capitalism’s rules, and that “Power” is only concerned about profits, couldn’t care less about life.

What I mean to express, once again, is that for real change to happen, people have to develop not only a counter, just and peaceful system to capitalism, but a whole new nature. That’s right: nature. Up until now, man has considered nature to be his enemy, to be conquered, plundered, poisoned, that is, to be endlessly warred against. That is the foundation of the current civilization and however much that is denied, it remains a fact. This civilization has been constructed from war after war, conquest after conquest, enslavement after enslavement and the inexorable extraction of any and all natural resources that could be sold for a profit in the market place which has become a global super market.

Until now Homo Sapiens has chosen not to exhibit any sense of oneness with his natural environment. Whether that came about through fear or hubris (from bad design or faulty evolution – I’m being satirical!), it came about and we are reaping the results in exponential terms. We are facing the truth about depletion of non-renewables in a finite environment. Man’s earth struggling in the stranglehold of unchecked capitalism has developed a cancer called entropy.

What is entropy, and why should we be very seriously concerned about that?

Definition of entropy:
1 a measure of the unavailable energy in a closed thermodynamic system that is also usually considered to be a measure of the system’s disorder, that is a property of the system’s state, and that varies directly with any reversible change in heat in the system and inversely with the temperature of the system; broadly: the degree of disorder or uncertainty in a system
2 the degradation of the matter and energy in the universe to an ultimate state of inert uniformity, or towards death and disorder. (gleaned quotes from Merriam-Webster web dictionary)

Death and disorder. If we think wars, population displacements, refugee crises and the dangerous political trends that support a new rise of dictators, we see death and disorder. Such trends lead to global war. Can this world survive a third world war and resultant levels of entropy?

We go to war because we do not value life and couldn’t care less about nature except to provide our smart phone cameras with colorful sunsets caused by environmental pollution and cute animal antics. We are, as history will record if there is a history, the last generations of the terminally entitled. We may pay lip service to nature’s plight but our wants continue to take priority.

From complaints about weather and bugs, yes, nature remains considered as man’s number one enemy.

Why is that? Simple: man is not, never was, a product of natural evolution. Nature is not man’s enemy, man is nature’s enemy and in the end, one will win over the other. If nature wins, Homo Sapiens disappears. If Man wins, everything dies.

Third and final option, if it isn’t already much too late: a full and complete reconciliation of man and nature, with man, being the perpetrator of the evil that is being done, agreeing to abandon his anti-life predatory ways and live simply, that all may live. That requires more than a change of system or even a change of mind, it demands a change of nature, meaning that Homo Sapiens must morph into a new species entirely. There’s the challenge.

“Extremes invariably lead to disaster. Only through balance can we fully harvest the fruits of nature.” (Kevin Anderson: Sandworms of Dune)

 

17 thoughts on “Is Nature Man’s Enemy?

  1. rawgod

    Genesis 1:29-30 (NIV Bible)
    29 Then God said, “I give you every seed-bearing plant on the face of the whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food. 30 And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds in the sky and all the creatures that move along the ground—everything that has the breath of life in it—I give every green plant for food.” And it was so.
    But previously, in Genesis 1:26 (NIV Bible)
    26 Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals,[a] and over all the creatures that move along the ground.”

    Thus did humanity assume its role as Supreme Taker of the Earth, and all its produce, for all time.

    Are you truly goingt against God’s Word?

    Reply
    1. Sha'Tara Post author

      I personally do not ascribe to any “God’s Word” not do I believe the “Bible” is inspired by God. That said, the passages you quote are open to interpretation. For example, why do we automatically assume that “god” meant to consume and destroy when s/he/it used the word “rule”? Assuming that mankind of that time was fashioned spiritually, mentally and even physically in the image of “god” who’s to say that the term “rule” didn’t just mean guidance? Teaching? A kind of husbandry? Looking after? Shepherding? Who’s to deny that at that particular time the earth and all that was on it was designed in such a way that mankind was a necessary guidance aspect, say a living, personal presence representative of the makers (the Elohim, plural) who could not remain to take care of it? Mankind as the planetary caretaker and if needed, protector? Perhaps even an arbiter if conflict arose between species or individuals? Let’s keep in mind that the Bible describes two totally different kinds of creation and “sin” doesn’t enter into the picture until after Genesis chapter 2, verse 4, where a different creature, the LORD God, rules in a place called the Garden of Eden. Note that in the first chapter all food was of a vegetarian nature, indicating that the creators were careful to not introduce a predatory system. That begins under the LORD God, with the deliberate killing of animals to make garments of skin for Adam and Eve. There is much history carefully expunged from the records dealing with these two separate acts of creation. Again, whenever I delve into that, a lot of hackles are raised. Funny creatures, Earthians, but so predictable in their quick denial or rejection of information their programming is not designed to accept. (Another very long story about that).

      Reply
    1. Sha'Tara Post author

      Thanks for your comment, Nick. I’ve given up on special people becoming leaders and giving us the power to change our world. It’s never happened and the reason is that none of them were able to actually empower us as individuals. If I wish to become self-empowered, I’ve got to do it myself, and I have done that. I’m not waiting in the wings nor being a wallflower at the dance. I’m dancing and having a good time. I’m not going to change the world, but I am changing myself. When confronted with a choice of purpose for my life, I chose to serve compassion hoping that eventually I would become an avatar of compassion, that there would be no other way possible for me to express myself. That’s how I am poisoning the “system”. It’s slow and apparently insignificant but if millions, then billions, chose the same, or similar purpose for their lives, the system would collapse from lack of energy supplied and we would find the freedom to “love one another”. Any popular change agent is but another charismatic demagogue with a persuasive tongue and words. I’m not saying they don’t mean well, I’m saying it doesn’t work and I’m no longer interested in chasing ideas that have never worked, however many times they’ve been tried. All the individuals mentioned in your linked article, have failed and the greatest failure of all, not mentioned, was Jesus. Freedom comes from being, not from following, IMO.

      Reply
  2. gserpent

    Humans see nature as the enemy because they think it is mechanical. We are not a product of natural evolution, but we are part of nature. We see ourselves as mechanical too. Our infantile religious minds think nature needs to be conquered and ruled. Our infantile scientific minds think it needs to be examined and taken apart. With our minds we will only see what we believe (Karma). Nature is not static. She is movement and change. It is this reason she will resists all attempts to be known. What we observe is not nature herself, but nature exposed to our mind and questioning. Maybe a million or a billion years from now the human race’s mind will reach a point where she will open her robe and show us her secrets and at that point we will see that she is all there ever is, was or ever will be. But we are babies that know nothing, so we make up a god that says to control and rule her. We want to take her apart and see how she works because nothing is greater than us. We can’t figure her out so we make her our enemy because god said so. Let me off this planet!!!! 😉

    Reply
    1. Sha'Tara Post author

      Sad to realize that neither the God bunch, nor the scientific bunch, have yet clued in on what constitutes a “Gaian” system; a living system. One bunch still holds to the false ‘prophecies’ of the Bible that the earth is to be entirely destroyed by God; the other bunch, as you say, see it as a mechanical construct which they can use, abuse, exploit and if it shows signs of stress, take to the garage and give it a tune-up. Oh what fools these mortals be! (By the way I like your use of “muggles” in your latest article on Witches and Warlocks. Thanks for validating my long-standing claim that I am a witch.)

      Reply
      1. gserpent

        Fools indeed. You are welcome. How could there be any doubt? 😉 I knew when I first met you and you told me about being able to see previous lives on Tiamat. Right then I knew you were a very powerful Witch.

  3. franklparker

    To live in equilibrium demands that the population (of whatever species is under discussion, including, but not exclusively, HS) remains stable. Increase longevity without reducing birth rate and, collectively, the species consumes more. Remove hazards (predators, whatever kills the species under consideration) so that more survive than in previous generations and the population increases and consumes more. All this is the working of nature. Man is part of nature despite what you may think to the contrary. Man changes nature and, inter alia,, changes his fate. There is a natural inevitability about the extinction of any species the population of which exceeds the level at which it is sustainable. The words of Charles Wood, speaking about the condition of Ireland in the late 1840s come to mind and apply just as well to the whole world today: “Except through a purgatory of misery and starvation I cannot see how Ireland (the world) is to emerge into anything approaching either quiet or prosperity.” Of course, then as now, it is only the poor who did (and continue) to experience the “purgatory of misery”.
    The conundrum is this: if everyone has enough, the population will expand until some portion does not have enough. This creates instability such that the population reduces (through war or famine or disease – ie the purgatory of misery) to return to something approaching balance whereupon the process repeats itself. You tell me where on this cycle we are presently at (I think we both know!)

    Reply
    1. Sha'Tara Post author

      Yeah. Industrialization, technology and science/medicine have all contributed to the exponential growth of our species and yes, we both know we are inexorably entering “the purgatory of misery” on a global scale. Already, millions are being affected by the downturn. Like people sandbagging, it will be held back but “sandbagging” will not be enough. I did not mean that man is not a part of nature in the way you see it, but that man stands apart in his ability to exploit and destroy, as well as his penchant for expressing gratuitous violence and not knowing when to stop. I think that’s rather obvious. Nature, given the chance, will balance itself but if man continues to exploit out of raw greed and lust and not to simply survive, then there is that very good chance he possesses enough technology and power to actually kill his home base, the earth’s ecosystem. As long as they remain available in some form or other, mankind continues to hold a very cavalier regard towards “simple” things like potable water, breathable air, and soil that can actually grow food. There is still the belief that we live in a cornucopia.

      Reply
  4. Sha'Tara Post author

    Hi Adam, could you PLEASE not post these long articles on this blog? Comments relevant to the blog post are OK within reasonable lenght, but not articles, OK? Thanks.

    Reply
      1. Sha'Tara Post author

        No biggie… I also meant to add that it’s totally OK to post links to relevant information.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.