Is Coexistence Necessary? From The Death of ‘Nature’”
Under the influence of Charles Sanders Peirce, I have launched an idea called Triadic Philosophy. It is summarized in the Kindle book Triadic Philosophy 100 Aphorisms . A free sample can be accessed by clicking Look Inside.
Triadic Philosophy grew into several more books outlining specific methods of triadic meditation and thinking. “The Death of ‘Nature’ “ is among several follow-up texts that examine expressions of, and propose actions related to, triadic thought.
See What Future Shall We Enable? — Everything Comes — Medium http://buff.ly/1AluRHi
Is Coexistence Necessary?
The answer is yes. No matter who we are coexisting with.
We could be talking our twin. Or our family, whatever that is. Or our neighbors — the ones we actually see and know or at least see or hear.
Once you sense that coexistence is necessary, we can give you an out.
Coexistence is NOT necessary if it is intolerable.
And you get to decide what intolerable means.
Coexistence is not necessary when harm is a real possibility. When that happens, don’t strike out. Be nonviolent. EXTRICATE.
This strategy is derived from Jesus’ instruction to his disciples when they were not received.
Shake the dust from your feet.
Whenever violence is likely, even in prospect, extricate. Be willing to start a new life in a different location.
Harm and violence comes from persons directly or indirectly.
This is why I advocate kid licenses. Seriously. I would be for vasectomies at birth if people would not laugh me out of the world.
I think men bear full responsibility for the harm that ensues when a pregnancy is ill-considered and when there is no commitment to child-rearing as something as important as any so-called career.
Needless to say, I am for extrication in any situation where abuse is even on the table. And always when abuse is active.
Love and abuse do not go together. People who abuse need help. People who tolerate abuse need help. There is no future for any relationship in which abuse is present. Even the acceptance of mild (say verbal) abuse is probably a sign of eventual difficulty.
Harm and violence can come from structures and environments.
There is no fundamental difference between a so-called natural cause and an environmental or structural cause.
The evil involved in a quake or tsunami is no different than that caused by poison in waters or fires in buildings or forests. In all cases, we can assign human responsibility, however remote. We are all linked. Everything we do has implications everywhere.
Bear in mind that we are talking about now.
If there was a time when we could have spoken differently, that time is gone. The death of nature is an event in progress. It is a calculation of will. We may not like this but we are all participants.
My poster child for this point of view is a plant that turns plastic junk into clothing. This can only be total proof of the futility of acting as though we could somehow save nature. The only way to save nature is to be more skilled in allowing our creativity to flourish, our brains to function and our thoughts to move in the direction of the good values. Our best shot is to propel a world away from harm and toward measurable, obvious forms of goodness.
If we wish to preserve rivers, to clean up oceans, to remove poisons from agriculture, more power to us.
But have no illusions. We are simply trying to reduce harm. We are fallible. Being decent is an often thankless task. It does not require virtuous behavior. It demands honest application of a fallible ethic that has no illusions about perfection.
Everything is at risk.
There is no cause that will influence the fate of the whole. There is no occupation that in itself will make the world better. There only us. Whoever we may be. And whatever we may do wherever we are. We coexist.
There is only one thing that cuts through all reality. It can be “prescribed” to every person on the planet.
It is good values led by tolerance, helpfulness and democracy and resting on the bedrock truth that the creation is continuous and that, as far as we can now guess, we are its fallible masters.
We can therefore worship no idols.
We can only look within ourselves and attain to whatever spirituality results.
Without a movement toward democracy globally, we will have
> no chance of basic income
> no decent education for the young
> and a continuation of harm that has roots in traditions and cultures that must pass away or transform themselves.
Without the cultivation of tolerance, flexibility, suppleness
> we will move toward mob behavior and gravitate toward war and violence.
Without an ethic of helping, of enabling
> society will be nothing more than a group of zombie-seeming automatons.
With hoary idolatries afoot, scientific method — the pragmaticist star — will become the tool of propaganda rather than the basis of increasing progress.
Coexistence is a given. The only real question is what sort of existence it will be.