Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Crompsin
Note to all pagans:
Nature is not friendly.
|
Actually, I do not think nature is all friendly or evil, but more just is.
Animals do not stalk men like man stalks them. The vast majority attack for 2 reasons, hunger or defending themselves. Man is one of the few species, if not the only species, that attacks for "sport". In fact, most land creatures can be trained and can get along with man. And we all have heard stories how animals will save people, dolphins saving the drowning person, or scaring away the shark, pets awaking their human families to save them from a fire, etc.
We tend to see nature in as being dark, mysterious and evil because we don't understand it, and man's nature is to fear what he can't explain.
Weather patterns tend to follow set patterns and are easily tracked.
Earthquakes, volcanoes, tidal waves (tsunamis) all give natural warnings, as evidenced by the animals actions. "We" just have tuned nature out and don't use that insight and it is dormant in us, but not dead.
I think, we all sense something coming in the near future that will truly awaken that aspect in us, but we are unsure of what it is.
In the end, as with everything, it all comes down to belief and what you want to believe.
===========================================================
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by SecretMethod70
Interesting enough article, but I think it's a pretty significant stretch to attribute environmental interconnectedness to any sort of evidence for a Pagan worldview. Nor is the science of environmental interconnectedness anything new, just this particular example. Buddhism, one of the world's oldest traditions, has taught since its inception that all existence is inter-related. One of the three dharma seals (three characteristics of all physical existence), non-self, is (very basically) the understanding that nothing has a separate self, insofar as all things are touched and influenced by the rest of existence. This leads to the concept of interdependent co-arising which is, among other things, an important factor in the more modern concept of engaged Buddhism, which (again, very basically) works to apply Buddhist teaching to everyday life in the understanding that our own individual condition (insofar as it is understood to exist within a Buddhist context) is dependent on the condition of the world around us, and vice-versa.
Anyhow, that's a very basic and admittedly fairly clumsy description, but the point is that Paganism, by no means, holds any sort of monopoly on interconnectedness (and, indeed, similar philosophies can be found in many other philosophical/religious traditions, including Christianity, to varying degrees). Furthermore, strictly comparing Buddhism and Paganism, it seems to me that Buddhism is more closely related to the actual science involved in interconnectedness while Paganism relies on concepts such as the Earth mother to explain the inter-relation. A metaphorical description of an abstract concept perhaps - much like I think other gods and goddesses are - but one extra and unnecessary step nonetheless.
This isn't to say that a Pagan worldview is wrong or that a Buddhist worldview is right, but since this was posted in Tilted Philosophy and framed as evidence for a Pagan worldview ("the Pagans just maybe right" (sic)), I think it's important to point these things out. And, again, Buddhism is just one example of many other traditions which recognize this interconnectedness to one degree or another.
Now, admittedly, I've latched onto your injection of Paganism into what could have been an otherwise fruitful discussion of interconnectedness and the importance of considering the consequences of our own actions, but it's difficult to avoid doing so when both your thread title and comments place undue focus on the Pagan worldview. If you want to discuss the science from the article and its implications for how we live our lives, then you may want to consider framing your original post differently (I'd be happy to alter the thread title if you'd like), or at least re-directing the discussion with a new post of your own elaborating on the kind of things you want to discuss.
|
Actually, Paganism is a term given to any religion other than that of the Judeo/Christian/Islamic (Abrahamic Monotheistic) God. While, we may tack on our own views of what "Pagan" truly represents... by definition it encompasses ALL religions that are not based on the Abrahamic Monotheistic God.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paganism
Quote:
Paganism (from Latin paganus, meaning "an old country dweller, rustic") is a term which, from a Western perspective, has come to connote a broad set of spiritual or cultic practices or beliefs of any folk religion, and of historical and contemporary polytheistic religions in particular.
The term can be defined broadly, to encompass the faith traditions outside the Abrahamic monotheistic group of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. The group so defined includes the Indian religions (such as Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism), Native American religions and mythologies and Shinto as well as non-Abrahamic ethnic religions in general. More narrow definitions will not include any of the world religions and restrict the term to local or rural currents not organized as civil religions. Characteristic of Pagan traditions is the absence of proselytism, and the presence of a living mythology which explains religious practice.[1]
|
Since most of the above described religions believe in an interconnectedness and/or that we are all one, the title is appropriate.
Quote:
|
Paganism" frequently refers to the religions of classical antiquity, most notably Greek mythology or Roman religion, and can be used neutrally or admiringly by those who refer to those complexes of belief.
|
==========================================================
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by albania
I often find that when someone brings up the subject of interconnectedness they fail to see the true philosophical implications. How do people see interconnectedness? I visualize it as strings reaching all things and people, finite and infinite strings each one describes what we have in common to everything attached to the string. This whole mass then becomes the very embodiment of a related existence.
Think about it carefully though, there is another way to look at the strings, they don't only connect us they trap us. Can there possibly be freedom in such a system? By necessity any action that I take is only an action that can be displayed and connected to a string. In this interconnected world I can not make any value judgments; I can only display behavior that is confined by everything around me. Something in this world is not good or bad it is simply is at most a minute part of this creature that embodies everything. What I’m trying to get across is almost the carbon copy of a predestination argument, where does this leave or free will?
People don’t often think about it in this way. To me it seems more appropriate to comment on it tersely. There are indeed things that everything has in common but they hold no deep meaning; they are a statement of fact and not a demonstration of some abstract universal truth.
|
It's a good point, however, just because one is interconnected does not take out free will and one's choices.
A drug addict arguably chose to do the drugs that addicted him. His family is affected, their friends are affected because of their worry, disgust, embarrassment, etc.... the addict's friends are affected because the addict was a close friend and ended up hurting them, he may introduce some friends to the drug and turns them into addicts, and they do that to their friends and so on and so on.... those friends not drug addicted are affected by their reactions and how they handle future friends..... society is affected by the loss of a worker, the individual talents the addict has, the crimes he may commit, having to pay for his healthcare, jail time, rehabs, etc.
Now, this addict also affects the drug dealer selling the stuff, the supplier who stops farming food and farms poppies or coca (for example), he affects governments, gives terrorist cells profits, affects forests and so on.
Thus, one had the choice but his choice affected large amounts of people, society as a whole and the world surrounding him and everyone.
When you truly think about it, every decision we as individuals, we as cities, counties, states, nations, society and so on make..... the ripples in some way, are truly felt everywhere else around the world.
But free will exists, in spite of it. We need free will to grow and expand, it is free will that has made us what we are, good or bad. It is free will of individuals that will either destroy mankind or save mankind and in turn destroy the planet or save the planet.
God/Mother Earth/ Buddha/ Zeus/ Apollo/ Ra/ whomever you believe in or even evolution.... gave us free will and individuality for a reason. We as individuals have to decide for ourselves how to use it and hope that the good outweighs the bad choices in the end.