Shaping nature to benefit man isn't destroying nature. Using trees to make a house isn't destroying nature. Burning coal to make heat isn't destroying nature.
Our ancestors used to be much better at maintaining the land. Then judeo-agriculture came along and now almost every farm is a factory farm, monocrop farm, or some similarly destructive bullshit.
You entire argument is based on the false presumption that nature is useless without man giving it value. What we have done is destroy. GMOs, monoculture, polluting the environment with countless toxins (some we may never be rid of), clear cutting hundreds of thousands of miles of wilderness so we can eat bananas, driving entire species into extinction (or damn near close to it)... The list goes on. Our current way of life, and this goes for all of humanity, does not make nature useful; it destroys nature for the gain of those in power, many of whom are jews. This is why environmentalism, originally a National Socialist cause, was co-opted by jews and turned into a left wing movement, so they could control it, use it as a means of wealth redistribution, and create a divisive dialectic.
Thousands? Really? And how many have 4000 year old books containing God's laws and 2000 year old books about prophesy that we see coming true in real time?
Are you saying men created all the other gods just not yours ? All of them or as real to their followers as your god is to you and they all have scriptures. Some of them are way older than 4000 years yes and propheces coming true? that's complete BS mate.
If you are born in india you believe in Vishnu, born in Iran you believe in Allah, etc.
You don't believe in 2999 gods out of 3000, that's one god away from being atheist.
Anyway, there is something to be said about correcting man's ecological situation and philosophy. I think this is necessary. But this is going to be largely a top-down matter. One must first eliminate rabid consumerism, the endless cycle of fulfilling ourselves by buying, buying, buying. Consume product. Get excited for next product.
Using natural resources to meet our needs is not anathema to nature. It's a fact of the world, like death. We are antagonized. There is nothing we can do, even in principle, that does not antagonize something else.
These pagan and neo-pagan bullshit ideas are often guilty of a total historical farce: i.e. the noble savage fallacy. I've noticed it most gratuitously when it comes to all things 'indigenous'. Take the native American Indians for example. The way these people have become culturally canonized as 'painting with all the colors of the wind' (read as: living in especial harmony with nature) is drooling dogshit.
They didn't. They stripped areas of resources competitively and moved to the next area. Consume area. Get excited for next area. Oh no, we encountered another tribe. Slaughter. People also like to put the blame for disappearing buffalo populations on 'da white man'; no, the indigenous had nearly wiped them out before any significant European population arrived.
You're always the worst people who have ever lived. And there's always a race of perfect beings who lived in a past golden era.
It's amazing how the people who will castigate Christians for being smooth-brained and regressive, always have these actually primitive features of primitive religions as part of their worldview. What is the noble savage paradigm if not a secular version of Eden?
I'm also fascinated by the psychological power of memes. Put an old guy in black-and-white with a quote above him...instant wisdom.
Yeah this is gay. God is not nature, or vice versa. If we want to “preserve nature” what we are doing is conserving our resources by living efficiently: getting more and more out of less and less. This takes a suppression of our selfish impulses and emphasis on coordination toward a positive outcome for the group. That is what makes a society more productive out of fewer resources.
The way to engineer a group to behave in a more cooperative and efficient way is to lower in group competition is to enforce policies that are mostly consistent with white traditional values: monogamy, modesty, avoiding gluttony and pleasure seeking wasteful behaviors. Ironically the leftists, by trying to destroy traditional taboos on sex and drug use and “racial diversity” destroy efficiency and increase destructive competition. They subsidize the most wasteful individuals at the expense of the most efficient ones.
[ - ] CHIRO 1 point 2.6 yearsOct 3, 2022 10:37:55 ago (+1/-0)
You make a good point about the social programs in your second paragraph. Efficiency and frugality are components of wisdom that emerge from scarcity and sacrifice. One has to 'endure' not-having to appreciate having, and that usually entails 'getting' the 'having' oneself.
The trouble with social programs is that, in much the same way that undiscerning parents can breed contemptible consumerism in their children, it gives for free what people require earning to appreciate. Regardless of what values a person might say they have, if their actions day in and day out suppose the government is a Giving Tree, the recipient will lose all sense for the Form of Life and its hardship.
If you are not punished for consuming, then you will consume. It's just nurturing the worst elements of the human nature. But some brands of politician use the resources of others to make themselves the Giving Tree.
Structuring an ideal society is a tough nut to crack. I can't say I know how. One thing I know for sure is that it would require that every citizen understands and knows how to 'ride the lightning', meaning the balancing act between the human impulse to out-perform his neighbors, and the objective cooperation the society necessitates. I think this comes down to how a society understands games, and what a society values.
This is one reason I believe religion plays an important role in an enduring civilization. Consider values as having some terminus, some end - so everything a human pursues has a teleological description: "I am doing this so that I can ultimately ___X____." If we say, yes, there is always a human impulse to out-compete his neighbors, then the only way to prevent that from becoming runaway, even in principle, is for the majority of people in a community to value something more than that particular rat race.
As a candidate, 'the common good' is inadequate in most cases to stifle that sort of runaway consumerist competition.
Any sufficient candidate, I think, is going to entail a worldview that includes concepts about the hereafter, a transcendent kind of observer and judge (however one wants to conceive of it) that adds an abstract layer of significance to how we conduct our lives (and our competing).
If not for this, all that there is, is the great pissing match. Key to whatever this abstract observation layer is, is that it must be powerful enough to coarse-grain to the level of the individual (this is the beginning of how we get God concepts). To see why only requires us to recognize why Godless worldviews fail at this.
Suppose some community has a prevailing concept about the common good. We can even suppose that everyone in the community believes that a common good is true, i.e. that it really is better for his community to fare better collectively.
Like in almost all cases of moral judgment in man, he will construe his own actions conceptually distinctly from the 'body' of actions he sees as resulting in the common good. Basically, hypocrisy. We're all hypocrites. If he acts so as to out-compete his neighbors and accrue disproportionately greater 'stuff', he will think that he is one from among, say, a thousand. It is OKAY for him to be that ONE. Just so long as this establishes a structured order that quite naturally precipitates the hierarchical levels so as to maintain a 'mean' for the Others that supports the common good.
Great. But who gets to decide why THAT guy gets to be the ONE. He's just a human. Fuck that, I only live once...it ought to be me. I have the skills. He's a dimwit.
The function of the abstract layer of supernatural observer that can coarse-grain all the way to the level of the individual person means that no such behavior can be justified on the basis of 'the numbers carrying it' (as in when the person who out-performs thinks to himself: this community can support just so much over-achievement). Whether or not the individual's behavior has CONSEQUENCES that hurt the community, the coarse-graining of the supernatural observer is not consequentialist, it will make his actions wrong whether he 'gets away with them' at the human level or not.
It's a simple matter to see how important this function is.
[ + ] texasblood
[ - ] texasblood -1 points 2.6 yearsOct 3, 2022 09:54:20 ago (+0/-1)
(attack the creator)
[ + ] 1point21jiggawatts
[ - ] 1point21jiggawatts -1 points 2.6 yearsOct 3, 2022 13:32:32 ago (+0/-1)
When He's done with it He's going to wipe it all out Himself.
Climate change is fake and gay and EVERYONE who thinks it's real is an actual faggot.
[ + ] Deleted
[ - ] deleted 0 points 2.6 yearsOct 3, 2022 05:42:48 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena 0 points 2.6 yearsOct 3, 2022 09:48:00 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena 0 points 2.6 yearsOct 3, 2022 09:28:02 ago (+1/-1)
[ + ] Ragnar
[ - ] Ragnar 0 points 2.6 yearsOct 3, 2022 11:23:07 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] DaveTheBlank
[ - ] DaveTheBlank 0 points 2.6 yearsOct 3, 2022 17:32:29 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] Wahaha
[ - ] Wahaha 2 points 2.6 yearsOct 3, 2022 04:51:28 ago (+2/-0)
Man is transforming nature to be useful.
[ + ] NaturalSelectionistWorker
[ - ] NaturalSelectionistWorker 2 points 2.6 yearsOct 3, 2022 07:09:06 ago (+2/-0)
[ + ] IfuckedYerMum
[ - ] IfuckedYerMum 1 point 2.6 yearsOct 3, 2022 09:51:07 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] FreeinTX
[ - ] FreeinTX 2 points 2.6 yearsOct 3, 2022 06:53:14 ago (+5/-3)
[ + ] IfuckedYerMum
[ - ] IfuckedYerMum 1 point 2.6 yearsOct 3, 2022 09:52:38 ago (+3/-2)
[ + ] FreeinTX
[ - ] FreeinTX 2 points 2.6 yearsOct 3, 2022 10:28:07 ago (+3/-1)
[ + ] IfuckedYerMum
[ - ] IfuckedYerMum 1 point 2.6 yearsOct 3, 2022 10:43:13 ago (+2/-1)
[ + ] FreeinTX
[ - ] FreeinTX 0 points 2.6 yearsOct 3, 2022 10:50:58 ago (+1/-1)
[ + ] IfuckedYerMum
[ - ] IfuckedYerMum 1 point 2.6 yearsOct 3, 2022 12:55:40 ago (+2/-1)
[ + ] FreeinTX
[ - ] FreeinTX -1 points 2.6 yearsOct 3, 2022 13:28:46 ago (+0/-1)
God created nature and man, so stop sucking dick or you'll end up in hell.
[ + ] IfuckedYerMum
[ - ] IfuckedYerMum 1 point 2.6 yearsOct 3, 2022 14:48:01 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] FreeinTX
[ - ] FreeinTX -1 points 2.6 yearsOct 3, 2022 15:27:09 ago (+0/-1)
[ + ] 1point21jiggawatts
[ - ] 1point21jiggawatts -1 points 2.6 yearsOct 3, 2022 13:33:58 ago (+0/-1)
[ + ] IfuckedYerMum
[ - ] IfuckedYerMum 1 point 2.6 yearsOct 3, 2022 14:49:50 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] bl_nk
[ - ] bl_nk 0 points 2.6 yearsOct 4, 2022 01:49:23 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] FreeinTX
[ - ] FreeinTX 0 points 2.6 yearsOct 4, 2022 07:17:28 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] bl_nk
[ - ] bl_nk 0 points 2.6 yearsOct 4, 2022 10:59:03 ago (+0/-0)
If you are born in india you believe in Vishnu, born in Iran you believe in Allah, etc.
You don't believe in 2999 gods out of 3000, that's one god away from being atheist.
[ + ] FreeinTX
[ - ] FreeinTX 0 points 2.6 yearsOct 4, 2022 18:25:58 ago (+0/-0)
No.
Strawman bullshit.
Not even remotely true.
Stupid dodge, faggot
[ + ] bl_nk
[ - ] bl_nk 0 points 2.6 yearsOct 4, 2022 21:34:08 ago (+0/-0)
You don't believe in all the other gods why ? because you think they aren't real ? hence MAN MADE ?
I shouldn't even bother, you're a retarded religious idiot, I can't expect you to think too much.
Have a nice day !
[ + ] 1point21jiggawatts
[ - ] 1point21jiggawatts 0 points 2.6 yearsOct 3, 2022 13:33:26 ago (+1/-1)
[ + ] IfuckedYerMum
[ - ] IfuckedYerMum 0 points 2.6 yearsOct 3, 2022 14:48:47 ago (+2/-2)
[ + ] bl_nk
[ - ] bl_nk -1 points 2.6 yearsOct 3, 2022 23:35:31 ago (+0/-1)
[ + ] CHIRO
[ - ] CHIRO 3 points 2.6 yearsOct 3, 2022 09:18:49 ago (+4/-1)
Panentheism on the other hand...
Anyway, there is something to be said about correcting man's ecological situation and philosophy. I think this is necessary. But this is going to be largely a top-down matter. One must first eliminate rabid consumerism, the endless cycle of fulfilling ourselves by buying, buying, buying. Consume product. Get excited for next product.
Using natural resources to meet our needs is not anathema to nature. It's a fact of the world, like death. We are antagonized. There is nothing we can do, even in principle, that does not antagonize something else.
These pagan and neo-pagan bullshit ideas are often guilty of a total historical farce: i.e. the noble savage fallacy. I've noticed it most gratuitously when it comes to all things 'indigenous'. Take the native American Indians for example. The way these people have become culturally canonized as 'painting with all the colors of the wind' (read as: living in especial harmony with nature) is drooling dogshit.
They didn't. They stripped areas of resources competitively and moved to the next area. Consume area. Get excited for next area. Oh no, we encountered another tribe. Slaughter. People also like to put the blame for disappearing buffalo populations on 'da white man'; no, the indigenous had nearly wiped them out before any significant European population arrived.
You're always the worst people who have ever lived. And there's always a race of perfect beings who lived in a past golden era.
It's amazing how the people who will castigate Christians for being smooth-brained and regressive, always have these actually primitive features of primitive religions as part of their worldview. What is the noble savage paradigm if not a secular version of Eden?
I'm also fascinated by the psychological power of memes. Put an old guy in black-and-white with a quote above him...instant wisdom.
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena 1 point 2.6 yearsOct 3, 2022 09:46:40 ago (+1/-0)
The way to engineer a group to behave in a more cooperative and efficient way is to lower in group competition is to enforce policies that are mostly consistent with white traditional values: monogamy, modesty, avoiding gluttony and pleasure seeking wasteful behaviors. Ironically the leftists, by trying to destroy traditional taboos on sex and drug use and “racial diversity” destroy efficiency and increase destructive competition. They subsidize the most wasteful individuals at the expense of the most efficient ones.
[ + ] CHIRO
[ - ] CHIRO 1 point 2.6 yearsOct 3, 2022 10:37:55 ago (+1/-0)
The trouble with social programs is that, in much the same way that undiscerning parents can breed contemptible consumerism in their children, it gives for free what people require earning to appreciate. Regardless of what values a person might say they have, if their actions day in and day out suppose the government is a Giving Tree, the recipient will lose all sense for the Form of Life and its hardship.
If you are not punished for consuming, then you will consume. It's just nurturing the worst elements of the human nature. But some brands of politician use the resources of others to make themselves the Giving Tree.
Structuring an ideal society is a tough nut to crack. I can't say I know how. One thing I know for sure is that it would require that every citizen understands and knows how to 'ride the lightning', meaning the balancing act between the human impulse to out-perform his neighbors, and the objective cooperation the society necessitates. I think this comes down to how a society understands games, and what a society values.
This is one reason I believe religion plays an important role in an enduring civilization. Consider values as having some terminus, some end - so everything a human pursues has a teleological description: "I am doing this so that I can ultimately ___X____." If we say, yes, there is always a human impulse to out-compete his neighbors, then the only way to prevent that from becoming runaway, even in principle, is for the majority of people in a community to value something more than that particular rat race.
As a candidate, 'the common good' is inadequate in most cases to stifle that sort of runaway consumerist competition.
Any sufficient candidate, I think, is going to entail a worldview that includes concepts about the hereafter, a transcendent kind of observer and judge (however one wants to conceive of it) that adds an abstract layer of significance to how we conduct our lives (and our competing).
If not for this, all that there is, is the great pissing match. Key to whatever this abstract observation layer is, is that it must be powerful enough to coarse-grain to the level of the individual (this is the beginning of how we get God concepts). To see why only requires us to recognize why Godless worldviews fail at this.
Suppose some community has a prevailing concept about the common good. We can even suppose that everyone in the community believes that a common good is true, i.e. that it really is better for his community to fare better collectively.
Like in almost all cases of moral judgment in man, he will construe his own actions conceptually distinctly from the 'body' of actions he sees as resulting in the common good. Basically, hypocrisy. We're all hypocrites. If he acts so as to out-compete his neighbors and accrue disproportionately greater 'stuff', he will think that he is one from among, say, a thousand. It is OKAY for him to be that ONE. Just so long as this establishes a structured order that quite naturally precipitates the hierarchical levels so as to maintain a 'mean' for the Others that supports the common good.
Great. But who gets to decide why THAT guy gets to be the ONE. He's just a human. Fuck that, I only live once...it ought to be me. I have the skills. He's a dimwit.
The function of the abstract layer of supernatural observer that can coarse-grain all the way to the level of the individual person means that no such behavior can be justified on the basis of 'the numbers carrying it' (as in when the person who out-performs thinks to himself: this community can support just so much over-achievement). Whether or not the individual's behavior has CONSEQUENCES that hurt the community, the coarse-graining of the supernatural observer is not consequentialist, it will make his actions wrong whether he 'gets away with them' at the human level or not.
It's a simple matter to see how important this function is.