|
| Thread: What is happening with the world?? |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 3 · «PREV / NEXT» |
|
Stormrage
Known Hero
Tucker is not a duck
|
posted March 13, 2004 11:39 AM |
|
|
Humans... i hate them... i will haunt everyone that brings doom to Mars after my death...
____________
"Heed to my call, denizens of All poor countries! Viva la revolt!"
|
|
Svarog
Honorable
Supreme Hero
statue-loving necrophiliac
|
|
posted March 13, 2004 04:12 PM |
|
|
A different view
Hey, is everybody here expecting the apocalypse lately?!
Quote:
Death is freedom. If you die, you get released from the cruel imprisonment on earth.
Now, that is what I call an unhealthy attitude! Then why are you still here in this prison? You can “release” yourself any time you want.
Hypocrites! You all talk about the “disastrous influence” of technology, but you are all using it. If you want to get closer to nature, why don’t you go live in the countryside somewhere, without any contact with civilization? But, no. You’d rather stay in cities, where it’s cozy and warm, so that you can use computers, watch TV, listen to music etc.
On more serious remark, though, I too think humankind, has many flaws, no doubt. But I don’t hate humans. They are a complex mixture of emotions, thoughts, dreams, ideas, beliefs, ideals, feelings, such as love, hate, joy, sadness… How can you hate all that? If you hate all that, that means you hate who you are.
Diversity. That’s the beauty of it. Even with all the current problems going round now, we will always have the beauty of existence in reach, and even more importantly, we will always have the ability to fight and hopefully solve those problems.
And on the “conquering of new worlds” point, I have only this to say. Take a look at the heroes and creatures after the Reckoning. They reached a new world, a new beginning, but did that solve their problems? No, because they are humans (at least with human nature), and it is in our nature to be the way we are, to play out the course of history once more. Not just exist, like other animals.
“Is this the end of our world? No, we are the pawns of fate. There are still many pages to turn.
And to all things comes a beginning.”
____________
The meek shall inherit the earth, but NOT its mineral rights.
|
|
Khaelo
Honorable
Supreme Hero
Underwater
|
|
posted March 13, 2004 04:56 PM |
|
|
a few quick comments...
A) The complaint that humanity is going downhill is very, very old. Hesiod gripes about human nature in the eight century BCE! (That link is to the segment of Works and Days concerning the "current" Iron Race.) Looking at history, I'd say humans then were no better or worse than humans now. What technology we have, we use for both good and evil. As Svarog says, humans are complex.
B) There's no one on Mars to complain about us leaving our trash there. The real problem is the space junk we've got circling our own planet -- pieces of garbage can hit important things like satellites and cause major damage.
C) The complaint that the god(s) find(s) us lacking is also very old. See above link. However, it seems to me that we only find ourselves lacking and superimpose that attitude upon the god(s). If one holds that the god(s) made us, wouldn't (t)he(ey) know our capablities?
____________
 Cleverly
disguised as a responsible adult
|
|
Peacemaker
Honorable
Supreme Hero
Peacemaker = double entendre
|
|
posted March 13, 2004 06:14 PM |
|
|
I dunno what you guys think of this but...
There are dozens of modern philosophers and spiritual theorists alive today who all share the common belief/observation that the human race is on the verge of a major spiritual revolution. While this last century has been probably our bloodiest, there have also been tremendous binding inroads and growing numbers of people "on the seek" in terms of spirituality. An explosion of books and presentations and seminars and whatnot... the entire world has advanced educationally in exponential terms over the last century... global interconnectedness, and the development of technologies that bind us ever closer together, have all worked together to open the channels of awareness toward one another in ways unprecedented in the history of this race...
These same philosophers and theorists postulate that the chaos we have been undergoing of late is merely a symptom of the occurrence of this spiritual revolution I am speaking about. While it may look pretty grim up close, what you may be seeing is the confusion that naturally arises during any kind of revolution. The "Old Guard" is rebelling against perceived attacks on its institutions, and it is lashing out against the movement.
Let me point out an illustration to you guys: first, you all knew this thing in Madrid happened, almost instantly. Second, you are all able to communicate almost instantly with people all over the world through this forum. Third, it's real clear that there is a lot of emotion going on over the incident. Real sorrow, desperation, anger, despair. Result: not just one, but three threads on discussions about what this might mean, how there can be a god, etc. spring up.
Compare all this with what the reactions might have been a hundred and fifty years ago, if you can.
Personally, I find the reaction going on here to be evidence of the spiritual revolution itself. While there are terrible things happening, there are also more emotions of love and empathy flying around on the planet than ever before.
If you believe anything about energy, then believe this: That energy flying around HAS to eventuate somewhere, to manifest in some way... So as we go about the nasty business of defending against these attacks, the more love, and the less fear, anger and hate, we can muster through these chaotic times, the better...
|
|
Stormrage
Known Hero
Tucker is not a duck
|
|
posted March 13, 2004 07:02 PM |
|
|
i hope that they soon realize that god actually exist. Or else they'll die and get a first class ticket to hell
____________
"Heed to my call, denizens of All poor countries! Viva la revolt!"
|
|
Dac
Tavern Dweller
|
|
posted March 13, 2004 10:45 PM |
|
|
[quote
Even if people are bad or not, they have turned away from god. There is no salvation for us now. If we start to worpship him again we might have a chance to reach afterlife, but we'll probably end up in hell.
I can say only this: we wont go in hell, hell is already here...We are in 9th circle of hell and we are getting towards 1st one...
Quote:
Hypocrites! You all talk about the “disastrous influence” of technology, but you are all using it. If you want to get closer to nature, why don’t you go live in the countryside somewhere, without any contact with civilization? But, no. You’d rather stay in cities, where it’s cozy and warm, so that you can use computers, watch TV, listen to music etc.
Wait, are`nt we humans or not? We all have doze of hypocrisy regardless what you say. Every single man on earth has every known sin, some more, some less.
Quote:
If it is a question as to the population of humans and their increasing depletion of the earth and all its resources then I say space exploration is a great direction to engage.
Exploration of space is`nt good only for resources, it will be our "Noah`s arc" if we planning to save the human race. I bet, if we find planet similar to Earth, we will go on with our irresponsible way of living, atleast in close future.
I lay my hope that something really revolutionary will happend and human race will change their way of living. Until it will be to late...
____________
|
|
AMtwis
Famous Hero
Wannabe-Pixelguy
|
|
posted March 13, 2004 10:50 PM |
|
|
That Is kind of what I thought. To be able to live better, we probably need to fina another planet
____________
|
|
Nimrod_The_D...
Known Hero
PoStEr Of BaBeS
|
|
posted March 14, 2004 11:28 AM |
|
|
Njeee
on order for us to find another planet, we have to get more technology. and by douing that, we create more weapons. its just an evil circle. For Humans to evolve and move to other planets,we must get rid of those who seek to hit the expansion by force. Like terroristm religius leaders who claim that earth is our place to be, and other countries who want to get there first. There fore, Earth must create a Council of som kind, Kinda like the UN, to get a stability and justice, into space travel.
____________
[naked Girl]
|
|
Stormrage
Known Hero
Tucker is not a duck
|
|
posted March 14, 2004 05:52 PM |
|
|
Quote:
That Is kind of what I thought. To be able to live better, we probably need to fina another planet
If we move our selves to another planet, we would probably do as any other time - exhaust the small amount of resources to build fabulous cities and monuments. To actually live in harmony we should do as the native americans does. Only use violence when needed, and only kill animals when hunger is closing up. Also, the native americans used to pray for the fallen animal that it would have a great afterlife. The Arian race, the white men, kills without honor and without mercy. We think that animals are only food, but they are also living creatures. I am NOT a greenpeace guy or something, but we should do as the native americans if we move to another planet. We could build fabulous cities and monuments, but after, we could try to produce the resources that we used to build these fabulous cities.
____________
"Heed to my call, denizens of All poor countries! Viva la revolt!"
|
|
Greek_god_su...
Famous Hero
Bringer Of Light
|
|
posted March 14, 2004 06:20 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
That Is kind of what I thought. To be able to live better, we probably need to fina another planet
If we move our selves to another planet, we would probably do as any other time - exhaust the small amount of resources to build fabulous cities and monuments. To actually live in harmony we should do as the native americans does. Only use violence when needed, and only kill animals when hunger is closing up. Also, the native americans used to pray for the fallen animal that it would have a great afterlife. The Arian race, the white men, kills without honor and without mercy. We think that animals are only food, but they are also living creatures. I am NOT a greenpeace guy or something, but we should do as the native americans if we move to another planet. We could build fabulous cities and monuments, but after, we could try to produce the resources that we used to build these fabulous cities.
And what happened to the native americans...
____________
After all, marriage and murder are not too different - one ends your life and the other is a crime
|
|
Stormrage
Known Hero
Tucker is not a duck
|
|
posted March 14, 2004 06:26 PM |
|
|
They were eradicated by the White Men.
____________
"Heed to my call, denizens of All poor countries! Viva la revolt!"
|
|
Consis
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Of Ruby
|
posted March 14, 2004 10:21 PM |
|
|
Wha.....?
You hear that Peacemaker? Says here that you've been eradicated by us white men.
____________
Roses Are Red And So Am I
|
|
Wolfman
Responsible
Supreme Hero
Insomniac
|
|
posted March 14, 2004 10:24 PM |
|
|
Haven't you heard, Consis? She's not Native at all,Peacemaker is secretly a robot from Mars...how else could she have posted such great pictures in that other thread? 
Am I right, PM?
Just kidding. 
____________
|
|
Khaelo
Honorable
Supreme Hero
Underwater
|
|
posted March 14, 2004 10:58 PM |
|
|
speculation gone wild!
Quote:
There are dozens of modern philosophers and spiritual theorists alive today who all share the common belief/observation that the human race is on the verge of a major spiritual revolution.
While I find the level of cynicism on this thread (particularly page 1) absolutely absurd, I can't buy a theory of spiritual awakening. IMHO, humanity as a species doesn't change. We invent new toys, new weapons, new strategies, new cultures as the ages pass, but we use them for the same goals. People identify with groups/leaders. Groups/leaders bicker over resources -- materials, land, power, pride, whatever. Conflict happens. People grieve over their losses and ask for peace. The groups/leaders finally come to terms, surrender, total destruction, etc. People go on with their lives. They identify with groups/leaders...Rinse. Wash. Repeat.
The cycle will break only when the group all people identify with is humanity as a whole -- not nationality, ethnicity, language, class, gender, creed, merit, or whatever else people think up to separate themselves from other people. Unfortunately, IMO, the human psyche defines group membership as Us and Them. With no Them, the boundries of the group are undefined. In order for humanity to unite, therefore, we must find a Them outside of ourselves. In current circumstances, that is highly unlikely, barring invasion by hostile alien species , or everyone turning on the other living creatures on this planet. Neither option seems particularly appealing.
Maybe I'm off base with this. I've heard Native American spiritual views that are holistic. However, the Native American peoples warred with each other before the Europeans arrived. Furthermore, there are holistic Western spiritualities, too, i.e. certain interpretations of Christianity. It's my impression that spirituality can only hold base human nature for so long. Individuals can commit to the spiritual standard, but groups tend to crack since most people leave spirituality at the sidelines of their lives. For every step forward (global communication and development), we take another step back (greater inequality, and increasing visibility thereof).
In short, I don't think humanity is going either uphill or downhill. We're just plugging along like we always have.
Peacemaker can deal with the incorrect "eradicated" comment better than I. 
Sidebar: Yoo hoo, guys! Mars has no life right now! Its beauty is purely aesthetic and scientific. Destroying the Martian landscape would have no moral consequences. The problem with moving massive numbers of humans to Mars or any other planet is A) it's expensive and B) groups of humans on Mars will act just the same as groups of humans on Earth. There is no reason for them to behave differently. Our humanity is tied to us, not the rock we live on.
____________
Cleverly
disguised as a responsible adult
|
|
Stormrage
Known Hero
Tucker is not a duck
|
|
posted March 15, 2004 09:32 AM |
|
|
Quote:
You hear that Peacemaker? Says here that you've been eradicated by us white men.
I hate only people that cares about money (very rich people like presidents and actors that sees themselves like better people than other). Money twists your mind to do whatever needed to get more of it. Money is might. Money also leads to fame. Fame leads to divinity (not actually). I have been affected once. MONEY IS A DRUG THAT EVERYONE IS ADDICTED TO WITHOUT KNOWING IT!
____________
"Heed to my call, denizens of All poor countries! Viva la revolt!"
|
|
Stormrage
Known Hero
Tucker is not a duck
|
|
posted March 15, 2004 09:42 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
There are dozens of modern philosophers and spiritual theorists alive today who all share the common belief/observation that the human race is on the verge of a major spiritual revolution.
While I find the level of cynicism on this thread (particularly page 1) absolutely absurd, I can't buy a theory of spiritual awakening. IMHO, humanity as a species doesn't change. We invent new toys, new weapons, new strategies, new cultures as the ages pass, but we use them for the same goals. People identify with groups/leaders. Groups/leaders bicker over resources -- materials, land, power, pride, whatever. Conflict happens. People grieve over their losses and ask for peace. The groups/leaders finally come to terms, surrender, total destruction, etc. People go on with their lives. They identify with groups/leaders...Rinse. Wash. Repeat.
The cycle will break only when the group all people identify with is humanity as a whole -- not nationality, ethnicity, language, class, gender, creed, merit, or whatever else people think up to separate themselves from other people. Unfortunately, IMO, the human psyche defines group membership as Us and Them. With no Them, the boundries of the group are undefined. In order for humanity to unite, therefore, we must find a Them outside of ourselves. In current circumstances, that is highly unlikely, barring invasion by hostile alien species , or everyone turning on the other living creatures on this planet. Neither option seems particularly appealing.
Maybe I'm off base with this. I've heard Native American spiritual views that are holistic. However, the Native American peoples warred with each other before the Europeans arrived. Furthermore, there are holistic Western spiritualities, too, i.e. certain interpretations of Christianity. It's my impression that spirituality can only hold base human nature for so long. Individuals can commit to the spiritual standard, but groups tend to crack since most people leave spirituality at the sidelines of their lives. For every step forward (global communication and development), we take another step back (greater inequality, and increasing visibility thereof).
In short, I don't think humanity is going either uphill or downhill. We're just plugging along like we always have.
Peacemaker can deal with the incorrect "eradicated" comment better than I.
Sidebar: Yoo hoo, guys! Mars has no life right now! Its beauty is purely aesthetic and scientific. Destroying the Martian landscape would have no moral consequences. The problem with moving massive numbers of humans to Mars or any other planet is A) it's expensive and B) groups of humans on Mars will act just the same as groups of humans on Earth. There is no reason for them to behave differently. Our humanity is tied to us, not the rock we live on.
Mars is not alive. That is a fact. But if we actually resurrects it, we would probably just destroy it again by consuming all it's resources.
____________
"Heed to my call, denizens of All poor countries! Viva la revolt!"
|
|
Peacemaker
Honorable
Supreme Hero
Peacemaker = double entendre
|
|
posted March 15, 2004 06:27 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Peacemaker can deal with the incorrect "eradicated" comment better than I.
Consis, for a fairly complete answer to whether "I" have been eradicated or not as evidence that "we" have been eradicated or not, you might refer to my post on March 9, 2003 on p. 6 of Take Back the Foos -- US Reprogramming in Tavern of the Rising Sun forum. (You can't miss it; it has a qp.) I would also suggest reading the book "American Holocaust" by David Stannard.
Khaelo --
Quote:
The cycle will break only when the group all people identify with is humanity as a whole -- not nationality, ethnicity, language, class, gender, creed, merit, or whatever else people think up to separate themselves from other people. Unfortunately, IMO, the human psyche defines group membership as Us and Them. With no Them, the boundries of the group are undefined. In order for humanity to unite, therefore, we must find a Them outside of ourselves.
Perhaps you are right. But I have two observations to make: First, do you not find people crossing over the lines, reaching out to people of difference to an extent we have never seen in human history? Is it not actually the national affiliations themselves where the tension arises, not so much between human beings? I believe that individuals of difference are changing and moving toward tolerance, but it is the continuing old thinking about group rivalries and inequities and national identities that is the lingering source of divisiveness.
EXAMPLE: I went to the Soviet Union in 1984. We met a group of young Russian people there at the museum in an elevator. When they found out we were Americans, they balked, and asked us why we wanted so badly to go to war.
We all started talking and all found out that we had erroneously imputed the international tensions between our governments onto one another personally. We ended up spending all our time with this group of people while we were in Moscow, made great friends. I remember one night when I stayed over at my friend Tamara's house, we were all curled up in her bed together (yes, people of the same sex can sleep in the same bed in Russia without it meaning anything other than they need to sleep) and we both started crying about whether our children would ever have the chance to play together.
Many more tears were shed upon our departure, and we all wrote to one another for years after that.
ANOTHER EXAMPLE: I had a boss who blocked out the middle week of August every year and would not schedule me for any trials cause he knew it was the week of Sundance and I would be out of the state. Twenty years ago Sundance was still "illegal" pursuant to federal legislation. This indiviual -- my boss -- was a Mormon. We have talked at length about the old thinking -- Mormons believeing that Indians were "Lamanites," kidnapping and adopting Indian children in the belief they would save the childrens' souls form the devial and their skin would actually turn "white." This man remains one of my best friends.
Khaelo (and others), my experience is that things have definitely changed and are changing. I hope you are having some of these kinds of personal experiences because they are at times the only thing that gives me hope. I want you to have this hope too.
Quote:
Maybe I'm off base with this. I've heard Native American spiritual views that are holistic. However, the Native American peoples warred with each other before the Europeans arrived. Furthermore, there are holistic Western spiritualities, too, i.e. certain interpretations of Christianity. It's my impression that spirituality can only hold base human nature for so long. Individuals can commit to the spiritual standard, but groups tend to crack since most people leave spirituality at the sidelines of their lives. For every step forward (global communication and development), we take another step back (greater inequality, and increasing visibility thereof).
In short, I don't think humanity is going either uphill or downhill. We're just plugging along like we always have.
I find your sentiments realistic, charming and intelligent as always. Ironically though, I think you are in the middle of this spiritual awakening I am talking about -- so close to it you can't see it yourself. You are one of the people I am talking about my friend. People like you give me great hope for you future.
As for war and tribalism, well several points. First, some tribes war and some do not. This was true "back then" too. As for Indians, we were all over the map in the olden days, from the Hopis who were looked upon as the ultimate examples of pacifism and spirituality to the Apaches, who tended to do unspeakble things (sorry guys).
As a general rule, during "warfare" we did not do massive damage and destruction on one another when warring primarily because we did not have horses, guns and big devastating fancy war technologies. While where was undeniably much death in "wars," there were actually only one or two big ones of note. With the exception of a couple of particularly vicious tribes/nations, the general rule was that "warring" comprised "counting coup" (touching the most members of the other side with a stick) or taking "prisoners" (shortage of women so go get some from somebody else's camp) stuff like that. Usually "prisoners" were take in very small numbers and adopted into the capturing tribe as a new member of the community. But the outright wiping out an entire other nation to take away their land or control their government was pretty much unheard of.
As for the reasons why we did not have big complex technologies, well there may be several explanations, perhaps a combination of things. I've read theories such as it was a consequence of having no draft animals. No draft animals means use of the wheel as a toy rather than as a transportation technology. Then there is supposed to be some connection between the development of travel technologies with the development of armament technologies and everything else that follows. Etc.
Another theory (perhaps a companion theory) is that technology in Europe exploded during the Age of Enlightenment, and the subsequent Scientific Revolution. Having studied this era of European culture I find it represents a shift of human focus to the manipulation of external circumstances and environs in an attempt to "improve" the human condition -- in other words, changing things ouside oneself in an attempt to achieve happiness. So I find the the entire technological revolution spiritually suspect from the beginning. Thus my "treadmill" comments in the past.
As for associating "religion" with "spirituality" and whatnot, well that's a whole complex subject for another thread. But as a general rule, I do not equate the two. I tend to be suspect of Christiantiy as an institution primarily because it has developed in a cultural ambience (mostly European) hand in hand with the scientific revolution and thus technology (the fruits of the scientific revolution). The two forces became polarized and were thought of as in many ways mutually exclusive for centuries. And once again, Christiantiy is very patriarchally oriented -- the more fundamentalist one is, the more one must look to external sources for spiritual guidance. The external guidance is the very same institution that was used for centuries by the feudalist -- turn -- state forces to further their agendas.
On the other hand, I agree that there are interpretations of Christianity -- and practically every other religion -- that are not warped and contaminated in this way, and there are also individuals who affiliate with no particular religion but similarly seek the higher mind and the more spiritual life.
The spiritual revoluation I am talking about has little to do with the existing religious institutions. It is much more of an individualistic venture; and appears to be happening more in spite of religious institutions than because of them. In fact, upon a closer look at what I am saying given current world problems, existing religious institutions are probably the strongest bastion of the "Old Guard" thinking I was talking about that is actively resisting our attempts to rise to the next level in human evolution.
I find my own thinking leading to this issue: the wise use of technology. It seems that much of our technological activity has occurred in a spiritual vacuum and indeed led us to treadmill behavior, that both you and I have described using different terms. Same old thing over and over is what you see. At the national level technology is the primary tool used to perpetuate the existing nation-state system through war, presumably through its use by nations for "self-protection." As we have seen in the last fifty years, as our technology advances, its use in such a way can become increasingly insane and counterproductive. We might just find ourselves "protecting ourselves" into oblivion.
But we have also changed the face of the globe with technology in positive ways. That I am posting this to you right now, and the people all over the world can tap in and see it any time, is probably the best example of that change. This manifestation of our technology could easliy be seen as one of the most powerful tools to bring people together through the various veils of alleged difference and separating forces, to collectively identify with one another as you suggest (and I agree) is essential for the spriitual revoluation to advance. On the other hand, humans as a group must take on collective responsibility concerning the technology and national division issues, lest we let those issues lead us by our noses to our own end.
I see a critial race going on between these two possibilities. How about you?
|
|
Consis
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Of Ruby
|
|
posted March 15, 2004 08:19 PM |
|
|
Wha...? I Didn't Say That!
Quote:
Peacemaker can deal with the incorrect "eradicated" comment better than I.
I didn't say thatUh.....Khaelo said that
Quote:
Consis, for a fairly complete answer to whether "I" have been eradicated or not as evidence that "we" have been eradicated or not, you might refer to my post on March 9, 2003 on p. 6 of Take Back the Foos -- US Reprogramming in Tavern of the Rising Sun forum. (You can't miss it; it has a qp.) I would also suggest reading the book "American Holocaust" by David Stannard.
Peacemaker I was pointing out this zealout was insinuating that you, as a native american indian, had been eradicated. i.e. you didn't exist. He was generalizing that they don't exist anymore because we whitemen killed them all off.
____________
Roses Are RedAnd So Am I
|
|
Khaelo
Honorable
Supreme Hero
Underwater
|
|
posted March 15, 2004 11:51 PM |
|
Edited By: Khaelo on 15 Mar 2004
|
Quote:
First, do you not find people crossing over the lines, reaching out to people of difference to an extent we have never seen in human history? Is it not actually the national affiliations themselves where the tension arises, not so much between human beings? I believe that individuals of difference are changing and moving toward tolerance, but it is the continuing old thinking about group rivalries and inequities and national identities that is the lingering source of divisiveness.
Are people now actively seeking multicultural exposure more than people of previous generations did? I don't see that. The improvements in communication technology bring the exposure, and most people accept it passively. Those who are inclined to reach out to others have greater opportunity. However, if humanity were actually improving in its ability to expand horizons, I think we would see a greater percentage of the population (compared to past generations) going to the extra effort of connection. That's not been my impression. As you point out, though, it's a matter of experience. Mine is admittedly limited.
Looking at it from history: If the technology vanished, (IMO) future gerneratons would gradually return to the highly localized view of the world that past generations held. For most, that would be sufficient. For those who strive to learn, the quest of discovery would be harder. That is, more or less, what happened to European civilization following the fall of the Roman Empire and the loss of safe travel which had previously created cosmopolitan communities. The trade networks, the common language, the common currency, the ability to travel -- all of this helped people from Italy, Gaul, Iberia, North Africa, Syria, Greece, etc. connect and co-operate with one another. All of this decayed with the Empire's loss of power. The human capacity for connecting with different people had not changed; it was merely the enviroment that changed. That is how I see the current era of jet travel and Internet access.
Quote:
The spiritual revoluation I am talking about has little to do with the existing religious institutions. It is much more of an individualistic venture; and appears to be happening more in spite of religious institutions than because of them. In fact, upon a closer look at what I am saying given current world problems, existing religious institutions are probably the strongest bastion of the "Old Guard" thinking I was talking about that is actively resisting our attempts to rise to the next level in human evolution.
First, your insights on Native American warfare are very informative. Thanks; I didn't know that stuff.
Second, I think you've hit on a critical connection between religion and technology. Both are social constructs that can either empower the status quo or enable motivated individuals to bring about change. [Edit: continued.] I also agree that spirituality is more individual. It's something that people must work on themselves. However, most people just aren't inclined to go to the effort of exploring spirituality. They take what religion offers them. And, as you point out, religion is often an important piece of keeping a given society separate from others. Add to that the fact that I see collective responsibility as something that usually has to be imposed rather than voluntarily adopted, and the hope for spiritual awakening seems bleak (for me).
____________
Cleverly
disguised as a responsible adult
|
|
Svarog
Honorable
Supreme Hero
statue-loving necrophiliac
|
|
posted March 16, 2004 02:29 AM |
|
|
First, let me stay impressed by the “modest” advancement you 2 made to this thread for a while.
* stays impressed … 5, 4, 3, 2, 1… *
Ok, enough stunning. It might not be really my field of discussion now, cause I don’t really love writing long posts and I’m not in par with your highly stylish level of expressing, but I’ll give it a shot. (I’m not a native speaker, ya know. )
Correct me if I’m wrong, but I notice that Khaelo has a somewhat cyclical view of the course of history. It might have something to do with her Asian origin (or am I wrong again?), because the Eastern religions, as well as pagan of the past held this view.
The three major monotheistic religions of today have a linear view of the course of history, which is an idea I and Peacemaker share, but not formed on religious grounds, that’s for sure.
Anyway, why is this important? Basically it’s progress vs. consistency, change vs. cycles, known vs. unknown etc. Is this the reason why some of you don’t believe in technological progress? I don’t know. You tell me.
Quote:
But the outright wiping out an entire other nation to take away their land or control their government was pretty much unheard of.
Now, that’s the problem I see here. It’s not technology by itself, it’s the way it is used. And that’s also something dependent of spiritual development in an era. Sometimes technology dictates spiritual development, sometimes it’s the other way around.
Anyway, the catch is not to allow it to be abused. Should we stop researching genetics, because of the threat from human cloning, even though we know it can save millions? Errrr, no. And abuses of technology for atrocities have always been around. Ancient Egyptian slaves, Spanish conquistadors, Nazis…
Criticizing technology is like saying you shouldn’t cross the street, because you might be run over by a car. But then, you’ll never know what’s on the other side of the road. I guess the best solution is to cross the street, but to watch yourself from cars.
As for Peacemaker, connecting technology and individual spiritual happiness, I do think you can grasp both of them. Maybe you are right about bringing “stuffs” in our lives makes us unhappy, but I don’t want to (can’t) believe that the path of happiness leads backwards.
Quote:
The spiritual revoluation I am talking about has little to do with the existing religious institutions. It is much more of an individualistic venture; and appears to be happening more in spite of religious institutions than because of them.
Perhaps I wasn’t clear enough up there. But in these lines you explained it better, than I ever could. And I didn’t even had to ask for it. Thanx..
The religious dimension of spiritual development is the one I was talking about, when I mentioned it is dictated by technology. While the individual sphere of “spiritual revelation” is the one I think is not connected with technology, and in fact, mustn’t be if we ever want to achieve true happiness in life. Therefore I agree completely about the often negative influence conventional religion has over our lives. And yes, I too think, it’s the last Bastion before the new age.
But we mustn’t forget that this is/will be a turbulent age of the potential revolution Peacemaker is talking about. After all, there are still full half of the people in the world, struggling for survival and some food in order to live till the next morning. We, sitting in front of our computers and getting involved in “useless” philosophical debates, are only the minority in this cruel world.
Thus, is there the danger of happiness to only a fraction of humanity and misery for the rest of it? I don’t want that kind of happiness!
____________
The meek shall inherit the earth, but NOT its mineral rights.
|
| |
|
|
