Sunday, April 29, 2007
#14
When I read the beginning of Ecology of Eden it was brought to my attention that it is not just humans who destroy nature. Yes, because of technology we have created ways to greater destroy the environment, but we are not the only species whose choices impact the world. We kill animals and plants in order to eat, but that is the way of life for all species. We destroy the environment in order to create our habitats (homes) and so do other animals. This isn’t a way of rationalizing and saying it is ok to destroy the environment it was just something I noticed while hiking one day and I saw where deer had formed a home and destroyed a lot of plant life in the process.
#13
Should we separate ourselves from wilderness in order to preserve it? Shepard talked a lot about ideas to separate ourselves from the wilderness because in dwelling in it we change it. But are we not apart of the wilderness ourselves? By excluding ourselves are we not altering it? Throughout this class the question that has come to my mind is what is a healthy balance or is there a healthy balance in the way we live with the wilderness, and I have not yet found that balance but I continually read passages and come to the conclusion that we can NOT separate ourselves from the wild because we would lose touch with something we are a part of.
#12
The Dead by the Side of the Road.
This poem by Gary Snyder shows the loss of sacred not only in space but in the animals that live in a space. He paints a picture of animals that have been desecrated and now are lying dead on the side of an interstate. This made me think about the fact that a landscape is just a place if without what inhabits it and therefore a place isn’t sacred of its own accord, it is also sacred because of what it contains. We could see this in a video we watched earlier where this bird began to build its home as a part of its mating ritual. This bird makes up a part of the environment and its actions created something that was found sacred to the tribe that lived in this land.
This poem by Gary Snyder shows the loss of sacred not only in space but in the animals that live in a space. He paints a picture of animals that have been desecrated and now are lying dead on the side of an interstate. This made me think about the fact that a landscape is just a place if without what inhabits it and therefore a place isn’t sacred of its own accord, it is also sacred because of what it contains. We could see this in a video we watched earlier where this bird began to build its home as a part of its mating ritual. This bird makes up a part of the environment and its actions created something that was found sacred to the tribe that lived in this land.
#11
In philosophy I learned that some believe that without language and communication there is no way for people to experience the same world. Do we all perceive the world completely different? Is there a physical world? I would say yes there is a physical world but we all just experience it differently (as I said in an earlier blog about Kant). The idea we discussed about “storied place” is very relevant to this argument. We all go through this physical world experiencing the same materials yet our minds create different experiences induced by nature.
#10
Have humans forgotten how to interact with nature? Has technology seeped too deeply into our lives that we can no longer fully experience nature, or does thes separation from nature only make us have a greater appreciation for it. To me it seems that when I am in a place for an extended period of time I begin to take it for granted and then when I leave a situation I realize that I need it back. However, I find when I am in nature these days I can not appreciate it as greatly as when I was a child and around it more. When I am in the mountains these days I firstly can’t fully be in it. There is something in the back of my head that is reminding me of all the technology at home that comprises my daily life that I don’t have right now and I cant realize how to deal with not having it.
#9
Early in the semester we were told that “names convey power over things.” I didn’t fully understand this until in Wilderness as Sacred Place we watched a movie in which a man was lost in a land where he knew no one and no one spoke his language. In this time the man began to go crazy because he was in chaos. Eventually however, he broke down and began to weep and then began to give names to the things he recognized from back in his homeland of France. Afterwards the man was relieved at the fact that he could recognize things and he could feel power over anything, even if the only power he had was that of knowledge.
#8
“poets use language to give order”
The importance of language in our culture is very necessary, without it there would be confusion because we could not order our universe. We would live outside of a cosmos and in pure chaos. Language allows us to define and understand. Without language we wouldn’t even be able to define ourselves. Language also bridges the gaps between our storied places, it allows us to makes sense not only of ourselves and our world but others worlds also.
The importance of language in our culture is very necessary, without it there would be confusion because we could not order our universe. We would live outside of a cosmos and in pure chaos. Language allows us to define and understand. Without language we wouldn’t even be able to define ourselves. Language also bridges the gaps between our storied places, it allows us to makes sense not only of ourselves and our world but others worlds also.
#7
“Give yourself up to a particular landscape.”
What does this look like? We watched a video early in the semester about a tribe of natives who fully experienced the land they lived in. Their activities and rituals fully revolved around the animals in it and the environment. They painted using all natural materials, they worshipped in sacred places, they ate of the land and they slept in the slept in the land. They used every part of the land and respected it and felt an attachment to it. The sad thing is they were dieing out and had no way to preserve these traditions because their children did not see the point in avoiding technology and truly dwelling in the land.
What does this look like? We watched a video early in the semester about a tribe of natives who fully experienced the land they lived in. Their activities and rituals fully revolved around the animals in it and the environment. They painted using all natural materials, they worshipped in sacred places, they ate of the land and they slept in the slept in the land. They used every part of the land and respected it and felt an attachment to it. The sad thing is they were dieing out and had no way to preserve these traditions because their children did not see the point in avoiding technology and truly dwelling in the land.
#5
I really enjoyed talking about the gardens that we create in order to replace the lack of nature we have in our towers. As a little girl I always had a garden and it was an easy way for me to escape from the mountain and be content without technology. However now the garden is not as fulfilling, I need more than a couple pretty flowers to keep me away from technology. I can of course leave for a weekend and go out into the mountains but eventually something will come up and I will come back to the tower only to crave the mountain. The only thing I can figure out to find contentment is that we need o find a way to live that includes the mountain into our daily lives, otherwise we are missing out.
#4
Technology has become our habitus. We no longer learn to dwell in nature we create our own islands away from nature. In Ecology of Eden we called this our tower away from the mountain. The problem with this is that we have depleted nature from where we live. Instead of finding some sort of balance we build up cities and push the mountain away. The problem that I see with this is, will we ever stop building our towers? If we don’t then we will continue to push the mountain away until there is no where to put it. If we do decide we have to stop, where and when do we stop?
#3
“to dwell in a place creatively over an extended period of time is to conduct oneself out of custom or habit.”
When we watched the video of images in class a couple weeks ago I thought back to this quote. There was a section where we watched the rhythms of the city and the patterns where cars were moving through the city and workers were performing their daily tasks. Is it good that we get into these patterns and where is the creativity in this? Maybe the creativity comes after the daily grind or maybe people find ways to change little parts of their life. DO we need pattern in order to enjoy spontaneity?
When we watched the video of images in class a couple weeks ago I thought back to this quote. There was a section where we watched the rhythms of the city and the patterns where cars were moving through the city and workers were performing their daily tasks. Is it good that we get into these patterns and where is the creativity in this? Maybe the creativity comes after the daily grind or maybe people find ways to change little parts of their life. DO we need pattern in order to enjoy spontaneity?
kant
In philosophy this year we studied Kant, who said that there is a world of objects, which is the real world, and then there is a world of phenomena, that is how we perceive the world after our mind processes what we see and experience. In our first class we discussed the idea that the world is different than what we ideally think. I just found it interesting to find that we had been discussing these ideas at the beginning of the year and later I had found that the philosopher who wanted to bridge the gap between empiricism and rationalism held these same views.
Saturday, April 28, 2007
necessary agnosia for meeting God. michelle slosser
“If we cannot know God's essence, we can stand in God's place --- on the high mountain, in the lonely desert, at the point where terror gives way to wonder. Only here do we enter the abandonment, the agnosia, that is finally necessary for meeting God.” Belden C. Lane. Solace of Fierce Landscapes
This is not the first time I have heard this basic message. Abandon yourself to God, abandon your life to Jesus, take up your cross and follow him, lose your life to find your life. I have never had an easy time understanding it, but I have always found those phrases attractive. Wikipedia says that agnosia is “a loss of ability to recognize objects, persons, sounds, shapes, or smells while the specific sense is not defective nor is there any significant memory loss.” Perception is working, but recognition is not. This is a medical condition that usually follows brain surgery or neurological illness. So why would this lack of recognition be necessary for meeting God? Maybe Lane meant something else that Wikipedia does not cover, but if that is what he meant, I am again having a hard time really understanding these ideas. My best shot at explaining this is that we need to abandon what we think we recognize, and accept the “terror” of not knowing what/who God is or what is really going on in life. It is easier to meet God at his high dangerous mountain, because he is huge and terrifying. It is easier to meet God in the lonely desert because our tiny simple thoughts are lonely in the significance and depth of God and his plan that we cannot fathom. I don’t know, maybe I am stabbing the dark here, but I would be pretty happy if I am anywhere close to being right about the meaning of agnosia abandonment to meet God.
This is not the first time I have heard this basic message. Abandon yourself to God, abandon your life to Jesus, take up your cross and follow him, lose your life to find your life. I have never had an easy time understanding it, but I have always found those phrases attractive. Wikipedia says that agnosia is “a loss of ability to recognize objects, persons, sounds, shapes, or smells while the specific sense is not defective nor is there any significant memory loss.” Perception is working, but recognition is not. This is a medical condition that usually follows brain surgery or neurological illness. So why would this lack of recognition be necessary for meeting God? Maybe Lane meant something else that Wikipedia does not cover, but if that is what he meant, I am again having a hard time really understanding these ideas. My best shot at explaining this is that we need to abandon what we think we recognize, and accept the “terror” of not knowing what/who God is or what is really going on in life. It is easier to meet God at his high dangerous mountain, because he is huge and terrifying. It is easier to meet God in the lonely desert because our tiny simple thoughts are lonely in the significance and depth of God and his plan that we cannot fathom. I don’t know, maybe I am stabbing the dark here, but I would be pretty happy if I am anywhere close to being right about the meaning of agnosia abandonment to meet God.
importance of stories. michelle slosser
I read Frederick Buechner’s The Magnificent Defeat a few times this semester, since it is only 144 pages long and packed full of great thoughts. Some chapters I liked better than others, a few even made my eyes well up with joy and awe, but some I just half read, not connecting to their meaning, since I am selfish and didn’t get any strong emotion from reading them. Then one day in class, when we were discussing sacred place as storied place, I recollected that in one of those “boring” chapters, Buechner wrote about stories and why they were so important to people. The first reason was that people are very curious, and very insistently want to know what will happen next. We will even read or watch stories over and over again, just for the fulfillment of seeing what happens, even if we already know. His second reason is just as insightful, saying that when authors put people and events into a story, they are given meaning, and a storyteller’s claim is that life has meaning. Buechner explains further by saying that stories mean a lot to people because they suggest that life’s actions “are leading us not just anywhere but somewhere.” If there is meaning in a character’s life, then there is meaning in our lives. And a story may just give us a clue to what our life’s meaning is. So is this what makes sacred place storied place? Because if it is storied, then is it full of meaning? And maybe is we stand in this storied place long enough, then we will find meaning. Or at least we will feel that there is meaning. I think many people long to just feel meaning, and they find it in heartbreakingly sad movies, or joining a “Save Darfur” facebook group, even though they will never do anything past that to save Darfur. I am not rebuking these actions, I am merely speculating on why people do things of that sort.
I don’t know why this chapter did not fascinate me until now, probably because I didn’t bother trying to understand how it related to me.
I don’t know why this chapter did not fascinate me until now, probably because I didn’t bother trying to understand how it related to me.
Alisha Richardson- Organic Foods
Apprehensive about eating that 10th generation genetically altered corn on the cob? Apparently, a lot of people are. Fear of human meddling and dangerous pesticides led to a huge boom in organic food production in the new millennium. Now organic food products can be found at practically every grocery store. Unforunately, raising crops without pesticides is not the most effiecent way, and this leads to the elevated prices of organic goods. Organics-only eaters make the more pricey purchase in the name of quality and peace of mind. Some people feel uncomfortable eating genetically enhanced or altered foods. Genetic engineers may see crop plants and livestock as property of humans verses relatives of wild things. It is feared that if plants are altered to protect against pests, the pests will eventually develop a resistance to the resistance, spawning a new generation of problems.
This process reminds me of the debate surrounding hand-sanitizer. By exposing germs to hand sanitizer, some conspiracy theorists propose that the germs will slowly become immune and eventually bacteria will enslave mankind. This seems very unlikely to me, at least during this lifetime. When bacteria become immune to bleach, then I'll be worried.
This process reminds me of the debate surrounding hand-sanitizer. By exposing germs to hand sanitizer, some conspiracy theorists propose that the germs will slowly become immune and eventually bacteria will enslave mankind. This seems very unlikely to me, at least during this lifetime. When bacteria become immune to bleach, then I'll be worried.
Alisha Richardson- Genetic Engineering
I still remember the day I opened my Scholastic News magazine in the third grade and saw a picture of a glowing bunny rabbit. The rabbit had been given the firefly gene for florescence, and it looked like something out of a cartoon. Our teacher introduced us to the concept of genetic engineering. We learned it was possible to take the trait of one living thing, and introduce it to a whole different species. Genetic engineering sounded like magic, and the possibilities seemed endless.
Nowadays, the process doesn't seem quite as glittery. I think humans may be getting in a little too deep with the trait swapping game.
How can we know if swapping frost-fighting skills between the genetic make-ups of fish and tomatoes is really a good idea? How much control is too much?
Alisha Richardson- The Wild Garden
"In its purest forms, the wild garden is well-suited to people whose wants are modest, whose tools are simple, and who are thinly scattered across the face of the Mountain. Most of us do not fit that description. The wild garden takes us closer to Eden than we can wisely go." Eisenberg 318.
When I heard this passage during presentations, it hit home. The message is simple: altering the earth has consequences that we can't foresee.
I remember as a little girl running around my grandparents' land in Bluewell, WV. My grandmother loved to garden, and her yard was always bursting with fresh blooms and bright colors. One side of the property was a freshly manicured lawn, but the other half was mostly woods. Through the forest, the land dropped off steeply. At the bottom of the incline was the neighbor's property, Claude's Pond. The pond was man-made, but it provided the locals with a great fishing spot, and helped support the wildlife of the forest.
These alterations seem harmless at surface level, but it is impossible for us to know the extent of our choices' effects on nature. Whether changing landscapes in big or small ways or introducing foreign flora and fauna, a ripple effect is felt throughout the local ecosystem.
When I heard this passage during presentations, it hit home. The message is simple: altering the earth has consequences that we can't foresee.
I remember as a little girl running around my grandparents' land in Bluewell, WV. My grandmother loved to garden, and her yard was always bursting with fresh blooms and bright colors. One side of the property was a freshly manicured lawn, but the other half was mostly woods. Through the forest, the land dropped off steeply. At the bottom of the incline was the neighbor's property, Claude's Pond. The pond was man-made, but it provided the locals with a great fishing spot, and helped support the wildlife of the forest.
These alterations seem harmless at surface level, but it is impossible for us to know the extent of our choices' effects on nature. Whether changing landscapes in big or small ways or introducing foreign flora and fauna, a ripple effect is felt throughout the local ecosystem.
Alisha Richardson- Bees
When I came to class at the beginning of the semester and saw a beehive sitting n the stage, I knew I'd made a good course selection. The intricate structure of a beehive is a fascinating phenomena of nature, but the nasty stings which accompany a swarm make it difficult to get too close and personal. This hive, with its amazing aroma of rotting apples and aging honeycomb, was a rare treat for sure.
As a kid, most of my experiences with bees and their hives were accidental and semi-painful. Numerous times I recall my friends and family members stumbling upon a hive of winged stingers who were not pleased at our intrusions. Running away from angry bees is an experience that nearly everyone has at some point. It's nice to be able to examine a hive and not get stung.
The movie we watched on bees was very eye opening. Bees can communicate with special buzz dancing! This is incredible. The scientist in the film was able to track the bees by tagging them with distinguishable paint marks. This is indeed a clever system. Then he was able to monitor the dances of the bees who knew the location of the food sources. The bees did their dance in a certain direction, at a certain speed, and the bees who saw the dance were able to locate the food source. All in all, this is amazing! No one ever told me that bees communicated through buzz dancing, so the film opened a whole new realm of possibilities. If bees are capable of giving each other directions, what other detailed messages can animals communicate with one another? If we can interpret the secret dance of bees, is it something we could replicate? What other forms of animal communication are accessable to the human world?
As a kid, most of my experiences with bees and their hives were accidental and semi-painful. Numerous times I recall my friends and family members stumbling upon a hive of winged stingers who were not pleased at our intrusions. Running away from angry bees is an experience that nearly everyone has at some point. It's nice to be able to examine a hive and not get stung.
The movie we watched on bees was very eye opening. Bees can communicate with special buzz dancing! This is incredible. The scientist in the film was able to track the bees by tagging them with distinguishable paint marks. This is indeed a clever system. Then he was able to monitor the dances of the bees who knew the location of the food sources. The bees did their dance in a certain direction, at a certain speed, and the bees who saw the dance were able to locate the food source. All in all, this is amazing! No one ever told me that bees communicated through buzz dancing, so the film opened a whole new realm of possibilities. If bees are capable of giving each other directions, what other detailed messages can animals communicate with one another? If we can interpret the secret dance of bees, is it something we could replicate? What other forms of animal communication are accessable to the human world?
Alisha Richardson- George's Marvelous Medicine
Roald Dahl's George's Marvelous Medicine is a classic children's story. George becomes frustrated with his grouchy grandma and creates a home-made medicinal concoction in hopes of cheering her up. George manages to create a magical grow potion which makes his grandma house-sized. Seeing the large grandma, George's farmer father immediately wants some of the potion for his livestock, but sadly George cannot recreate the recipe.
This story reflects the human desire for a magic grow potion, the most obvious human quick-fix for world hunger. Though Dahl's story is entertainingly wacky and highly implausible, the end means are not so crazy. Science is trying to create what George stumbled upon accidentally: some heavy duty miracle-grow. The goal of genetic engeneering is to create heartier crops and larger harvests in hopes of making goods more bountiful, less expensive, and more avaliable. Some people fear genetic engieneering will go too far, and this has resulted in a back-to-basics sort of movement.
Friday, April 27, 2007
Alisha Richardson- Gaia
Eisenberg's Gaia hypothesis on page 145, "claims that the biosphere as a whole is a self-regulating system. How much of this is science and how much myth? Is Gaia an indulgent mother who will care for us no matter how badly we behave, or a jealous goddess who will strike us down in our pride?"
Hmm... an auto-pilot system which continues to function despite the amount of damage it receives? Sounds a little too good to be true. It's obvious there are limits to how much we can take from the earth. A couple crossing-the-line situations pop into mind: Chernobyl, oil spills, animal extinction. There's only so much rainforest left for us to destroy. 'Nonrenewable resource' is a self-explanatory label. There are some actions which can't be undone.
One thing is certain, ecological problems aren't going to just go away or get better by being ignored. We all have to work together to ensure a healthy, happy Gaia. We have to be planeteers, because saving our planet is the thing to do.
Hmm... an auto-pilot system which continues to function despite the amount of damage it receives? Sounds a little too good to be true. It's obvious there are limits to how much we can take from the earth. A couple crossing-the-line situations pop into mind: Chernobyl, oil spills, animal extinction. There's only so much rainforest left for us to destroy. 'Nonrenewable resource' is a self-explanatory label. There are some actions which can't be undone.
One thing is certain, ecological problems aren't going to just go away or get better by being ignored. We all have to work together to ensure a healthy, happy Gaia. We have to be planeteers, because saving our planet is the thing to do.
Alisha Richardson- Changing Nature
Is it acceptable to change nature?
How far is too far?
Kern County, CA, 1926- "Having made their world safe for livestock by diligently slaughtering every skunk, fox, badger, weasel, snake, owl, hawk, and coyote in sight, the farmers of Kern County found themselves confronted with an army of 100 million mice-- the greatest rodent infestation in history." Eisenberg, 102.
Often, when we try too hard to control nature, it easily backfires.
Another example of humans taking control and making mistakes is told in the childern's book The Old Ladies Who Liked Cats. In this story, the townspeople tire of the old ladies' cats and force the ladies to get rid of them. This disturbs the ecological balance of the town. Soon there are too many mice and grasshoppers, and the plants suffer. This leaves less grazing vegetation for the cows, so they produce milk that's not up to par. In turn, the sailors can't get energy from the crappy milk, and everyone suffers until the cats return while the old ladies say we told you so. All in all a great story.
What's really sad about humans taking control is that sometimes the damage we cause is irreparable. Animals become extinct all the time, and then all that remains of them is pictures. This one's for the dingoes and the kiwi birds. You're sorely missed.
How far is too far?
Kern County, CA, 1926- "Having made their world safe for livestock by diligently slaughtering every skunk, fox, badger, weasel, snake, owl, hawk, and coyote in sight, the farmers of Kern County found themselves confronted with an army of 100 million mice-- the greatest rodent infestation in history." Eisenberg, 102.
Often, when we try too hard to control nature, it easily backfires.
Another example of humans taking control and making mistakes is told in the childern's book The Old Ladies Who Liked Cats. In this story, the townspeople tire of the old ladies' cats and force the ladies to get rid of them. This disturbs the ecological balance of the town. Soon there are too many mice and grasshoppers, and the plants suffer. This leaves less grazing vegetation for the cows, so they produce milk that's not up to par. In turn, the sailors can't get energy from the crappy milk, and everyone suffers until the cats return while the old ladies say we told you so. All in all a great story.
What's really sad about humans taking control is that sometimes the damage we cause is irreparable. Animals become extinct all the time, and then all that remains of them is pictures. This one's for the dingoes and the kiwi birds. You're sorely missed.
Alisha Richardson- Limits on Growth and a Baby Turtle
Eisenberg discusses limits on growth in the Earth Jazz section, page 362.
"The concept of limits on growth is something that unites fetishers but divides managers." How much control is too much control? Humans have found ways to escape the limitations on growth by adding variables. We can fit more people in smaller spaces because modern architecture has allowed us to build incredible skyscrapers. Modern science helps us to live longer, healthier lives. But on the flipside, natural disasters, power outages, and the outbreak of disease can have dramatically worse effects if people are living in closer quarters. Now the exponential increase in human population seems like it's headed for an inevitable leveling off. Unfortunately, as we continue to multiply, cheating the system and finding ways around mother nature's boundaries, the environment around us is feeling the consequences.
In an effort to feed and house earth's booming population, a lot of land is cleared. Eisenberg says that, "[i]f there is one thing ecologists have learned in recent years, it is that wilderness cannot be kept in boxes; and the smaller the boxes, the more frantically they must be managed to retain even a semblance of life. ...Wildlife biologists now speak of wilderness areas as 'megazoos' in which endangered species are tagged, tracked, and provided with dating services." 362
As an extreme and literal interpretation of this quote, allow me to introduce Bert.
Bert is my pet turtle. I found him a week ago on the beach, and he is probably less than one month old. Bert is messy because he likes the water in his terrarium to be everywhere. I have to clean his tank daily, or else it gets stinky, or Bert risks a fungal infection from clammy, wet, vegatation. I don't plan to keep Bert once he reaches an adolecent size; I'll take him back to the shore of his origin. But in the meantime, his box of wilderness is exceptionally small, and I work frantically to make his stay pleasant.
"The concept of limits on growth is something that unites fetishers but divides managers." How much control is too much control? Humans have found ways to escape the limitations on growth by adding variables. We can fit more people in smaller spaces because modern architecture has allowed us to build incredible skyscrapers. Modern science helps us to live longer, healthier lives. But on the flipside, natural disasters, power outages, and the outbreak of disease can have dramatically worse effects if people are living in closer quarters. Now the exponential increase in human population seems like it's headed for an inevitable leveling off. Unfortunately, as we continue to multiply, cheating the system and finding ways around mother nature's boundaries, the environment around us is feeling the consequences.
In an effort to feed and house earth's booming population, a lot of land is cleared. Eisenberg says that, "[i]f there is one thing ecologists have learned in recent years, it is that wilderness cannot be kept in boxes; and the smaller the boxes, the more frantically they must be managed to retain even a semblance of life. ...Wildlife biologists now speak of wilderness areas as 'megazoos' in which endangered species are tagged, tracked, and provided with dating services." 362
As an extreme and literal interpretation of this quote, allow me to introduce Bert.
Bert is my pet turtle. I found him a week ago on the beach, and he is probably less than one month old. Bert is messy because he likes the water in his terrarium to be everywhere. I have to clean his tank daily, or else it gets stinky, or Bert risks a fungal infection from clammy, wet, vegatation. I don't plan to keep Bert once he reaches an adolecent size; I'll take him back to the shore of his origin. But in the meantime, his box of wilderness is exceptionally small, and I work frantically to make his stay pleasant.
Alisha Richardson- Keat's Pastoral Beauty
I'd like to preface this blog with a little background information. I love this poem. If I had read every poem ever, this would probably still be my favorite. I'm not claiming to be an expert, but let's just say I've done a little explicating.
To bounce off the Coleridge, a little John Keats seemed appropriate. Perhaps Keat's most famous poem, Ode on a Grecian Urn is a literary force to be reckoned with.
When someone quoted Eisenberg during presentations "Pastoral is a dream shattered by shouting in the streets," immediately Keats came to mind.
Keats begins the ode with images of bliss. Words like flowery, sweetly, Arcady, and ecstasy characterize the first stanza. Keats depicts a beautiful scene of lovers who are unable to touch, and yet remain together and ageless in time. The warmth continues throughout the third stanza, with exclamations of happy love, sweet music, and trees which never lose their leaves.
In the fourth stanza however, Keats details the opposite side of the urn with a different tone. The streets of the citadel are empty, and the priest leads a cow to be sacrificed. Keats' final stanza emphasizes the urn's capability to endure time. The urn is bittersweet for Keats because it depicts a world he cannot reach. Keats and his true love, Fanny Brawne, were separated because of his poor health. Keats was forced to move from London to Italy, and he could not see Fanny for fear of spreading his tuberculosis. Although this aspect of his personal life makes the poem mildly tragic, Keats words still manage to depict real beauty. His final two lines, "Beauty is truth, truth beauty,--that is all/ Ye know on earth, and all ye need to know" have given humanity a lot to ponder. Interpretations vary wildly, and experts debate the true meaning because of punctuation discrepancies. One thing is certain: John Keats was an amazingly talented poet, and the scene he describes on the urn is one of true pastoral beauty.
Thou still unravish'd bride of quietness,
Thou foster-child of silence and slow time,
Sylvan historian, who canst thus express
A flowery tale more sweetly than our rhyme:
What leaf-fring'd legend haunts about thy shape
Of deities or mortals, or of both,
In Tempe or the dales of Arcady?
What men or gods are these? What maidens loth?
What mad pursuit? What struggle to escape?
What pipes and timbrels? What wild ecstasy?
Heard melodies are sweet, but those unheard
Are sweeter; therefore, ye soft pipes, play on;
Not to the sensual ear, but, more endear'd,
Pipe to the spirit ditties of no tone:
Fair youth, beneath the trees, thou canst not leave
Thy song, nor ever can those trees be bare;
Bold Lover, never, never canst thou kiss,
Though winning near the goal yet, do not grieve;
She cannot fade, though thou hast not thy bliss,
For ever wilt thou love, and she be fair!
Ah, happy, happy boughs! that cannot shed
Your leaves, nor ever bid the Spring adieu;
And, happy melodist, unwearied,
For ever piping songs for ever new;
More happy love! more happy, happy love!
For ever warm and still to be enjoy'd,
For ever panting, and for ever young;
All breathing human passion far above,
That leaves a heart high-sorrowful and cloy'd,
A burning forehead, and a parching tongue.
Who are these coming to the sacrifice?
To what green altar, O mysterious priest,
Lead'st thou that heifer lowing at the skies,
And all her silken flanks with garlands drest?
What little town by river or sea shore,
Or mountain-built with peaceful citadel,
Is emptied of this folk, this pious morn?
And, little town, thy streets for evermore
Will silent be; and not a soul to tell
Why thou art desolate, can e'er return.
O Attic shape! Fair attitude! with brede
Of marble men and maidens overwrought,
With forest branches and the trodden weed;
Thou, silent form, dost tease us out of thought
As doth eternity: Cold Pastoral!
When old age shall this generation waste,
Thou shalt remain, in midst of other woe
Than ours, a friend to man, to whom thou say'st,
"Beauty is truth, truth beauty,--that is all
Ye know on earth, and all ye need to know."
To bounce off the Coleridge, a little John Keats seemed appropriate. Perhaps Keat's most famous poem, Ode on a Grecian Urn is a literary force to be reckoned with.
When someone quoted Eisenberg during presentations "Pastoral is a dream shattered by shouting in the streets," immediately Keats came to mind.
Keats begins the ode with images of bliss. Words like flowery, sweetly, Arcady, and ecstasy characterize the first stanza. Keats depicts a beautiful scene of lovers who are unable to touch, and yet remain together and ageless in time. The warmth continues throughout the third stanza, with exclamations of happy love, sweet music, and trees which never lose their leaves.
In the fourth stanza however, Keats details the opposite side of the urn with a different tone. The streets of the citadel are empty, and the priest leads a cow to be sacrificed. Keats' final stanza emphasizes the urn's capability to endure time. The urn is bittersweet for Keats because it depicts a world he cannot reach. Keats and his true love, Fanny Brawne, were separated because of his poor health. Keats was forced to move from London to Italy, and he could not see Fanny for fear of spreading his tuberculosis. Although this aspect of his personal life makes the poem mildly tragic, Keats words still manage to depict real beauty. His final two lines, "Beauty is truth, truth beauty,--that is all/ Ye know on earth, and all ye need to know" have given humanity a lot to ponder. Interpretations vary wildly, and experts debate the true meaning because of punctuation discrepancies. One thing is certain: John Keats was an amazingly talented poet, and the scene he describes on the urn is one of true pastoral beauty.
Thou still unravish'd bride of quietness,
Thou foster-child of silence and slow time,
Sylvan historian, who canst thus express
A flowery tale more sweetly than our rhyme:
What leaf-fring'd legend haunts about thy shape
Of deities or mortals, or of both,
In Tempe or the dales of Arcady?
What men or gods are these? What maidens loth?
What mad pursuit? What struggle to escape?
What pipes and timbrels? What wild ecstasy?
Heard melodies are sweet, but those unheard
Are sweeter; therefore, ye soft pipes, play on;
Not to the sensual ear, but, more endear'd,
Pipe to the spirit ditties of no tone:
Fair youth, beneath the trees, thou canst not leave
Thy song, nor ever can those trees be bare;
Bold Lover, never, never canst thou kiss,
Though winning near the goal yet, do not grieve;
She cannot fade, though thou hast not thy bliss,
For ever wilt thou love, and she be fair!
Ah, happy, happy boughs! that cannot shed
Your leaves, nor ever bid the Spring adieu;
And, happy melodist, unwearied,
For ever piping songs for ever new;
More happy love! more happy, happy love!
For ever warm and still to be enjoy'd,
For ever panting, and for ever young;
All breathing human passion far above,
That leaves a heart high-sorrowful and cloy'd,
A burning forehead, and a parching tongue.
Who are these coming to the sacrifice?
To what green altar, O mysterious priest,
Lead'st thou that heifer lowing at the skies,
And all her silken flanks with garlands drest?
What little town by river or sea shore,
Or mountain-built with peaceful citadel,
Is emptied of this folk, this pious morn?
And, little town, thy streets for evermore
Will silent be; and not a soul to tell
Why thou art desolate, can e'er return.
O Attic shape! Fair attitude! with brede
Of marble men and maidens overwrought,
With forest branches and the trodden weed;
Thou, silent form, dost tease us out of thought
As doth eternity: Cold Pastoral!
When old age shall this generation waste,
Thou shalt remain, in midst of other woe
Than ours, a friend to man, to whom thou say'st,
"Beauty is truth, truth beauty,--that is all
Ye know on earth, and all ye need to know."
Alisha Richardson- Xanadu
In discussing the search for Arcadia, “Xanadu” is often a term used synonymously. Originally, Xanadu (also known as Shengdu) was a beautiful city in Mongolia known for its splendor. The English Romantic poet Samuel Taylor Coleridge wrote the famous poem Kubla Khan based on this luxurious locale, and now the term is used to describe a place of great beauty, opulence, bounty, or other utopian qualities.
In Xanadu did Kubla Khan
A stately pleasure-dome decree:
Where Alph, the sacred river, ran
Through caverns measureless to man
Down to a sunless sea.
So twice five miles of fertile ground
With walls and towers were girdled round :
And there were gardens bright with sinuous rills,
Where blossomed many an incense-bearing tree ;
And here were forests ancient as the hills,
Enfolding sunny spots of greenery.
But oh ! that deep romantic chasm which slanted
Down the green hill athwart a cedarn cover !
A savage place ! as holy and enchanted
As e'er beneath a waning moon was haunted
By woman wailing for her demon-lover !
And from this chasm, with ceaseless turmoil seething,
As if this earth in fast thick pants were breathing,
A mighty fountain[1] momently[2] was forced :
Amid whose swift half-intermitted burst
Huge fragments vaulted like rebounding hail,
Or chaffy grain beneath the thresher's flail :
And 'mid these dancing rocks at once and ever
It flung up momently the sacred river.
Five miles meandering with a mazy motion
Through wood and dale the sacred river ran,
Then reached the caverns measureless to man,
And sank in tumult to a lifeless ocean :
And 'mid this tumult Kubla heard from far
Ancestral voices prophesying war !
The shadow of the dome of pleasure
Floated midway on the waves ;
Where was heard the mingled measure
From the fountain and the caves.
It was a miracle of rare device,
A sunny pleasure-dome with caves of ice !
A damsel with a dulcimer
In a vision once I saw :
It was an Abyssinian maid,
And on her dulcimer she played,
Singing of Mount Abora.
Could I revive within me
Her symphony and song,
To such a deep delight 'twould win me,
That with music loud and long,
I would build that dome in air,
That sunny dome ! those caves of ice !
And all who heard should see them there,
And all should cry, Beware ! Beware !
His flashing eyes, his floating hair !
Weave a circle round him thrice,
And close your eyes with holy dread,
For he on honey-dew hath fed,
And drunk the milk of Paradise.
I hadn't read the poem since 10th grade, so it was very refreshing to become reacquainted, especially in light of our discussion of Arcadia. I think the major irony is that very little remains of this society today. Kublai Khan's summer retreat/palace has not stood the test of time. In this sense, the Xanadu of Coleridge is just as fleeting as the next quixotic paradise. The essence of the city now survives through Coleridge's stanzas.
In Xanadu did Kubla Khan
A stately pleasure-dome decree:
Where Alph, the sacred river, ran
Through caverns measureless to man
Down to a sunless sea.
So twice five miles of fertile ground
With walls and towers were girdled round :
And there were gardens bright with sinuous rills,
Where blossomed many an incense-bearing tree ;
And here were forests ancient as the hills,
Enfolding sunny spots of greenery.
But oh ! that deep romantic chasm which slanted
Down the green hill athwart a cedarn cover !
A savage place ! as holy and enchanted
As e'er beneath a waning moon was haunted
By woman wailing for her demon-lover !
And from this chasm, with ceaseless turmoil seething,
As if this earth in fast thick pants were breathing,
A mighty fountain[1] momently[2] was forced :
Amid whose swift half-intermitted burst
Huge fragments vaulted like rebounding hail,
Or chaffy grain beneath the thresher's flail :
And 'mid these dancing rocks at once and ever
It flung up momently the sacred river.
Five miles meandering with a mazy motion
Through wood and dale the sacred river ran,
Then reached the caverns measureless to man,
And sank in tumult to a lifeless ocean :
And 'mid this tumult Kubla heard from far
Ancestral voices prophesying war !
The shadow of the dome of pleasure
Floated midway on the waves ;
Where was heard the mingled measure
From the fountain and the caves.
It was a miracle of rare device,
A sunny pleasure-dome with caves of ice !
A damsel with a dulcimer
In a vision once I saw :
It was an Abyssinian maid,
And on her dulcimer she played,
Singing of Mount Abora.
Could I revive within me
Her symphony and song,
To such a deep delight 'twould win me,
That with music loud and long,
I would build that dome in air,
That sunny dome ! those caves of ice !
And all who heard should see them there,
And all should cry, Beware ! Beware !
His flashing eyes, his floating hair !
Weave a circle round him thrice,
And close your eyes with holy dread,
For he on honey-dew hath fed,
And drunk the milk of Paradise.
I hadn't read the poem since 10th grade, so it was very refreshing to become reacquainted, especially in light of our discussion of Arcadia. I think the major irony is that very little remains of this society today. Kublai Khan's summer retreat/palace has not stood the test of time. In this sense, the Xanadu of Coleridge is just as fleeting as the next quixotic paradise. The essence of the city now survives through Coleridge's stanzas.
Austin Magruder - Do dogs believe in god?
Whenever I walk into my house, my dog comes running up to me, wagging his tail and begging for attention. I began to wonder, what does my dog think the meaning of life is? To him, at least from my perspective, life is very simple; eat, play, pee on the lawn, and sleep. Every day for his entire life he has basically the same routine, all he wants is attention. I provide him with food, I entertain him, and I let him outside to relieve himself. It is almost as if I am a God to him. So I wonder, do dogs believe that we run the universe, or do they know there is something more? Now obviously since we have not found a way to intelligently communicate what dogs are thinking, we will not be able to answer these questions. Just something I was thinking about.
Austin Magruder - Fred Phelps
The Topeka, Kansas.-based Westboro Baptist Church, which is not affiliated with any national Baptist organization, announced plans to protest at victims’ funerals only hours after 32 people were killed in the worst mass shooting in U.S. history. They also may protest at other events on the Virginia Tech campus. Fred Phelps and his organization protest at many military funerals, and are extremely conservative in their political views to put it mildly. Fred Phelps and the Westboro Baptist Church are protesting these funerals because they believe that God would not allow good christians to die this way. He feels that it is god's wrath on our nation. My question to Phelps is, how would god feel about protesting at funerals? Isn't that simply morally wrong? To make a statement such as those students must have been sinners is ludacris. But he takes it another step further, by going to these funerals where families and friends are mourning over their loss and saying these kids deserved it. This man disgusts me and i would not be surprised at all to see him physically harmed for what he says he wants to do.
Heather Lynn Building up layers
We talked about in class how many of these glaciers that you can see are only so big because they have grown over time. The way they do this is because the ice would melt in the summer and run down the mountain and then in the winter it would snow and freeze on top of that creating new layers every year. The building up of layers reminds me of how much stress people have in their lives, especially us college kids at CNU right now. We are all stressed because we are having to work on papers and other work and then exam week is right afterwards. I dont think it is good that we keep doing this to ourselves. Think of a time when you were really stressed because things kept building up more and more and you just got to the point where you were so stressed out you just couldnt take it anymore. i think this is how the gunman from the VT shootings felt before he killed all of those people. He was mentally ill and thought that everyone was out to get him. He became extremely paranoid and finally just thought i know how to make it go away and then he went and did what he did. Building up layers can be bad because one day it just going to burst.
Heather Lynn Natural Instincts
Another story that we talked about was when a women was attacked by a mountain lion in the woods and he dragged her a little ways only to eat her a little bit and them store her body for later when he would return with another appetite. People found her body in the wood like this before the mountain lion could return back home to finish off the rest of her. Mountain lions have a natural instinct just like any other animal including humans. we have a natural instinct to suvive and to live. Even though what happened to this woman was awful the mountain lion wasnt trying to be mean to this women. He was just trying to survive out in the wilderness and when he saw food walking by his natural instinct told him tp crouch down and then attack her so that he could eat and live.
Jackie Trono - Animism
As Wikipedia defines it,
“animism is a belief system that does not accept the separation of body and soul, of spirit from matter. As such it is based upon the belief that personalized souls are found in animals, plants, and other material objects, governing, to some degree, their existence. It also assumes that this unification of matter and spirit plays a role in daily life” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animism).
I have chosen to write about animism because it is a view I have come to respect, one that I also used to reject. Growing up philosophically, I had encapsulated the world into a materialist framework, repudiating all things ethereal or spiritual. I believed the world to be no more than what exists in the physical realm. Accordingly, I was also a nihilist, believing the world to be utterly meaningless. I was so focused on the meaning behind Sartre’s comment that
“Every existing thing is born without reason, prolongs itself out of weakness, and dies by chance” (Jean-Paul Sartre, Nausea 180).
My thoughts centered on all the misery abound on the Earth, the suffering and tragedy. I had no concern for anyone or anything besides myself. Now, as a result of a personal telepathic experience, an experience that shook the footholds of my materialist views and made it impossible for me to continue believing such exclusionary nonsense, I no longer hold such a depressing worldview. The shocking thing about the telepathic experience was that it happened to me in spite of the fact that I did not believe such a thing was possible. I realize that citing telepathy as the source of my paradigm shift makes me sound sort of cuckoo, but I can’t change the fact that it occurred that way.
Whatever the cause for the change, all I can say is that I am so much happier for it. I feel fuller and I have greater warmth for other people and earthly life in general. The shift has caused me to care about things that I used to think were just more symbols of a dying planet. That destruction of which I speak is clearly the fault of humanity, and I hope that I can help others in eradicating the pessimistic, close-minded, and inaccurate materialist ideology that pervades intellectual society and is at the heart of such irresponsible behavior.
“animism is a belief system that does not accept the separation of body and soul, of spirit from matter. As such it is based upon the belief that personalized souls are found in animals, plants, and other material objects, governing, to some degree, their existence. It also assumes that this unification of matter and spirit plays a role in daily life” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animism).
I have chosen to write about animism because it is a view I have come to respect, one that I also used to reject. Growing up philosophically, I had encapsulated the world into a materialist framework, repudiating all things ethereal or spiritual. I believed the world to be no more than what exists in the physical realm. Accordingly, I was also a nihilist, believing the world to be utterly meaningless. I was so focused on the meaning behind Sartre’s comment that
“Every existing thing is born without reason, prolongs itself out of weakness, and dies by chance” (Jean-Paul Sartre, Nausea 180).
My thoughts centered on all the misery abound on the Earth, the suffering and tragedy. I had no concern for anyone or anything besides myself. Now, as a result of a personal telepathic experience, an experience that shook the footholds of my materialist views and made it impossible for me to continue believing such exclusionary nonsense, I no longer hold such a depressing worldview. The shocking thing about the telepathic experience was that it happened to me in spite of the fact that I did not believe such a thing was possible. I realize that citing telepathy as the source of my paradigm shift makes me sound sort of cuckoo, but I can’t change the fact that it occurred that way.
Whatever the cause for the change, all I can say is that I am so much happier for it. I feel fuller and I have greater warmth for other people and earthly life in general. The shift has caused me to care about things that I used to think were just more symbols of a dying planet. That destruction of which I speak is clearly the fault of humanity, and I hope that I can help others in eradicating the pessimistic, close-minded, and inaccurate materialist ideology that pervades intellectual society and is at the heart of such irresponsible behavior.
Heather Lynn Can you face your fears?
A story that we were told about professor redick was a time when he was walking through the woods and came across a bobcat on the trail that was sitting on toop of a rock. The bobcat was startled but Redicks present and began to run off into the wood. Redick decided to run after the bobcat as if it were his prey because that is what bobcats would normally do to you but instead he was chasing the bob cat. It made me think of all the things i am scared of in my life and would i be able to chase somthing like a bobcat who could rip me apart or would i run in the other direction to make sure he wouldn't eat me. How many other people would run after the bobcat? It doenst have to be a bobcat of course because you dont come across them often but it could be anything that you are scared of; spiders, snakes, dogs, etc. would you get close to them to pet them even though you know they could bite you maybe at anytime or would you walk away from them and continue to live in fear your whole life. Facing your fear i think is a could thing even if you do it small steps. You could live your life knowing you had accomplished something you thought to be impossible.
Jackie Trono - Kahler On Science As Model, Not Reality
Erich Kahler regards science as merely modeling the world, not actually depicting reality in The Nature of the Symbol. Referring to the geometrical figures, diagrams, and models of science, Kahler writes,
“In all these kinds of images the instrumental, mediatorial element predominates; none of them is meant actually to represent reality…. A model, being just a modulus, a measure of the real thing, will never permit us to forget its provisional, hypothetical nature; it can never stand for an established reality” (Erich Kahler, The Nature of the Symbol 60).
I find this passage very interesting as it reflects something about which I have often thought. I have considered the concept of science as a religion. Many scientifically minded people take science as unquestionably representing reality. In my opinion, science merely models the world, which is what Kahler argues as well. Science offers us an excellent means of predicting the events of the world, but we will never know that our models actually correspond to reality.
I also found Kahler’s ideas, expressed in a footnote, about the separation between word and meaning rather stimulating. Kahler comments,
“The word and its meaning are independent things. Here is the word – a complex of sounds and signs; there is what it means. The two are separable; each exists by itself, the word without the thing, the thing without the word. The same thing is designated in different languages by different words…” (Kahler 68).
I find it interesting to reflect on language. It appears to be our only tool in navigating the conceptual world, and yet, it is practically useless in performing a physical activity, such as kicking a soccer ball. I may have learned technique from a coach through his spoken instruction, but the actual implementation of the act referenced by those words is beyond language. Curious, indeed!
“In all these kinds of images the instrumental, mediatorial element predominates; none of them is meant actually to represent reality…. A model, being just a modulus, a measure of the real thing, will never permit us to forget its provisional, hypothetical nature; it can never stand for an established reality” (Erich Kahler, The Nature of the Symbol 60).
I find this passage very interesting as it reflects something about which I have often thought. I have considered the concept of science as a religion. Many scientifically minded people take science as unquestionably representing reality. In my opinion, science merely models the world, which is what Kahler argues as well. Science offers us an excellent means of predicting the events of the world, but we will never know that our models actually correspond to reality.
I also found Kahler’s ideas, expressed in a footnote, about the separation between word and meaning rather stimulating. Kahler comments,
“The word and its meaning are independent things. Here is the word – a complex of sounds and signs; there is what it means. The two are separable; each exists by itself, the word without the thing, the thing without the word. The same thing is designated in different languages by different words…” (Kahler 68).
I find it interesting to reflect on language. It appears to be our only tool in navigating the conceptual world, and yet, it is practically useless in performing a physical activity, such as kicking a soccer ball. I may have learned technique from a coach through his spoken instruction, but the actual implementation of the act referenced by those words is beyond language. Curious, indeed!
Heather Lynn God is powerful
A picture that was shown in one of our classes is described as someone being knocked over. This is because there was a volvanoe near by where the picture was takin and the volcanoe made a loud noise like an explosion causing the person who was having their picture taken to be knocked over. This makes me think of if God created the earth that he must have created this volcanoe and if that is true that he made the volcanoe explode when it did. This to me shows how powerful God can truly be in order to make a volcanoe explode and knock some one who has their feet firmly planted on the ground to be knocked over but just a sound. I mean that was just a little baby thing can you imagine if we as humans had that kind of power what this world would be like especially with the war that we have going on right now with Iraq. How many lives could we destroy with this kind of power. Or how many of them could we save?
Garrett Dalton-Sikhism and Ecology
People acquire their values and beliefs from many different sources. Religion is one of the most common places in which one can find the origins of cultural beliefs. Few religions explicitly express any notions of how the environment is supposed to be treated. Christians, for the most part, accept nature as a part of God's creation just like humanity. However, Christianity portrays humans as superior to nature in all ways. Man is after all created in God's image. Like Christianity, Sikhism explains that God created both humans and nature. Unlike Christianity, Sikhism also explains that all of God's creations are equal in the eyes of God because they are part of God. As such, human beings have the responsibility to live in harmony with nature and to find ways in which to preserve the environment. Unlike many religions, care for the environment is a major tenant in the Sikh faith. Ecology is bound to suffering not only in nature but among humans. By finding solutions to the problems found within humanity, humans can come to understand the problems facing nature.
Jackie Trono - Buber: You, Not It
In I and Thou, Martin Buber identifies the two most basic words in human language, I-It and I-You, and argues that each word carries with it an associated ontology. Those who view the world through the experience of I-It understand everything as objects for use. Those who view the world through the I-You relation encounter the external as a sacred subject.
Buber contrasts the I in the I-It with the I in the I-You. He writes,
“The I of the basic word I-It appears as an ego and becomes conscious of itself as a subject (of experience and use). The I of the basic word I-You appears as a person and becomes conscious of itself as subjectivity (without any dependent genetive). Egos appear by setting themselves apart from other egos. Persons appear by entering into relation to other persons….The purpose of setting oneself apart is to experience and use, and the purpose of that is “living” – which means dying one human life long. The purpose of relation is the relation itself – touching the You” (Martin Buber, I and Thou 112-113).
Elaborating on the distinction between viewing the world as It versus viewing it as You, Buber writes that the I in I-It is a self-absorbed ego, whereas the I in I-You is a conscientious person. This distinction can be applied as ecological perspectives. The ego who views the world as It sees it as mere resource to be exploited. On the other hand, the person who views the world as You bears a respectful relation to his environment, recognizing the relation as symbiotic.
In applying Buber’s ideas to the realm of ecology, I feel that there is a correlation between the two basic words and the two basic civilizations, primal and modern. While modern people view the world as It, primal peoples view the world as You. This interpretation would account for why modern industry has no qualms with destroying the massive forests that support our existence. They see nature as simply It, a thing with only utilitarian value. Conversely, primal people appear to have much greater respect for their surrounding ecosystems and attempt to live in harmony with them, performing sacred rites for the animals they kill and aiming to not waste anything they reap. I agree with Gary Snyder that the modern world has a lot to learn from primal people.
Buber contrasts the I in the I-It with the I in the I-You. He writes,
“The I of the basic word I-It appears as an ego and becomes conscious of itself as a subject (of experience and use). The I of the basic word I-You appears as a person and becomes conscious of itself as subjectivity (without any dependent genetive). Egos appear by setting themselves apart from other egos. Persons appear by entering into relation to other persons….The purpose of setting oneself apart is to experience and use, and the purpose of that is “living” – which means dying one human life long. The purpose of relation is the relation itself – touching the You” (Martin Buber, I and Thou 112-113).
Elaborating on the distinction between viewing the world as It versus viewing it as You, Buber writes that the I in I-It is a self-absorbed ego, whereas the I in I-You is a conscientious person. This distinction can be applied as ecological perspectives. The ego who views the world as It sees it as mere resource to be exploited. On the other hand, the person who views the world as You bears a respectful relation to his environment, recognizing the relation as symbiotic.
In applying Buber’s ideas to the realm of ecology, I feel that there is a correlation between the two basic words and the two basic civilizations, primal and modern. While modern people view the world as It, primal peoples view the world as You. This interpretation would account for why modern industry has no qualms with destroying the massive forests that support our existence. They see nature as simply It, a thing with only utilitarian value. Conversely, primal people appear to have much greater respect for their surrounding ecosystems and attempt to live in harmony with them, performing sacred rites for the animals they kill and aiming to not waste anything they reap. I agree with Gary Snyder that the modern world has a lot to learn from primal people.
Heather Lynn God is their Creator
We watched another movie that wasnt as long as the movie with the Japanese man about a Shaman and his helper and another man who was being held captive on the island with them. He saw them as evil and hated them and wanted to run away from them, so one day he gets mad and runs away. However, they Shaman creates this thing represents the center of the world and he is the controller of it. He outs a stick into the ground and attaches one end of the string to the stick and the other end attached to a lizard. The Shaman then draws a cirlce on the sand in order to create the "center of the universe." Outside of the circle is considered to be the world of chaos and the Shaman wants him to come back into the circle so that he will not have to face that world. The Shaman doesn different things to the lizard which in makes those things happen to the man who escapes as well such as pouring water on the lizard and then the man would fall in water. When the lizard finally runs around the stick a certain amount of times he is stuk at the center of the world which also makes the man show up right back where he started. He then tells the Shaman the concept of yourself is language and what you do. He says this becuase he is trying to figure out who he is and discover why he is where he is. Is this really where he is suppose to be or is he suppose to be somewher else? He then goes on to talk about how God created him the Shaman and the helper and if God created all of them then they must not be so evil as he once thought and maybe there is a reason for him being with the two of them.
Alisha Richardson- Arcadia
Throwing the discussion back to class presentations 2/26/07, we spent some time talking about Arcadia and "real country." Essentially, people are torn between the mountain and the tower because they want both simultaneously. This is tricky. Eden and Walmart can't coincide. As time passes, people insist on more and more modern conveniences, but the farther we stray from nature, the more we ache for the utopia of the garden. For example, although they were stranded on a tropical island, the characters in Gilligan's Island didn't have it all bad. The professor was generally able to manufacture any sort of device or appliance, as long as the construction of such item didn't lead to a rescue. The women were roughing it, but they were blemish-free and fashionable in the process.
Our society continues to grow larger, faster, and increasingly more technological, and everyone feels the pressure to hustle and keep up. Computers and ipods become obsolete and outdated almost as soon as they are introduced to the market. Grocery stores become more and more vast, to the point where a redistribution of inventory in the store leads to droves of lost shoppers- Kroger chaos and Harris teeter traffic jams.
The desires for convenience and the low prices of supermarkets are so great that many people go to extreme lengths to reach the stores. In Mexico, people living in border cities will often cross the US border with day passes or illegally just to buy cheap goods at Walmart. Basic items like milk and eggs are actually cheaper in the US, so many poverty-stricken parents have no choice. Obviously this is not a great system.
Anyway, back to Arcadia. We'd love to have our cake and eat it too, but it's hard to bake a cake in the forest. Plus, ants and bears also love to eat cake, and we're generally not fans of sharing resources with the wildlife.
Our society continues to grow larger, faster, and increasingly more technological, and everyone feels the pressure to hustle and keep up. Computers and ipods become obsolete and outdated almost as soon as they are introduced to the market. Grocery stores become more and more vast, to the point where a redistribution of inventory in the store leads to droves of lost shoppers- Kroger chaos and Harris teeter traffic jams.
The desires for convenience and the low prices of supermarkets are so great that many people go to extreme lengths to reach the stores. In Mexico, people living in border cities will often cross the US border with day passes or illegally just to buy cheap goods at Walmart. Basic items like milk and eggs are actually cheaper in the US, so many poverty-stricken parents have no choice. Obviously this is not a great system.
Anyway, back to Arcadia. We'd love to have our cake and eat it too, but it's hard to bake a cake in the forest. Plus, ants and bears also love to eat cake, and we're generally not fans of sharing resources with the wildlife.
Garrett Dalton-Bees and animal communication
A film we watched about bees explained that they maintain their own form of language with which to communicate with the rest of the hive. I found this to be extremely interesting to learn that a bees ability to locate sources of pollen is entirely dependent on the bees ability to communicate clearly the location of said pollen. Bees are apparently much more intelligent than I had previously believed them to be or this is simply a genetic trait that is programed into a bee from birth. Are bees language the product of associative learning or a genetic trait? The movie got me to think of how other animals communicate with one another and with humans as well. Take cats for an example. Cats communicate with one another through scent by way of marking territory. They scratch to show territoriality as well. Cats also use body language to tell other cats their intentions. It is interesting to note that cats do not "meow" when in the wild. This is only used when communicating with human beings.
Heather Lynn Movie with Japenese man
In a few of our classes we watched a movie that involved a japanese guy that was going to Iceland to do some rituals for his parents death so that souls could finally rest in peace. He didn't do very much for them when he was alive and thought that it was his duty to do this for them since he hadn't seen them in forever. He was suppose to be going to Hawaii for vacation but instead took an extra week off and began his long journey to Iceland and to the river where he chosen to perform his rituals. He encountered many "different" people on the way who made his journey a bit difficult but he eventually caught up with the right man who would help him find his way. This movie although it was VERY strange related back to some of the thigns we have talked about in previous classes. How people wonder off into the wilderness to find food or to stop for something and then they end up losing their way (when the couple steal his car) and think that there is no hope but then as they are walking along and see somthing that looks like a path (the hotel with the man who helps him in the end) they realize that they are going to make it out of the wilderness.
Garrett Dalton-The Road
Imagine a world in which nature is but a memory and the human race is on the brink of extinction. In The Road, Cormanc McCarthy presents a post apocalyptic world in which a man and his son struggle to survive in a dying world. After a nuclear war, the earth is left in desolation. Most plants and animals are gone and only a few humans remain. The survivors live on what rations they can, mostly what is left over from the previous life. others turn to cannibalism in order to survive the inhospitable reality. This book, among other things, shows humanities need for the natural world. Human beings rely so heavily on agriculture to sustain life and the absence of it makes survival almost impossible. Humanity needs to care for the environment not only for ecological morality but also to ensure the security of the human race itself. The Road was extremely well written and deservedly gained much acclaim from reviewers. I thoroughly look forward to the film adaptation that is scheduled to come out this year.
People and Rain - Gordon Mallonee
So it was raining today. not just a little rain where you don't really get wet. this was a storm of sorts. it moved in fast turned on its water made some noise in the clouds and a little light show and was gone. i was lucky enough to be able to be outside while this was going on. most people however might think that it is not a good thing. i saw many people running to get out of the rain and cursing it as them sped on by. RAIN is the LIFE of the planet. people do not think about it and see it as something that they would rather not have to deal with. i love running around outside in the rain and even better during thunder storms at night when the sky is lit up for a FLASH of a second. Thunder storms are the best thing in the world. i remember sitting on my side porch at home in the summer just to enjoy the storms and occationally go out running in them. Rain is a good thing so next time it storms go and run around in it, it feel nice. :-)
FROGS are the Rain Callers in many cultures so that might have some reason behind it.
As Evernden talks about in his article, the word nature means different things to different persons. It could mean trees, animals, or the whole world itself. I think that he made a good argument and started from scratch. Maybe we should define the word nature before we can move any further. We must all agree somewhat on a common idea of what nature is.
I found this to be a very appealing beginning to his article. This allows him to go into different ideas of nature. He talks about nature being perceived as an object, miracle, self, etc. He also talks about the pollution issues, which may be the most important of them all. Pollution is the key cause to our ecological crisis situation today. That is the basic element of destruction in the world. Developments of living quarters, businesses, roads, and so forth are all polluting the environment. If we found a consistent alternative fuel, and a way to control its' waste, we would be much better off. It is much easier said than done though of course.
Evernden then talks some on the self and extensions as we have discussed in previous philosophy classes. It is important to include one's self in to this crisis of nature. This author does so but also takes many other people's opinions and beliefs into consideration. He talks about one of my favorite philosphers being Rene Descartes. Everndon appreciates his words wisdom and talk s about his "laws of nature" too. Both Everndon and Descartes at least seem to be open-minded and start from the most fundamental ideas possible. (As Descartes did in his meditations.)
I found Evernden's article a bit more interesting than White's, probably because I agreed with him more. He uses a much more open-minded approach to the ethics of the environment. I have already emphasized in previous responsed as to what I feel about White and his degrading of the religion Christianity. I do not think that religion is at the heart of our problem. It is only a nuasance to making progress, as White quite obviously disagrees. He puts full blame on religion, specifically the Christian faith.
I found this to be a very appealing beginning to his article. This allows him to go into different ideas of nature. He talks about nature being perceived as an object, miracle, self, etc. He also talks about the pollution issues, which may be the most important of them all. Pollution is the key cause to our ecological crisis situation today. That is the basic element of destruction in the world. Developments of living quarters, businesses, roads, and so forth are all polluting the environment. If we found a consistent alternative fuel, and a way to control its' waste, we would be much better off. It is much easier said than done though of course.
Evernden then talks some on the self and extensions as we have discussed in previous philosophy classes. It is important to include one's self in to this crisis of nature. This author does so but also takes many other people's opinions and beliefs into consideration. He talks about one of my favorite philosphers being Rene Descartes. Everndon appreciates his words wisdom and talk s about his "laws of nature" too. Both Everndon and Descartes at least seem to be open-minded and start from the most fundamental ideas possible. (As Descartes did in his meditations.)
I found Evernden's article a bit more interesting than White's, probably because I agreed with him more. He uses a much more open-minded approach to the ethics of the environment. I have already emphasized in previous responsed as to what I feel about White and his degrading of the religion Christianity. I do not think that religion is at the heart of our problem. It is only a nuasance to making progress, as White quite obviously disagrees. He puts full blame on religion, specifically the Christian faith.
The trail that we walked at nike park was interesting. I enjoyed hearing the history of the park. It was a nice short hike although the wind made it a little rough. The correlation between religion and ecology became more evident as I listened to you speak and observed my surroundings. God created everything for a reason I believe. This was clear as I learned about the shallow ocean we saw that was mostly white. It is where a buch of oysters were, or use to be.
Ecological ethics
Two famous American philosophers were the cause of the thoughts involved in Transcendental Preservation Ethics. Ralph Waldo Emerson and Henry David Thoreau were the two great thinkers. A man named John Muir used their thoughts to campaign this idea of preserving wild nature. They had the idea of the world being used for something other than the norm of what most see it as. They see nature as a "temple" which is used to come close with God. This also relates to the effort to harmonize society with nature. It could be a solution if the majority of people saw the world as this "tool" to come close with God. Instead the majority is using society as a way place to build and increase technology.
We need not be so materialistic is what he is getting at I believe. Nature itself is a blessing which we should appreciate as it is rather than change it.
Another man named Pinchot insisted on a different mode of ethics in nature. This is called Resource Conservation Ethics which is based upon the notions of equity and efficiency. Just as the name spells out, the main objective is to conserve. Conserving resources would not prevent negative effects on the globe, but will slow things down a bit.
That is an interesting concept which differs some from the ethical view according to Muir. He beleived that using these natural resources as they are is more important than Pinchot's idea of using nature for our material desires as he refers to John Stuart Mill. Muir thinks that nature should only be appreciated for its aesthetic beauty and value. To him that is what is "morally superior".
"...people going to forest groves, mountain scenery, and meandering streams for religious transcendence, aesthetic contemplation, and healing rest and relaxation put these resources to a "better" ---i.e., morally superior---use than did lumber barons, mineral kings and captains of industry hell-bent upon little else than worshiping at the shrine of the Almighty Dollar and seizing the Main Chance." (177)
The third ethical idea that Callicot discusses is known as Evolutionary Ecological Land Ethics. This sort of evolves from Darwin's ideas of evolution and ecology. This method includes God as a big part of what is ethically right as far as nature. Every creature has some importance in this world acording to this theory. Therefore we should not kill things in order to beneift ourself as a society in some manner. This set of ethics is similar in a way to the preservation ethics stated above, only slightly stricter. Nothing should be changed and humans should not consider themselves as the primary species.
We need not be so materialistic is what he is getting at I believe. Nature itself is a blessing which we should appreciate as it is rather than change it.
Another man named Pinchot insisted on a different mode of ethics in nature. This is called Resource Conservation Ethics which is based upon the notions of equity and efficiency. Just as the name spells out, the main objective is to conserve. Conserving resources would not prevent negative effects on the globe, but will slow things down a bit.
That is an interesting concept which differs some from the ethical view according to Muir. He beleived that using these natural resources as they are is more important than Pinchot's idea of using nature for our material desires as he refers to John Stuart Mill. Muir thinks that nature should only be appreciated for its aesthetic beauty and value. To him that is what is "morally superior".
"...people going to forest groves, mountain scenery, and meandering streams for religious transcendence, aesthetic contemplation, and healing rest and relaxation put these resources to a "better" ---i.e., morally superior---use than did lumber barons, mineral kings and captains of industry hell-bent upon little else than worshiping at the shrine of the Almighty Dollar and seizing the Main Chance." (177)
The third ethical idea that Callicot discusses is known as Evolutionary Ecological Land Ethics. This sort of evolves from Darwin's ideas of evolution and ecology. This method includes God as a big part of what is ethically right as far as nature. Every creature has some importance in this world acording to this theory. Therefore we should not kill things in order to beneift ourself as a society in some manner. This set of ethics is similar in a way to the preservation ethics stated above, only slightly stricter. Nothing should be changed and humans should not consider themselves as the primary species.
Human impact on nature
I think that it would be nearly impossible for society to enforce a control method to prevent, or even reduce the effect humans have on nature. The world today is so dependent on technology. Technology is so far advanced now too that society would not be tempted to make things harder on ourselves to prevent harm on nature. The population across the globe is increasing which makes things even more difficult to harmonize culture with nature. In the ancient times nature was much more harmonized and appreciated because the simple fact that technology was not yet introduced.
"The changes that take place in the modern world do resemble those of the ancient world, yet the accelerated pace at which change happens today could cause the effects of human civilization to be exponential in modern society."
Technology and nature are on opposite ends of one another. There is no sure way to harmonize the two without reverting back to old ways of doing things. The reason that I say it is nearly impossible, is because very few people today will go about living in an old fashion sort of way if not necessary, especially if the reward is only to preserve nature. It would be great if it happened so that we could achieve the harmoniztion of nature and society. Another basic reason that I don't think that society can create a way of enforcing control over humans is for selfish reasons. By the time that such things as global warming effect the society we live in, we will be long gone. It is difficult to think of people that it will effect who don't even exist yet. For instance, your great grandchildren or even further down the line.
Only if everyone was into nature for their own beliefs or religion would it be possible for society to manage a relationship between itself and nature. That is the difficulty with this global issue, not everyone is as concerned or effected by the environment. Just as not everyone has the same religious beliefs which could lead to a resolution.
"The changes that take place in the modern world do resemble those of the ancient world, yet the accelerated pace at which change happens today could cause the effects of human civilization to be exponential in modern society."
Technology and nature are on opposite ends of one another. There is no sure way to harmonize the two without reverting back to old ways of doing things. The reason that I say it is nearly impossible, is because very few people today will go about living in an old fashion sort of way if not necessary, especially if the reward is only to preserve nature. It would be great if it happened so that we could achieve the harmoniztion of nature and society. Another basic reason that I don't think that society can create a way of enforcing control over humans is for selfish reasons. By the time that such things as global warming effect the society we live in, we will be long gone. It is difficult to think of people that it will effect who don't even exist yet. For instance, your great grandchildren or even further down the line.
Only if everyone was into nature for their own beliefs or religion would it be possible for society to manage a relationship between itself and nature. That is the difficulty with this global issue, not everyone is as concerned or effected by the environment. Just as not everyone has the same religious beliefs which could lead to a resolution.
Austin Magruder - Prayer in public schools
This has been a hot topic for a while. Opponents of prayer in public schools cite the establishment clause of the firt amendment which prohibits the state from forcing religion upon anyone. People in favor of prayer in public schools cite the free exercise clause which allows for people to freely excercise any religion they choose. I studied a case this year in one of my government classes that focussed on a student led prayer before every home football game. The procedure was that first the students would vote whether or not to have a speaker before each game, then they would elect a student to do so. In 2000, in the case of Santa Fe v. Doe, the supreme court decided to not allow the public school to do this citing that it was in violation of the establishment clause because the speaches were in public forum, using the public school's PA system. I would argue however, that if the students voted for this, they should be allowed to have the invocations. If you don't wish to pray, don't its as simple as that. I feel that the supreme court overstepped their bounds in this case and violated the free exercise clause of the first amendment.
Austin Magruder - Cleric Interview
For my Religion and Politics in America class we were required to interview a cleric and ask them questions based around the relation between religion and politics. One of the questions I asked was "do you believe that polititians are inherintly virtuous people?" his response was quite interesting. He pointed out he had a couple of friends who were congressmen. Both of these men retired after not too long. He said these people ran for office because they wanted to make a difference, but they felt they did not have much impact at all. He stated that political positions often force you to compromise your morals, so it is not necessarily the people that are immoral, but the position forces them to be not as virtuos as the may be. If you are for more strict gun control for example, but you need money from the NRA to get anything done, you will have to compromise. Just thought that interview was good insight into what religious figures think of politics.
Austin Magruder - Global Warming
Are we as humans so consumed with ourselves that we are willing to live in the now and not care about the future because it will be someone elses problem? This issue kind of reminds me of President George W. Bush's statement about the Iraq war "This war started on my watch, but it is going to end on yours." That sort of mentality where we pass on our problems to the next person in line is disgusting. Global warming is very real, and it suprises me how many people are unwilling to deal with it. I have heard many people jokingly say things like, oh i'll be dead before that ever happens. Yes, you will probably be long gone, but what about your children, or your children's children? Do you not care about them? This issue affects us all in one way or another, lets act like it.
Thinking and Awareness in Animals - Katie Lamp
Are animals aware of their existence? Can they think as humans do? Two books I read, "Minds of Their Own" by Lesley J. Rogers and "Animal Minds: Beyond Cognition to Consciousness" by Donald A. Griffin, consider these questions. In Rogers' book, he looks at the evolution of the brain in both humans and non-human animals and how the brain has developed in order to have consciousness, and then finally at what point in the evolution of the animal brain that consciousness could have developed. In Griffin's book, he looks at how animal communication that may seem incomprehensible to us because it is so different from how we communicate could actually offer us a look at what animals think and feel and how their communication is revealing these things. While the idea of animals having consciousness and cognitive abilities similar to humans may seem a bit odd to some people, these two books make a strong case for it.
Images of Animals: Anthropomorphism and Animal Mind- Katie Lamp
In her book "Images of Animals: Anthropomorphism and Animal Mind", Eileen Crist looks at how humans have tried to apply our characteristics to animals over time in order to establish some sort of relationship with them because after all, we do share the planet and oftentimes physical territory with them. With the development of the field of ethology, it comes as no surprise that while ethologists may try to approach non-human animals as natural subjects, there will be many people who want to explain animal behavior through human constructs such as emotions. I think one of the most important things to remember when studying animal behavior is that they are, in fact, not people, and that they should be studied as such. When examining the relationship between humans and nature as we have done in this class, the consideration of the relationship between humans and non-human animals is unavoidable, and I think Crist does a good job of looking at how humans can falsely attribute their own characteristics to animals when trying to establish some sort of relationship to them.
The Botany of Desire- Katie Lamp
Before this class, I had read The Botany of Desire by Michael Pollan. When we began to delve into the relationship between humans and nature, I thought of this book because Pollan examines how humans and some plants have domesticated each other over time. Plants domesticating people? Seems like a strange idea at first but Pollan makes a really good argument with his discussions on the relationship between humans and the apple, the tulip, marijuana, and the potato. These four plants have contributed to our shift from a nomadic people to an agricultural society, and looking at how plants have "domesticated" people (rather than the other way around) not only makes us consider that we may not have all the control as we'd like to think, but also shows that the relationship between humans and nature has several different dimensions.
Are We Self-Destructive? (Turtle Island)- Katie Lamp
I think Snyder sums up one of the most important considerations from this class in his chapter "The Wilderness" when he says:
"I don't like Western culture because I think it has much in it that is inherently wrong and that is at the root of the environmental crisis that is not recent; it is very ancient; it has been building up for a millenium. There are many things in Western culture that are admirable. But a culture that alienates iself from the very ground of its own being- from the wilderness outside (that is to say, wild nature, the wild, self-contained, self-informing ecosystems) and from that other wilderness, the wilderness within- is doomed to a very destructive behavior, ultimately perhaps self-destructive behavior" (Snyder, 106)
Are we a self-destructive society? I'd like to think we are not because this makes us look terrible as a species and it seems very fatalistic to say we are destroying ourselves and that the "end is near" so to speak, but Snyder makes a good point as have some of the other authors we have read this semester. We have alienated ourselves from nature so much that those individuals who either live in nature or spend a great deal of time there are the exception rather than the rule. We as a society have made ourselves so comfortable surrounded by our concrete, glass and central heating that most of us wouldn't survive a week if dropped into nature and asked to fend for ourselves without our grocery stores and computers. While Snyder seems to take a very negative approach when he says that we are self-destructive, I think he may, unfortunately, be right and I'm not sure we can ever go back.
"I don't like Western culture because I think it has much in it that is inherently wrong and that is at the root of the environmental crisis that is not recent; it is very ancient; it has been building up for a millenium. There are many things in Western culture that are admirable. But a culture that alienates iself from the very ground of its own being- from the wilderness outside (that is to say, wild nature, the wild, self-contained, self-informing ecosystems) and from that other wilderness, the wilderness within- is doomed to a very destructive behavior, ultimately perhaps self-destructive behavior" (Snyder, 106)
Are we a self-destructive society? I'd like to think we are not because this makes us look terrible as a species and it seems very fatalistic to say we are destroying ourselves and that the "end is near" so to speak, but Snyder makes a good point as have some of the other authors we have read this semester. We have alienated ourselves from nature so much that those individuals who either live in nature or spend a great deal of time there are the exception rather than the rule. We as a society have made ourselves so comfortable surrounded by our concrete, glass and central heating that most of us wouldn't survive a week if dropped into nature and asked to fend for ourselves without our grocery stores and computers. While Snyder seems to take a very negative approach when he says that we are self-destructive, I think he may, unfortunately, be right and I'm not sure we can ever go back.
Poems in Turtle Island- Katie Lamp
I found the poems in Turtle Island that Snyder wrote to be fascinating, and I'm not surprised that he receieved the Pulitzer Prize for this poetry. Usually, poetry that doesn't have a set rhyme or rhythm can irk me, but I found his writing beautiful and I liked how apparently random words revealed such depth when I read the poems. One of my favorites was "Why Truck Drivers Rise Earlier than Students of Zen" because it gave me a very peaceful feeling and the last line, "There is no other life" really struck me for some reason. I think the reason it resonated so deeply with me is that Snyder was taking what appears to be a very mundane occupation and putting it in such a light that the reader can see the peacefulness and zen quality of it. I enjoyed a lot of his other poems, but for an almost inexplicable reason, this poem struck me and I found it to be the most beautiful.
Jackie Trono - Snyder On Learning From Primal People
In Turtle Island, Gary Snyder is calling for us to rediscover and reconnect with the land that houses us. Along with many moving poems, Turtle Island also contains an essay calling for environmental awareness, “Four Changes.” Here, Snyder posits many interesting thoughts and questions. What I found most interesting was his comment that we, as the “civilized,” need to learn from indigenous people. He writes,
“A line is drawn between primitive peoples and civilized peoples. I think there is a wisdom in the worldview of primitive peoples that we have to refer ourselves to, and learn from” (Gary Snyder, Turtle Island 107).
I prefer the word primal to primitive because primitive pejoratively connotes ineptitude. Primal, on the other hand, refers to that which is most fundamental. I believe primal people are more fundamentally connected with their environments than the civilized people secluded in cities who go off into nature for a respite from the bustle of their daily lives. Primal people live in nature and, as Snyder says, have done a much better job of keeping open the lines of communication with nature.
The idea of learning from indigenous, primal people is of great interest to me. I intend to spend two weeks with a group at the healing center, Mayantuyacu, of an Ashaninca shaman, Juan Flores, in the Peruvian Amazon this August for the purpose of gaining greater access to that gnosis of which Narby speaks in The Cosmic Serpent. I found out about Juan through emails with Narby, so I believe he is a reputable source for ascension. I wish to broaden my understanding of the animated aspect of the natural world. Although I can analytically think about such a concept while removed here in Virginia, I believe that only by total immersion in the environment will I be able to obtain any real understanding of that ontological perspective that insists that plants can communicate and that biomolecular information is something I can extract from my surroundings without the use of scientific instruments. Fascinating! I am really looking forward to this experience.
“A line is drawn between primitive peoples and civilized peoples. I think there is a wisdom in the worldview of primitive peoples that we have to refer ourselves to, and learn from” (Gary Snyder, Turtle Island 107).
I prefer the word primal to primitive because primitive pejoratively connotes ineptitude. Primal, on the other hand, refers to that which is most fundamental. I believe primal people are more fundamentally connected with their environments than the civilized people secluded in cities who go off into nature for a respite from the bustle of their daily lives. Primal people live in nature and, as Snyder says, have done a much better job of keeping open the lines of communication with nature.
The idea of learning from indigenous, primal people is of great interest to me. I intend to spend two weeks with a group at the healing center, Mayantuyacu, of an Ashaninca shaman, Juan Flores, in the Peruvian Amazon this August for the purpose of gaining greater access to that gnosis of which Narby speaks in The Cosmic Serpent. I found out about Juan through emails with Narby, so I believe he is a reputable source for ascension. I wish to broaden my understanding of the animated aspect of the natural world. Although I can analytically think about such a concept while removed here in Virginia, I believe that only by total immersion in the environment will I be able to obtain any real understanding of that ontological perspective that insists that plants can communicate and that biomolecular information is something I can extract from my surroundings without the use of scientific instruments. Fascinating! I am really looking forward to this experience.
Ecology of Eden- Conflict Between Man and Earth- Katie Lamp
In the first few chapters of Ecology of Eden, Eisenberg discusses why we need a balance between human culture and nature. After reading the entire book, I still found this to be one of his most important arguments. His idea of the Planet Managers and the Planet Fetishers was an interesting one, I thought, with the Planet Managers arguing for a man-made paradise with nature's best interests in mind and the Planet Fetishers arguing for a "return to Eden" and man returning to his wild roots. I think Eisenberg believes we have grown and developed in such a way that we are completely isolated from true nature now, and he presents two arguments as to how to return to our natural state. Because I think that returning to our natural state would be impossible at this point, I think Eisenberg's argument that we must strike a balance was a strong one.
Australia's Aborigines and lost culture- Katie Lamp
When we watched the video about the Aborigines in Australia, it made me think about the idea of lost culture. The elders look after the land in order to preserve it here, because they feel they are the only ones who can take care of the country. There are still records of these people and their life, such as the cave paintings that depict what used to be there before these people were driven out by disease, etc. When people from other countries came and drove out the Aborigines from their home, there was no chance of these people being able to record their lives anymore. The Aborigines' knowledge has not been written down, but rather it was stored in the minds of the group of people known as the "Library". While this was probably an effective way to maintain their knowledge when they could pass down the information from generation to generation, it is no longer effective because these people are a dying breed. When the narrator of the video was discussing how the elders are the only ones left who have this knowledge, it made me think about lost culture and how this culture is fading because the only ideas of these people that can be communicated to others anymore can only be found in the cave paintings. The ideas in the cave paintings seemed interesting, and it made me wish that someone besides the person who made this video had taken an interest in these people earlier when more of them were still around.
Buber and the phrase "I love you"- Katie Lamp
When we were discussing Martin Buber's "I and Thou", someone brought up the fact that they had previously heard from another teacher that "I love you" means "I love me" because most people expect the person they say this to to say it in return, and it would only be a selfless statement if one didn't expect the response in return. The phrase "I love you" puts something between the You and the I, and I found this idea really interesting because I had always conceptualized love as being selfless, that for someone to love someone else they had to be less selfish because we are told that if you love someone, you do things for them instead of for yourself. The ideas behind the phrase "I love you" that can come from Buber's writing clearly contrast with the ideas of romantic love in our culture today, and I wonder if anyone has ever examined this contradiction in depth.
Jackie Trono - Eisenberg On The Gaia Hypothesis
Among other topics in The Ecology of Eden, Evan Eisenberg takes a look at the Gaia hypothesis. Developed in the 1960s by James Lovelock, the Gaia hypothesis basically proposes that the Earth’s living and nonliving parts come together in a complexly interconnected system that is analogous to a single living organism. Lovelock was first intrigued by the fact that the Earth, unlike other planets, is not at chemical equilibrium. Yet, the Earth has maintained some other kind of equilibrium in the constancy of its mixture of gases, the constancy of its temperature in spite of the increased temperature of the sun, and by in its re-stabilizing after recovery from major traumas. Lovelock proposed that this regulatory mechanism was a direct result of the nature of Earth as a complex living organism.
Eisenberg comments curiously that the Gaia hypothesis does not resolve the problem of understanding the constancies present on the Earth, but rather furthers the inquiry. He writes,
“The Gaia hypothesis is not so much an answer as a question: Why is the earth such a nice place to live? Why has it stayed a nice place to live for nigh on three billion years? Barring divine intervention, the answer must have something to do with the action of life itself. But that in itself is not an answer; just a reasonable narrowing down of the question” (Evan Eisenberg, The Ecology of Eden 268).
Thus, Gaia begs the question of why the planet is hospitable to life. Skeptics claim that life evolved to find the environment fitting. Eisenberg, however, retorts that instead it seems as though life furnished the planet like a family moving into a new house, the carpet and walls were already there, but life added the details that made Earth hospitable.
I have to wonder how exactly Gaians, claiming that the hospitability and the stability of Earth has something to do with life, propose that life actually affects things. Interestingly, Eisenberg comments, “The Gaians do not claim to know exactly what the explanation or mechanism is, only that it must have something to do with life” (Eisenberg 269-70). Then the Gaia hypothesis is not an answer, but truly only a narrowing of the question of how this planet works. Again, I have to wonder what the real use of such a hypothesis is. It seems to me that its best use is in the ideological shift resultant from viewing the Earth as alive. I hope that such an animated view of the natural world would help breed a greater respect and care for the Earth.
Eisenberg comments curiously that the Gaia hypothesis does not resolve the problem of understanding the constancies present on the Earth, but rather furthers the inquiry. He writes,
“The Gaia hypothesis is not so much an answer as a question: Why is the earth such a nice place to live? Why has it stayed a nice place to live for nigh on three billion years? Barring divine intervention, the answer must have something to do with the action of life itself. But that in itself is not an answer; just a reasonable narrowing down of the question” (Evan Eisenberg, The Ecology of Eden 268).
Thus, Gaia begs the question of why the planet is hospitable to life. Skeptics claim that life evolved to find the environment fitting. Eisenberg, however, retorts that instead it seems as though life furnished the planet like a family moving into a new house, the carpet and walls were already there, but life added the details that made Earth hospitable.
I have to wonder how exactly Gaians, claiming that the hospitability and the stability of Earth has something to do with life, propose that life actually affects things. Interestingly, Eisenberg comments, “The Gaians do not claim to know exactly what the explanation or mechanism is, only that it must have something to do with life” (Eisenberg 269-70). Then the Gaia hypothesis is not an answer, but truly only a narrowing of the question of how this planet works. Again, I have to wonder what the real use of such a hypothesis is. It seems to me that its best use is in the ideological shift resultant from viewing the Earth as alive. I hope that such an animated view of the natural world would help breed a greater respect and care for the Earth.
Buber and "I and Thou" - Katie Lamp
When I first read selections of Martin Buber's "I and Thou" two years ago at Oxford, I hated it. Honestly, it was confusing and if I had to see the words "I", "you" and "it" in succession like that ever again I thought I would go crazy. As you can imagine, I was not too thrilled when it was handed out in class. However, I decided to give it a chance, and the selections pulled from the text that we discussed were surprisingly interesting to me. I was able to look past my first impressions and see how the relationships between people and things form and how our language has allowed us to construct and use these relationships. There is so much depth in the understanding it takes to fully appreciate the relationship between an "I" and a "you" and how this relationship is established and maintained, and after examing Buber's writing from a different perspective, I can appreciate what he is talking about a lot more.
Bees' waggle dance- Katie Lamp
When we watched the video about the waggle dance in bees and how this extraordinary ability has been studied for years by ethologists, I found it really interesting not because I wanted to know "how" they "know" where the food is, but because I love it when scientists, and in particular ethologists, examine phenomenons in non-human animal species that humans do not exhibit. Communication in many non-human animal species is of particular interest to me because I think that this characteristic (human communication) is the factor many people contribute to why they think humans are superior to other species. Granted, this is not the case with everyone, and many people try to understand and respect the things that make other species unique, but many people say that humans are superior because of our form of communication and how it has advanced us as a species. I wish that every person who provided this as a reason could see the video on the waggle dance in bees because humans have no form of communication that parallels the unspoken communication between these bees that allows them to track down food miles away.
Tao and Oneness With the World - Ernie Stanley
Tao Te Ching, 67 (as translated by Ch’u Ta-Kao):
“All the world says to me: 'Great as Tao is, it resembles no description (form).' Because it is great, therefore it resembles no description. If it resembled any description it would have long since become small.
I have three treasures, which I hold and keep safe: The first is called love; The second is called moderation; The third is called not venturing to go ahead of the world.
Being loving, one can be brave; Being moderate, one can be ample; Not venturing to go ahead of the world, one can become the chief of all officials.
Instead of love, one has only bravery; Instead of moderation, one has only amplitude;
Instead of keeping behind, one goes ahead: These lead to nothing but death.
For he who fights with love will win the battle; He who defends with love will be secure.
Heaven will save him, and protect him with love.”
I find this poem to be one of the greatest illustrators of the paradigm differences between Eastern schools of belief, such as Taoism and those of Western religions in the treatment of the world. Whereas Western religions contend that man, as the implicit favorite of the divine, is the ruler of nature and and even above it, Eastern religion often merely contends that man should be one with nature and the universe.
Within this Taoist poem, the path for being one with the Tao lies not in the domination of the world, but instead in loving it. In a sense this is not radically different than religions such as Christianity which demands foremost for love and worship of God, the transcendental force. Taoism asks for the very same thing, love of a transcendental force. However, Tao, the transcendental force, is not above the world and universe as God is, but rather the constant driving order behind it. In order to be in tune with Tao one must be in tune with the world and not above it or beyond it.
“All the world says to me: 'Great as Tao is, it resembles no description (form).' Because it is great, therefore it resembles no description. If it resembled any description it would have long since become small.
I have three treasures, which I hold and keep safe: The first is called love; The second is called moderation; The third is called not venturing to go ahead of the world.
Being loving, one can be brave; Being moderate, one can be ample; Not venturing to go ahead of the world, one can become the chief of all officials.
Instead of love, one has only bravery; Instead of moderation, one has only amplitude;
Instead of keeping behind, one goes ahead: These lead to nothing but death.
For he who fights with love will win the battle; He who defends with love will be secure.
Heaven will save him, and protect him with love.”
I find this poem to be one of the greatest illustrators of the paradigm differences between Eastern schools of belief, such as Taoism and those of Western religions in the treatment of the world. Whereas Western religions contend that man, as the implicit favorite of the divine, is the ruler of nature and and even above it, Eastern religion often merely contends that man should be one with nature and the universe.
Within this Taoist poem, the path for being one with the Tao lies not in the domination of the world, but instead in loving it. In a sense this is not radically different than religions such as Christianity which demands foremost for love and worship of God, the transcendental force. Taoism asks for the very same thing, love of a transcendental force. However, Tao, the transcendental force, is not above the world and universe as God is, but rather the constant driving order behind it. In order to be in tune with Tao one must be in tune with the world and not above it or beyond it.
Anthropomorphism- Katie Lamp
In addition to this class, I was also taking Comparative Psychology in which we examine animal behavior. One of the most important things I learned from that class was not to apply human characteristics to animals- in other words, not to anthropomorphize. It it sometimes difficult to study some of the behaviors animals exhibit (one example being the waggle dance in bees) without wondering "how they do it". It can thus be easy to fall into the trap of trying to apply human cognitive processes and higher order thinking to these creatures to explain "how" they do these things. In reality, these animals can do some pretty impressive things that humans cannot do without the cognitive abilities we have as humans. I find this really amazing, and it was easy to relate the idea that humans have essentially isolated themselves from nature to the idea that humans try to separate themselves from other species as well, and this isolation is the reason i think some people anthropomorphize and instead of appreciating other species for their amazing abilities, we sometimes assume they have the skills they have because they are using some sort of human ability in a non-human form.
Meredith Clements-Food
I've really got to thinking a lot lately, especially because graduation is approaching and I will be financially on my own, about the types of food I am going to eat since I'll be paying for everything on my own. It really scares me that I might not be able to afford the things I like, like the free roaming eggs and organic spinach. It costs so much money but I hate all the additives that 'unorganic' food has. I definitely don't want to survive off oodles of noodles (not that I don't find it tasty..but it has enough sodium to stop my heart).
Meredith Clements-Food
I've really got to thinking a lot lately, especially because graduation is approaching and I will be financially on my own, about the types of food I am going to eat since I'll be paying for everything on my own. It really scares me that I might not be able to afford the things I like, like the free roaming eggs and organic spinach. It costs so much money but I hate all the additives that 'unorganic' food has. I definitely don't want to survive off oodles of noodles (not that I don't find it tasty..but it has enough sodium to stop my heart).
Meredith Clements-Aborigine movie
The Austrailian Aborigine movie really amazed me. How there were only a few of them left but they lived the same way their ancestors had once lived. How each man had a different "job" and how important that each job was. I thought it was amazing how they would start the fires to "start over" so new plant life could start once again. I think it was really neat how close in relationship they were to the animals, plants, rocks, Gods, and everything else in nature. These Aborigines really showed the closeness of ecology and religion.
Salvia divinorum and Encountering Being - Ernie Stanley
Preface: Before continuing, I do not encourage or discourage the use of psychedelics such as salvia. I do however discourage use of anything, be it psychedelic or otherwise, without knowing what it is and how to use it safely. Salvia divinorum finds its roots as one of the three divine plants (the others being Teonanácatl (mushrooms) and Peyotl (peyote)) of Mazatec shamanic practice as a spiritual and medicinal aid. However, salvia is an atypical psychedelic and has no relation chemically to the Schedule I hallucinogens. It is legal to consume, cultivate and sell within the state of Virginia and has no recorded physical dangers associated with safe use and no record of causing medical problems or injuries. I must also stress that salvia has no euphoric effects or “high” and any use towards this end will be met with very bitter disappointment.
Upon exhaling vision faded, the mind swirled and the world melted. And there no longer was I. And the framework of consciousness disappeared. There were no physical sensations. There was no thought or idea. There was only an oneness of Being.
Being as I (which has since been restored) encountered came as what I would describe as cosmic energy. There was no form to it, no trappings, no end and no beginning. The very concepts which describe reality, form, concept, understanding, experiential perception were all destroyed and replaced by exchange. And with this exchange came what could be called in the loosest sense, a “feeling” of suffering.
I could say that time passed and I returned to conscious existence, but there was no time. I did return, but my mind reacted harshly. It seemed to punish me for leaving reality behind. I was left a mental newborn. I had no immediate memory of what had been before, and could not determine if the reality I had returned to was indeed what had been before. And though, after hearing the word “salvia”, my memories quickly began reconstructing what had occurred and had been, my mind struggled with the new feeling of the surreal exchange which had occurred and I was left in intense discomfort with the realization that I had completely destroyed my “self”. I was also left so exhausted that within minutes I fell into sleep.
While this description of my experience may sound like it left me insane, this is assumably not the case. After sleeping I awoke with full acceptance of the world in which I consciously exist and though the discomfort I felt was not eliminated, it had largely been replaced by what I believe to be spiritual understanding. And though I feel deep analysis deals some injustice to my encounter, I feel it appropriate to at least loosely do so in order to provide some clarity in the epistemic sense. What I was precipitated into by Salvia would be called Ego (self) death by psychologists, and is the complete deconstruction of the self resulting in the removal of all barriers to the presence of true essence, be that God or otherwise. Martin Buber, however, would call it an Ich-Du encounter between myself and the essence of Being (which Buber believed to be the Tetragrammaton).
It would not be for awhile afterward that I began deep research (our discussion on Buber’s I-Thou relationships began this research ) into the concepts behind my encounter. Prior to this I only understood salvia as a shamanic aid in spiritual awakening. It did not occur to me that my encounter was a form of spiritual awakening that may take place, thus leaving me at first shocked. And while I do acknowledge that prior frameworks of thought could possibly have been latent in the encounter and corrupted it, the sense of spiritual understanding that was inspired by my encounter is deep and internally revolutionary enough that I readily discount such notions.
However, separate from the spirituality induced by salvia is the respect I now carry for the plant. The encounter it facilitated what I consider to be one of the most profound occurrences of my life and has definitely altered my perception. And while I will not claim that psychedelics such as salvia are the only way to achieve such spiritual awakening, I find it disturbing that there is currently an ignorant and irresponsible movement to assign it as dangerous and useless. Soon salvia may very well fall victim to the western religious paradigm which renders the entirety of nature solely as material resources and devoid of soul and the holy. Salvia may soon find itself illegal and demonized alongside the other “divine” plants (and fungi) of Shamanic culture, its spiritual traditions and properties ignored in the name of a status quo mentality.
Upon exhaling vision faded, the mind swirled and the world melted. And there no longer was I. And the framework of consciousness disappeared. There were no physical sensations. There was no thought or idea. There was only an oneness of Being.
Being as I (which has since been restored) encountered came as what I would describe as cosmic energy. There was no form to it, no trappings, no end and no beginning. The very concepts which describe reality, form, concept, understanding, experiential perception were all destroyed and replaced by exchange. And with this exchange came what could be called in the loosest sense, a “feeling” of suffering.
I could say that time passed and I returned to conscious existence, but there was no time. I did return, but my mind reacted harshly. It seemed to punish me for leaving reality behind. I was left a mental newborn. I had no immediate memory of what had been before, and could not determine if the reality I had returned to was indeed what had been before. And though, after hearing the word “salvia”, my memories quickly began reconstructing what had occurred and had been, my mind struggled with the new feeling of the surreal exchange which had occurred and I was left in intense discomfort with the realization that I had completely destroyed my “self”. I was also left so exhausted that within minutes I fell into sleep.
While this description of my experience may sound like it left me insane, this is assumably not the case. After sleeping I awoke with full acceptance of the world in which I consciously exist and though the discomfort I felt was not eliminated, it had largely been replaced by what I believe to be spiritual understanding. And though I feel deep analysis deals some injustice to my encounter, I feel it appropriate to at least loosely do so in order to provide some clarity in the epistemic sense. What I was precipitated into by Salvia would be called Ego (self) death by psychologists, and is the complete deconstruction of the self resulting in the removal of all barriers to the presence of true essence, be that God or otherwise. Martin Buber, however, would call it an Ich-Du encounter between myself and the essence of Being (which Buber believed to be the Tetragrammaton).
It would not be for awhile afterward that I began deep research (our discussion on Buber’s I-Thou relationships began this research ) into the concepts behind my encounter. Prior to this I only understood salvia as a shamanic aid in spiritual awakening. It did not occur to me that my encounter was a form of spiritual awakening that may take place, thus leaving me at first shocked. And while I do acknowledge that prior frameworks of thought could possibly have been latent in the encounter and corrupted it, the sense of spiritual understanding that was inspired by my encounter is deep and internally revolutionary enough that I readily discount such notions.
However, separate from the spirituality induced by salvia is the respect I now carry for the plant. The encounter it facilitated what I consider to be one of the most profound occurrences of my life and has definitely altered my perception. And while I will not claim that psychedelics such as salvia are the only way to achieve such spiritual awakening, I find it disturbing that there is currently an ignorant and irresponsible movement to assign it as dangerous and useless. Soon salvia may very well fall victim to the western religious paradigm which renders the entirety of nature solely as material resources and devoid of soul and the holy. Salvia may soon find itself illegal and demonized alongside the other “divine” plants (and fungi) of Shamanic culture, its spiritual traditions and properties ignored in the name of a status quo mentality.
Jackie Trono - Sheldrake On The Reanimation of Nature
Outlining the history of man’s ontological relationship to nature, Rupert Sheldrake discusses the progression from an animate understanding before the rise of materialism to an inanimate understanding that has prevailed to modern times with materialism to the reanimated understanding of nature that is arising from modern science in his book, The Rebirth of Nature: The Greening of Science and God.
I find Sheldrake’s commentary on materialism particularly interesting as I used to share that view, which I know find to be patently false. Sheldrake writes,
“Materialism in its philosophical sense asserts that only matter is real, and that everything, including human consciousness, can be explained in terms of matter. As a political doctrine, it places the highest value on material well-being and material progress. In its everyday sense, it refers to a preoccupation with material needs and desires rather than spiritual values. In all these senses, the material world is the sole reality, or at least the only reality of importance” (Rupert Sheldrake, The Rebirth of Nature 74).
Materialism, then, excludes any and all possibility of something transcendent of matter, which directly contradicts quotidian and metaphysical experience of consciousness. Materialists would have us understand that completely counterintuitive idea that the mind is the brain and the brain is no more than an electrochemical machine. Francis Crick put it in the following way, and called this senseless idea the Astonishing Hypothesis.
“‘You,’ your joys and your sorrows, your memories and your ambitions, your sense of personal identity and free will, are in fact no more than the behavior of a vast assembly of nerve cells and their associated molecules…. This hypothesis is so alien to the ideas of most people alive today that it can truly be called astonishing” (Qtd. Rupert Sheldrake, The Sense of Being Stared At 13).
The hypothesis is so astonishing and alien because it bears only a partial reality. The human mind is more than the sum of its constituent subatomic interactions. Clearly, there is something about consciousness that is inexplicable by physics. Once again, materialists would argue that it simply is a lack of the proper instrumentalities that makes the carry-over from brain chemistry to consciousness unclear. However, I find this argument weak considering that it insists that something that obviously exists – individual choice resultant from a consciousness necessarily comprised of more than merely deterministic electrochemical interactions – does not based on what appears to be nothing more than speculation.
I find Sheldrake’s commentary on materialism particularly interesting as I used to share that view, which I know find to be patently false. Sheldrake writes,
“Materialism in its philosophical sense asserts that only matter is real, and that everything, including human consciousness, can be explained in terms of matter. As a political doctrine, it places the highest value on material well-being and material progress. In its everyday sense, it refers to a preoccupation with material needs and desires rather than spiritual values. In all these senses, the material world is the sole reality, or at least the only reality of importance” (Rupert Sheldrake, The Rebirth of Nature 74).
Materialism, then, excludes any and all possibility of something transcendent of matter, which directly contradicts quotidian and metaphysical experience of consciousness. Materialists would have us understand that completely counterintuitive idea that the mind is the brain and the brain is no more than an electrochemical machine. Francis Crick put it in the following way, and called this senseless idea the Astonishing Hypothesis.
“‘You,’ your joys and your sorrows, your memories and your ambitions, your sense of personal identity and free will, are in fact no more than the behavior of a vast assembly of nerve cells and their associated molecules…. This hypothesis is so alien to the ideas of most people alive today that it can truly be called astonishing” (Qtd. Rupert Sheldrake, The Sense of Being Stared At 13).
The hypothesis is so astonishing and alien because it bears only a partial reality. The human mind is more than the sum of its constituent subatomic interactions. Clearly, there is something about consciousness that is inexplicable by physics. Once again, materialists would argue that it simply is a lack of the proper instrumentalities that makes the carry-over from brain chemistry to consciousness unclear. However, I find this argument weak considering that it insists that something that obviously exists – individual choice resultant from a consciousness necessarily comprised of more than merely deterministic electrochemical interactions – does not based on what appears to be nothing more than speculation.
Jackie Trono - Narby On Amazonian Shamanism
In The Cosmic Serpent: DNA And The Origins of Knowledge, Jeremy Narby explores the relationship between the knowledge of Western rationalism and the gnosis of Amazonian shamanism. I find the interplay between these ideologies fascinating. Western rationalism is characterized most notably by what I refer to as the “taxonomical imperative,” by which I mean the impetus in Westerners to classify and categorize their experiences. It could be said to be a generally human characteristic, but here I am making the distinction between the Western analytical mind that judges and the more holistic indigenous mind that perceives. I find the Western perspective to be severely limited by this differentiating instinct.
On this topic, Narby writes,
“Rationalism separates things to understand them. But its fragmented disciplines have limited perspectives and blind spots. And as any driver knows, it is important to pay attention to blind spots, because they contain vital information. To reach a fuller understanding of reality, science will have to shift its gaze. Could shamanism help science to defocalize? My experience indicates that engaging shamanic knowledge requires looking into a great number of disciplines and thinking about how they fit together” (Jeremy Narby, The Cosmic Serpent 160).
Narby, of course, is suggesting an endorsement of a more holistic approach to knowledge in general as part of the furthering of physical science, specifically. From personal experience in attempting to shift my own gaze from a staunchly materialist perspective, I would have to comment that such a transition would not exactly go smoothly. It is incredibly difficult to relinquish ingrained analytical tendencies on the personal as well as the social level. I wonder if there will be some synthesis of analytical and holistic thought that will reconcile this conflict.
Throughout the book, Narby formulates the hypothesis that Amazonian shamans under the influence of ayahuasca commune with nature in a very primal way such that they can communicate with the fundamental forces of nature and from them extract medical and spiritual information. I will close this blog with Jeremy’s own questions on the subject, as I find them good food for thought. Narby writes,
“According to my hypothesis, shamans take their consciousness down to the molecular level and gain access to biomolecular information. But what actually goes on in the brain/mind of the ayahuasquero when this occurs? What is the nature of a shaman’s communication with the animate essences of nature? The clear answer is that more research is needed in consciousness, shamanism, molecular biology, and their interrelatedness” (Narby 160).
On this topic, Narby writes,
“Rationalism separates things to understand them. But its fragmented disciplines have limited perspectives and blind spots. And as any driver knows, it is important to pay attention to blind spots, because they contain vital information. To reach a fuller understanding of reality, science will have to shift its gaze. Could shamanism help science to defocalize? My experience indicates that engaging shamanic knowledge requires looking into a great number of disciplines and thinking about how they fit together” (Jeremy Narby, The Cosmic Serpent 160).
Narby, of course, is suggesting an endorsement of a more holistic approach to knowledge in general as part of the furthering of physical science, specifically. From personal experience in attempting to shift my own gaze from a staunchly materialist perspective, I would have to comment that such a transition would not exactly go smoothly. It is incredibly difficult to relinquish ingrained analytical tendencies on the personal as well as the social level. I wonder if there will be some synthesis of analytical and holistic thought that will reconcile this conflict.
Throughout the book, Narby formulates the hypothesis that Amazonian shamans under the influence of ayahuasca commune with nature in a very primal way such that they can communicate with the fundamental forces of nature and from them extract medical and spiritual information. I will close this blog with Jeremy’s own questions on the subject, as I find them good food for thought. Narby writes,
“According to my hypothesis, shamans take their consciousness down to the molecular level and gain access to biomolecular information. But what actually goes on in the brain/mind of the ayahuasquero when this occurs? What is the nature of a shaman’s communication with the animate essences of nature? The clear answer is that more research is needed in consciousness, shamanism, molecular biology, and their interrelatedness” (Narby 160).
Jackie Trono - Jonas On Technology's Infinity
Jonas – On Technology’s Infinity
Hans Jonas, a student of Heidegger, also investigated technology and its relation to ecology. First marking out the belief in the indefinite progress of technology, Jonas writes,
“What makes it more than a sanguine belief…is an underlying and well-grounded, theoretical view of the nature of things and of human cognition, according to which they do not set a limit to novelty of discovery and invention, indeed, that they of themselves will at each point offer another opening for the as yet unknown and undone” (Scharff 194).
I understand this virtual infinity of technology to give humans a sense of the sublime in a very similar way to that of religion. Jonas even states that not only does it dominate our lives, but technology “nourishes also a belief in its being of predominant worth” (Scharff 196). Perhaps technology is the new religion, as, following Ellul, it dictates all aspects of life, including morality.
Elaborating on the effects of recognizing the sublime in the technological, Jonas continues,
“In a reciprocal interplay with the growing subtlety of exploration (instrumental and conceptual), nature itself stands forth as ever more subtle…And instead of narrowing the margin of the still-undiscovered, science now surprises itself with unlocking dimension after dimension of new depths. The very essence of matter has turned from a blunt, irreducible ultimate to an always reopened challenge for further penetration” (Scharff 195).
Although such a comment seems to ensure that men, understanding and respecting the sublimity arising from technology, would also a bear respect for the natural world which they uncover in its most intimate depths, the opposite appears to be the case. Jonas insists that the self-proliferating aspect of technology is actually at the heart of man’s destruction of his environment, writing that
“technology exponentially increases man’s drain on nature’s resources (of substances and energy), not only through the multiplication of the final goods for consumption, but also, and perhaps more so, through the production and operation of its own mechanical means” (Scharff 197).
If, as Jonas suggests, the chief vocation of man is “to become ever more masters of the world” (Scharff 196), how are we to continue our existence in the presence of such ecologically destructive technology? Jonas’ short answer is that all we know is that the disaster of destroying the planet must be averted, and he believes that human spontaneity, which defies prediction, is our best bet.
I find Jonas’ philosophy very frustrating because he so aptly portrays technology and its destructive relationship to the environment, and yet, he offers no clear-cut solution to the problem.
Hans Jonas, a student of Heidegger, also investigated technology and its relation to ecology. First marking out the belief in the indefinite progress of technology, Jonas writes,
“What makes it more than a sanguine belief…is an underlying and well-grounded, theoretical view of the nature of things and of human cognition, according to which they do not set a limit to novelty of discovery and invention, indeed, that they of themselves will at each point offer another opening for the as yet unknown and undone” (Scharff 194).
I understand this virtual infinity of technology to give humans a sense of the sublime in a very similar way to that of religion. Jonas even states that not only does it dominate our lives, but technology “nourishes also a belief in its being of predominant worth” (Scharff 196). Perhaps technology is the new religion, as, following Ellul, it dictates all aspects of life, including morality.
Elaborating on the effects of recognizing the sublime in the technological, Jonas continues,
“In a reciprocal interplay with the growing subtlety of exploration (instrumental and conceptual), nature itself stands forth as ever more subtle…And instead of narrowing the margin of the still-undiscovered, science now surprises itself with unlocking dimension after dimension of new depths. The very essence of matter has turned from a blunt, irreducible ultimate to an always reopened challenge for further penetration” (Scharff 195).
Although such a comment seems to ensure that men, understanding and respecting the sublimity arising from technology, would also a bear respect for the natural world which they uncover in its most intimate depths, the opposite appears to be the case. Jonas insists that the self-proliferating aspect of technology is actually at the heart of man’s destruction of his environment, writing that
“technology exponentially increases man’s drain on nature’s resources (of substances and energy), not only through the multiplication of the final goods for consumption, but also, and perhaps more so, through the production and operation of its own mechanical means” (Scharff 197).
If, as Jonas suggests, the chief vocation of man is “to become ever more masters of the world” (Scharff 196), how are we to continue our existence in the presence of such ecologically destructive technology? Jonas’ short answer is that all we know is that the disaster of destroying the planet must be averted, and he believes that human spontaneity, which defies prediction, is our best bet.
I find Jonas’ philosophy very frustrating because he so aptly portrays technology and its destructive relationship to the environment, and yet, he offers no clear-cut solution to the problem.
God Flesh - Ernie Stanley
A shamanic verse of the famous Mazatec medicine woman María Sabina
“Because I can swim in the immense
Because I can swim in all forms
Because I am the launch woman
Because I am the sacred opposum
Because I am the Lord opposum
I am the woman Book that is beneath the water, says
I am the woman of the populous town, says
I am the shepherdess who is beneath the water, says
I am the woman who shepherds the immense, says
I am a shepherdess and I come with my shepherd, says
Because everything has its origin
And I come going from place to place from the origin . . .”
This chant was orated during a shamanic ritual after the ingestion of teonanácatl. Teonanácatl is “God Flesh” to the Mazatec , but to most it is called psilocybin or magic mushrooms. I find this chant particularly interesting, not soley because it is indicative of an altered-state but rather because it echoes a theme that we have explored in class this semester. Maria’s chant tells us of her encounter with existence. She is not separated from anything in her ritual. The chant, through her repeated use of “I am” shows us that there are no objects in her existence during this ritual either. She is swimming through existence, a part of it all, not just a separate object within it, as most people perceive themselves. Her being is not solely as the woman of the populous town next to the water, but rather she permeates throughout everything.
And further, it is not even Maria talking. It may seem odd to find that says follows everything in the second verse, followed by no object. It is existence saying these things, not an object. There is no I-it in Maria’s encounter, in the truest sense she is part of existence and in harmony with it not apart from it.
How interesting it is that she has arrived in this state through something demonized in the west.
“Because I can swim in the immense
Because I can swim in all forms
Because I am the launch woman
Because I am the sacred opposum
Because I am the Lord opposum
I am the woman Book that is beneath the water, says
I am the woman of the populous town, says
I am the shepherdess who is beneath the water, says
I am the woman who shepherds the immense, says
I am a shepherdess and I come with my shepherd, says
Because everything has its origin
And I come going from place to place from the origin . . .”
This chant was orated during a shamanic ritual after the ingestion of teonanácatl. Teonanácatl is “God Flesh” to the Mazatec , but to most it is called psilocybin or magic mushrooms. I find this chant particularly interesting, not soley because it is indicative of an altered-state but rather because it echoes a theme that we have explored in class this semester. Maria’s chant tells us of her encounter with existence. She is not separated from anything in her ritual. The chant, through her repeated use of “I am” shows us that there are no objects in her existence during this ritual either. She is swimming through existence, a part of it all, not just a separate object within it, as most people perceive themselves. Her being is not solely as the woman of the populous town next to the water, but rather she permeates throughout everything.
And further, it is not even Maria talking. It may seem odd to find that says follows everything in the second verse, followed by no object. It is existence saying these things, not an object. There is no I-it in Maria’s encounter, in the truest sense she is part of existence and in harmony with it not apart from it.
How interesting it is that she has arrived in this state through something demonized in the west.