To me this proves we are all interconnected and the Pagans just maybe right - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

pan6467 · 09-11-2007, 10:45 PM

Now, knowing we are all interconnected and dependent upon each other.... from the smallest bacteria to the largest tree to man to the creatures 2 miles underwater...... shouldn't we all try to make sure we don't kill each other off.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience/...eafloorlifetoo

Quote:

Asteroid Impact Would Devastate Seafloor Life, Too

Andrea Thompson
LiveScience Staff Writer
LiveScience.comTue Sep 11, 9:10 AM ET

If an asteroid were to hit Earth and wipe out all life at the planet's surface, the creatures that live around deep sea hydrothermal vents would be safe from destruction, scientists have long thought. What goes on above the ocean's waves should be of little concern to creatures living 2 miles below.

But apparently it is, new research finds.

During a global catastrophe, the shrimp and mussels that thrive around these vents may be just as doomed as the rest of us.

Creatures such as bacteria, shrimp and snails have flourished around hydrothermal vents, despite the fact that no sunlight reaches to the depths of the ocean floor. Instead, colonies get nutrition from the minerals dissolved in the superheated water that spews out from the vents.

Through a process called chemosynthesis, microbes convert the heat and minerals produced by the vents into energy. They then provide food to more complex forms of life, such as mollusks, crustaceans and worms.

Scientists had thought that because the food source of the creatures living around the vents was independent from the world above that an event such as a giant asteroid collision, which can kick up a cloud of debris that blocks the sun for months or years, wouldn't affect the vent ecosystems.

But new research done by Jon Copley of the University of Southampton indicates that the offspring of some of these creatures grow up away from the life-sustaining vents and depend for food on whatever material sinks down from the sunlit surface waters.

In fact, the vent inhabitants time the birth of their offspring with the seasons—even though they cannot see the sun. They time the release of their young to the spring bloom of the microscopic plant life that grows on the ocean's surface—stuff that sinks after it dies.

"I used to think these deep-sea communities would be safe from whatever havoc happens up here," Copley said. "But finding seasonality down there shows that life beneath the waves is far more connected than we realized."

Copley, who presented his research at the British Association for the Advancement of Science's Festival of Science, warns that because of this newly discovered susceptibility, deep sea vent communities could be impacted as climate change alters life in surface waters, though researchers have not found any evidence of climate change impacts in the deep ocean yet.

The other thing of note..... if these creatures 2 miles underwater know seasons...... then perhaps the Pagan's are right... Earth mother truly is.

SecretMethod70 · 09-12-2007, 02:59 AM

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.

Ourcrazymodern? · 09-12-2007, 06:31 AM

The earth IS our mother, inasmuchas we all came from it. All the other philosophies and even the science are developments thereof. Possibly we could go with the flow of the OP's idea and project a feeling of acceptance and joy at the fact that we're even here to be aware of anything else.
And enjoy our inter-connectedness for what it is, an opportunity for understanding.
Before the asteroid comes I hope our distant offspring feel better about each other!

Ustwo · 09-12-2007, 07:04 AM

Some of the life would possibly not survive at the thermal vents, but the bacteria would, and those are the ones that matter.

Really the only way life will be wiped out on the earth is if it were utterly destroyed. Bacteria have been found miles below the surface (and I'm not talking ocean but hard rock surface), some life can hibernate for centuries.

We already had a true mass extinction in the Permian where 90-95% of all species went extinct. Mother earth must have had a real bout of PMS then. Several other times more than 75% of the species went extinct in a short period of time.

We are all mostly interconnected in that we all eat each other. Of course I agree we shouldn't try to kill each other off, its never wise to out hunt your food supply.

What I'm not sure is how I should embrace people who put some sort of conscious spirit, some higher intelligence, in natural phenomena. I don't think of the earth as a living thing, its a ball of minerals. It supports living things who have no real foresight, but are just balls of self replicating chemicals whose primary trait is seeing to it that there are more of them. Really if the earth is in fact a living thing we would be best described as parasites.

Neo-paganism to me (besides as a way of annoying parents) seems to be more of a way of loving nature while being completely ignorant of it. Its assigning motives to that which has no real motive. We all want to be part of something big and special, not just the naked apes we are.

roachboy · 09-12-2007, 08:28 AM

i'm not sure i see much beyond an aesthetic question in this business concerning the word "paganism" here...if it provides a set of metaphors that you find generative to play with, then fine; if you dont, then you dont.

pan made a general wave in the direction of gaia--smeth raises the meta-question concerning metaphor choice--ustwo inserts a particular (not wrong, but particular nonetheless in terms of scale, in terms of attributes selected to foreground and attributes selected to not foreground)...so we are 4 posts in and there are already 3 repertoires that have been introduced (4 if you count this one, despite my attempt to remain to the side)

so there's another possibility for thinking about the thread that basically agrees with the jist of smeth's post but twists it in a different direction:

let the various aesthetic preferences play out and wonder along the way whether these divergent choices nonetheless allow people to talk about the same thing----or not: for example, between pan's and ustwo's posts above, you get mutually exclusive notions of "connectedness"...at least they appear to be mutually exclusive at first--but are they necessarily so?

just another way to proceed...

Plan9 · 09-12-2007, 08:30 AM

Note to all pagans:

Nature is not friendly.

Ourcrazymodern? · 09-12-2007, 03:37 PM

"It's not nice to fool Mother Nature"

-foolish, yes, and not all that telling.

Are you happy to be alive, for the time being, come what may? Would any ONE among us prefer nonexistence?

No "view points" are mutually exclusive because we're all here together, and like it or not, it's just us here.

...Speaking as internalized bacteria and other cool stuff and at the mercy of the universe: Protect our place as best you can.

SecretMethod70 · 09-12-2007, 04:40 PM

Indeed, the inter-related nature of existence is a very important lesson that all ought to understand, and I hope I didn't come across as hostile to that fact. I'm simply leary of attempts to use such observations as proof of some sort that one tradition (in this case, Paganism, or more accurately, as Ustwo points out, neo-Paganism) is "right," which is how this thread was framed. Especially when the concept is not even remotely exclusive to that tradition.

When it comes to discussing this inter-relation, I'm honestly not sure what there is to discuss. Everything is connected, in some way, to everything else, and we should be more careful about what we do to ourselves and the world around us. Is there any debate about this outside of some religious fundamentalists?

albania · 09-12-2007, 05:34 PM

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.

ubertuber · 09-12-2007, 06:35 PM

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.

That's an interesting way to frame this thread. However, if you think about it in a larger context, what you are saying is really so well understood that it's a truism.

Does any of us really believe that we are free of the consequences of our own actions? Does any of us really think that we live in a vacuum, without relationship to anything around us?

The value in reframing these understood things in the way you have, albania, is that it causes us to look freshly at what it known.

Lady Sage · 09-13-2007, 04:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crompsin

Note to all pagans:
Nature is not friendly.

We know.

pan6467 · 09-13-2007, 09:30 PM

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.

albania · 09-14-2007, 05:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ubertuber

That's an interesting way to frame this thread. However, if you think about it in a larger context, what you are saying is really so well understood that it's a truism.

Does any of us really believe that we are free of the consequences of our own actions? Does any of us really think that we live in a vacuum, without relationship to anything around us?

The value in reframing these understood things in the way you have, albania, is that it causes us to look freshly at what it known.

Right, this is true. But my point was that the proof of the value of interconnectedness does not follow from the facts. We look at the things we have in common, to refer to pan's later post the ripples we make, and we don't see them for what they truly are, facts. From these facts the things we wish don't necessarily follow; i.e. (not that anyone specifically made this argument) it does not follow, at least for me, that everyone should try to get along or that we should hold ourselves responsible for the well being of others that we influence. One can even make the case that interconnectedness has bad implications; my conjarbled attempt to show this was my initial post.

Quote:

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.

This is the way I wish I could see the world. However, you chose to single out an example of a negative effect. Suppose, in a similar fashion there is a positive effect. Is there any difference between these actions in the interconnected world I thought of. Not really, ultimately, they are both just expressions of how we connect to the things around us, neither is a better or worse expression of that fact. Such a base system does not really allow for value judgments.

To deviate for a moment. For that matter what system of thought when broken down to the base truly allows for value judgments? I seem to have gotten myself nowhere, and I can't seem to answer a question that has popped in my mind as I was responding: In what way do I see the world that allows for me to logically make a value judgment? All I know is that interconnectedness never sat right with me.

SecretMethod70 · 09-16-2007, 03:27 AM

pan6467: If that's what you meant, it's a bit more acceptable, though still incorrect. Defining Pagan as anything non-Abrahamic is an extremely broad definition, and you'd have to realize that most people do not understand the term in that manner (including those who are in the business of religious studies). It is much more commonly understood to mean religions without strict organization and/or religions relating specifically to nature. Besides, I think it's fair that I assumed that is the definition you intended since 1) you're pretty open about your own neo-Pagan beliefs and 2) very few organized non-Abrahamic religions have any concept of an "Earth Mother," which you referenced in your opening post. Also, even if you meant for "Pagan" to mean any non-Abrahamic religion, it ignores the fact that most Abrahamic religions also recognize interconnectedness to one degree or another. Anyway, it's not particularly important, I simply mean to say that you should be more careful about throwing around anything as "proof" for any particular spiritual view in opposition to any other, especially if what you intend to discuss has nothing to do with that.

Now, onto the more interesting discussion...

albania: At the base level, I must agree that there is no such thing as free will. This, however, is a conclusion I came to long ago and I believe it is the only logical answer to the question technically speaking. As complex as humans are - as complex as the neurons that make up our brain are, or the unseen ties that bind us through our interactions are - everything ultimately breaks down to the atom. One can talk about inanimate consciousness or one can ignore that concept completely but, in the end, I don't think it matters and the atoms (and, breaking it down even further, the subatomic particles) work according to the laws of physics - some of which we understand and some of which we do not. In this sense, all of existence is determined. I am choosing to respond to this thread, but ultimately it is not a choice. On the larger scale, it is not a choice because of the life experiences I have had which have shaped my personality in such a way that I will choose to respond right now, but even more significantly all of those life experiences can be broken down to the interactions of particles that must and do interact in the exact way that they have. Quantum physics may allow for a certain degree of randomness, but even that randomness is not indicative of any free will because I am not my atoms. My atoms are me, and they will do whatever they will do.

But - and this is where we get to the important things - so what?

While I can't think of any serious reason to believe in free will, I continue to live my life as if my choices are my own, while simultaneously recognizing that my choices are impacted by those of others, and so on. Still, even any attempt we make to assert our free will by doing something which we think goes against what we are inclined to do...is not free will. On the atomic level, we were destined to attempt to assert our free will in that way, at that time.

So, what implication does it have? None, really, and I think it's a mistake to look for one. I challenge anyone to think of a new way to live if there is no free will. Try to be more free? That's simply a predetermined response to the predetermined discovery in your brain that there is no free will, and even your change in lifestyle upon realizing this is, in itself, not a free choice. So, if there is no free will, the only reasonable option is to acknowledge the fact... and move on. Think as if you are free, act as if you are free, all with the internal understanding that you are, in fact, not free. For to think and act as if you are not free is to unnecessarily create unhappiness for yourself regarding something which, lacking free will, you cannot control in the first place. And even this "choice" to think and act as if you are free is not a choice at all. I am compelled to write this by the workings of the atoms that currently make up my brain, which are causing me to impact the physical world around me, which will transmit this data (made of yet more atoms and particles) to you, and ultimately I hope that the workings of my atoms will have a cascade effect so as to impact the workings of your atoms and create the "choice" to think and act as if you are free. You can see, we are not free, but it is useless to spend much energy on the fact beyond acknowledging it.

Now, as for interconnectedness in the broader sense, that is a different story. If our atoms will allow us to think and act as if we are free and put our lack of free will on the back burner, so to speak, then we are faced with the choice of how to let this understanding that everything is inter-related shape our decisions. This is where focusing on the "good" side of inter-relation comes in, where we recognize the importance of our own actions and "choose" to live according to that. It is by becoming "in tune" with this interconnectedness that we can lead happier, more fulfilling, lives, while also improving the lives of those around us. This is generally what is meant by interdependent co-arising. Because of the cosmic inter-relation, we rise and fall together, like points on an infinitely complex net. If you rise, the people and objects around you rise in accordance and as the distance gets greater, the effect lessens. If you descend, the same thing happens in the opposite direction. It is by choosing to rise, in recognition of our interconnectedness, that we create a happier existence for ourselves and those around us. As you rise and bring those people and things around you up along with you, they are often compelled to make the same choice, only enhancing the rising effect. But, the nature of existence is that there will be others that choose to descend and this counters your rising effect. The idea is that the more people recognize this inter-relation, the more will choose to rise, and the more progress will be made in that direction. So, recognizing an interconnected world has significant implications regarding our own lives. Our own well-being is linked, in the broadest sense, to the well-being of others. While we can find ways to consider ourselves happy separate from the well-being of others, it is through the recognition of our own interconnectedness that we are able to reach higher points, both collectively and individually.

09-12-2007, 02:59 AM	#2 (permalink)
SecretMethod70 Human Administrator Location: Chicago	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. __________________ Le temps détruit tout "Musicians are the carriers and communicators of spirit in the most immediate sense." - Kurt Elling

09-12-2007, 06:31 AM	#3 (permalink)
Ourcrazymodern? still, wondering. Location: South Minneapolis, somewhere near the gorgeous gorge	The earth IS our mother, inasmuchas we all came from it. All the other philosophies and even the science are developments thereof. Possibly we could go with the flow of the OP's idea and project a feeling of acceptance and joy at the fact that we're even here to be aware of anything else. And enjoy our inter-connectedness for what it is, an opportunity for understanding. Before the asteroid comes I hope our distant offspring feel better about each other! __________________ BE JUST AND FEAR NOT

09-12-2007, 07:04 AM	#4 (permalink)
Ustwo Pissing in the cornflakes	Some of the life would possibly not survive at the thermal vents, but the bacteria would, and those are the ones that matter. Really the only way life will be wiped out on the earth is if it were utterly destroyed. Bacteria have been found miles below the surface (and I'm not talking ocean but hard rock surface), some life can hibernate for centuries. We already had a true mass extinction in the Permian where 90-95% of all species went extinct. Mother earth must have had a real bout of PMS then. Several other times more than 75% of the species went extinct in a short period of time. We are all mostly interconnected in that we all eat each other. Of course I agree we shouldn't try to kill each other off, its never wise to out hunt your food supply. What I'm not sure is how I should embrace people who put some sort of conscious spirit, some higher intelligence, in natural phenomena. I don't think of the earth as a living thing, its a ball of minerals. It supports living things who have no real foresight, but are just balls of self replicating chemicals whose primary trait is seeing to it that there are more of them. Really if the earth is in fact a living thing we would be best described as parasites. Neo-paganism to me (besides as a way of annoying parents) seems to be more of a way of loving nature while being completely ignorant of it. Its assigning motives to that which has no real motive. We all want to be part of something big and special, not just the naked apes we are. __________________ Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

09-12-2007, 08:28 AM	#5 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	i'm not sure i see much beyond an aesthetic question in this business concerning the word "paganism" here...if it provides a set of metaphors that you find generative to play with, then fine; if you dont, then you dont. pan made a general wave in the direction of gaia--smeth raises the meta-question concerning metaphor choice--ustwo inserts a particular (not wrong, but particular nonetheless in terms of scale, in terms of attributes selected to foreground and attributes selected to not foreground)...so we are 4 posts in and there are already 3 repertoires that have been introduced (4 if you count this one, despite my attempt to remain to the side) so there's another possibility for thinking about the thread that basically agrees with the jist of smeth's post but twists it in a different direction: let the various aesthetic preferences play out and wonder along the way whether these divergent choices nonetheless allow people to talk about the same thing----or not: for example, between pan's and ustwo's posts above, you get mutually exclusive notions of "connectedness"...at least they appear to be mutually exclusive at first--but are they necessarily so? just another way to proceed... __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite Last edited by roachboy; 09-12-2007 at 08:32 AM..

09-12-2007, 08:30 AM	#6 (permalink)
Plan9 I Confess a Shiver	Note to all pagans: Nature is not friendly. __________________ *Whatever you can carry.* "You should not drink... and bake."

09-12-2007, 03:37 PM	#7 (permalink)
Ourcrazymodern? still, wondering. Location: South Minneapolis, somewhere near the gorgeous gorge	"It's not nice to fool Mother Nature" -foolish, yes, and not all that telling. Are you happy to be alive, for the time being, come what may? Would any ONE among us prefer nonexistence? No "view points" are mutually exclusive because we're all here together, and like it or not, it's just us here. ...Speaking as internalized bacteria and other cool stuff and at the mercy of the universe: Protect our place as best you can. __________________ BE JUST AND FEAR NOT

09-12-2007, 04:40 PM	#8 (permalink)
SecretMethod70 Human Administrator Location: Chicago	Indeed, the inter-related nature of existence is a very important lesson that all ought to understand, and I hope I didn't come across as hostile to that fact. I'm simply leary of attempts to use such observations as proof of some sort that one tradition (in this case, Paganism, or more accurately, as Ustwo points out, neo-Paganism) is "right," which is how this thread was framed. Especially when the concept is not even remotely exclusive to that tradition. When it comes to discussing this inter-relation, I'm honestly not sure what there is to discuss. Everything is connected, in some way, to everything else, and we should be more careful about what we do to ourselves and the world around us. Is there any debate about this outside of some religious fundamentalists? __________________ Le temps détruit tout "Musicians are the carriers and communicators of spirit in the most immediate sense." - Kurt Elling

09-12-2007, 05:34 PM	#9 (permalink)
albania Psycho	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.

09-16-2007, 03:27 AM	#14 (permalink)
SecretMethod70 Human Administrator Location: Chicago	pan6467: If that's what you meant, it's a bit more acceptable, though still incorrect. Defining Pagan as anything non-Abrahamic is an extremely broad definition, and you'd have to realize that most people do not understand the term in that manner (including those who are in the business of religious studies). It is much more commonly understood to mean religions without strict organization and/or religions relating specifically to nature. Besides, I think it's fair that I assumed that is the definition you intended since 1) you're pretty open about your own neo-Pagan beliefs and 2) very few organized non-Abrahamic religions have any concept of an "Earth Mother," which you referenced in your opening post. Also, even if you meant for "Pagan" to mean any non-Abrahamic religion, it ignores the fact that most Abrahamic religions also recognize interconnectedness to one degree or another. Anyway, it's not particularly important, I simply mean to say that you should be more careful about throwing around anything as "proof" for any particular spiritual view in opposition to any other, especially if what you intend to discuss has nothing to do with that. Now, onto the more interesting discussion... albania: At the base level, I must agree that there is no such thing as free will. This, however, is a conclusion I came to long ago and I believe it is the only logical answer to the question technically speaking. As complex as humans are - as complex as the neurons that make up our brain are, or the unseen ties that bind us through our interactions are - everything ultimately breaks down to the atom. One can talk about inanimate consciousness or one can ignore that concept completely but, in the end, I don't think it matters and the atoms (and, breaking it down even further, the subatomic particles) work according to the laws of physics - some of which we understand and some of which we do not. In this sense, all of existence is determined. I am choosing to respond to this thread, but ultimately it is not a choice. On the larger scale, it is not a choice because of the life experiences I have had which have shaped my personality in such a way that I will choose to respond right now, but even more significantly all of those life experiences can be broken down to the interactions of particles that must and do interact in the exact way that they have. Quantum physics may allow for a certain degree of randomness, but even that randomness is not indicative of any free will because I am not my atoms. My atoms are me, and they will do whatever they will do. But - and this is where we get to the important things - *so what?* While I can't think of any serious reason to believe in free will, I continue to live my life as if my choices are my own, while simultaneously recognizing that my choices are impacted by those of others, and so on. Still, even any attempt we make to assert our free will by doing something which we think goes against what we are inclined to do...is not free will. On the atomic level, we were destined to attempt to assert our free will in that way, at that time. So, what implication does it have? None, really, and I think it's a mistake to look for one. I challenge anyone to think of a new way to live if there is no free will. Try to be more free? That's simply a predetermined response to the predetermined discovery in your brain that there is no free will, and even your change in lifestyle upon realizing this is, in itself, not a free choice. So, if there is no free will, the only reasonable option is to acknowledge the fact... and move on. Think as if you are free, act as if you are free, all with the internal understanding that you are, in fact, not free. For to think and act as if you are not free is to unnecessarily create unhappiness for yourself regarding something which, lacking free will, you cannot control in the first place. And even this "choice" to think and act as if you are free is not a choice at all. I am compelled to write this by the workings of the atoms that currently make up my brain, which are causing me to impact the physical world around me, which will transmit this data (made of yet more atoms and particles) to you, and ultimately I hope that the workings of my atoms will have a cascade effect so as to impact the workings of your atoms and create the "choice" to think and act as if you are free. You can see, we are not free, but it is useless to spend much energy on the fact beyond acknowledging it. Now, as for interconnectedness in the broader sense, that is a different story. If our atoms will allow us to think and act as if we are free and put our lack of free will on the back burner, so to speak, then we are faced with the choice of how to let this understanding that everything is inter-related shape our decisions. This is where focusing on the "good" side of inter-relation comes in, where we recognize the importance of our own actions and "choose" to live according to that. It is by becoming "in tune" with this interconnectedness that we can lead happier, more fulfilling, lives, while also improving the lives of those around us. This is generally what is meant by interdependent co-arising. Because of the cosmic inter-relation, we rise and fall together, like points on an infinitely complex net. If you rise, the people and objects around you rise in accordance and as the distance gets greater, the effect lessens. If you descend, the same thing happens in the opposite direction. It is by choosing to rise, in recognition of our interconnectedness, that we create a happier existence for ourselves and those around us. As you rise and bring those people and things around you up along with you, they are often compelled to make the same choice, only enhancing the rising effect. But, the nature of existence is that there will be others that choose to descend and this counters your rising effect. The idea is that the more people recognize this inter-relation, the more will choose to rise, and the more progress will be made in that direction. So, recognizing an interconnected world has significant implications regarding our own lives. Our own well-being is linked, in the broadest sense, to the well-being of others. While we can find ways to consider ourselves happy separate from the well-being of others, it is through the recognition of our own interconnectedness that we are able to reach higher points, both collectively and individually. __________________ Le temps détruit tout "Musicians are the carriers and communicators of spirit in the most immediate sense." - Kurt Elling