Not sure why I bother trying to talk to you people anymore, but I will go ahead and throw out an idea that I assume you will simply reject because it goes against your belief system.
We should not worship nature to such a high degree. Yes, we should try to conserve wild areas as a buffer against mistakes and for basic enjoyment. And we are not doing a good enough job of that.
But the assumption is that basically the wild areas have some sacred process or system going on that we cannot possibly ever aspire to understanding or surpassing.
First of all, there is absolutely no separation between the "wild" world and the "human" world. The idea of a natural world that is separate from a human world is an oversimplification that has become misleading.
Everything in the world, including people and the things that we make, from human feces, to plastic trash bags to rocket ships and computers, is the result of the same natural physical laws and processes involved in the universe.
The planet sees itself with billions of eyes. The planet thinks with billions of tiny minds.
The cities, roadways, and agricultural fields that cover increasingly large areas of earth are part of the natural evolution of the planet.
Its hard to really convey especially since we are so far down the line of nature worship, but part of what I am trying to get across is that humans have already surpassed nature in some ways, and if we haven't already done so then we can create environments that do.
I think it will be easier to appreciate this type of thing once we become a multi-planet species. Or at least get a colony on the moon or something.
Because part of the nature worship is the reality that we only have one biosphere to support us. We need to fix that.
But another thing -- this does tie into Malthusian population control, eugenics, classism, etc. There is an inherent disgust for the dirty masses that is hidden behind the earth worship. We have to remember the value of human life.
First you say that humans and artificial human works are products and part of Nature. Then you say that humans have surpassed Nature and can create environments outside of Nature, which is what you just spent the first half of your post arguing is impossible.
I think you need to figure out what you're trying to say.
Don't think I said that environments would be outside of nature. That's not what I meant.
I wouldn't capitalize "nature". We are part of it, we can consciously direct its evolution if we do it in a sophisticated enough way.
We are not separate from nature and we are not inferior to nature.
My point is that instead of sort of shutting down and reverting to feudalism in the face of environmental challenges, we can continue to create a more sophisticated technological system that integrates information about the biosphere and continues to evolve it in new ways. My point is that humanity should not worship untamed wilderness. Rather, we should continue to respect the fragility and complexity of the biosphere, but still recognize our own abilities and shape the universe.
Well two things: we need some of the things in our environment that we also destroy. We need to global temperature to stay below certain levels, but I fucking love flying to nice vacation destinations. My personal interests are in conflict with what is good for humanity.
Also: we need to respect other forms of life. Just like I can't kill someone from another family, even if we are unrelated, it is immoral to kill or damage the environment of another species. I can't kill a human from another family, or other country, without being an asshole. That extends not only to other humans, but also to other forms of life.
Almost everything that you said, to a certain degree, is understood as a starting point.
The place where I differ is I believe that now that everyone understands those things that you say, we can use our science and technology to overcome some limitations.
Think about what nuclear power means, especially fusion.
We should not worship nature to such a high degree. Yes, we should try to conserve wild areas as a buffer against mistakes and for basic enjoyment. And we are not doing a good enough job of that.
But the assumption is that basically the wild areas have some sacred process or system going on that we cannot possibly ever aspire to understanding or surpassing.
First of all, there is absolutely no separation between the "wild" world and the "human" world. The idea of a natural world that is separate from a human world is an oversimplification that has become misleading.
Everything in the world, including people and the things that we make, from human feces, to plastic trash bags to rocket ships and computers, is the result of the same natural physical laws and processes involved in the universe.
The planet sees itself with billions of eyes. The planet thinks with billions of tiny minds.
The cities, roadways, and agricultural fields that cover increasingly large areas of earth are part of the natural evolution of the planet.
Its hard to really convey especially since we are so far down the line of nature worship, but part of what I am trying to get across is that humans have already surpassed nature in some ways, and if we haven't already done so then we can create environments that do.
I think it will be easier to appreciate this type of thing once we become a multi-planet species. Or at least get a colony on the moon or something.
Because part of the nature worship is the reality that we only have one biosphere to support us. We need to fix that.
But another thing -- this does tie into Malthusian population control, eugenics, classism, etc. There is an inherent disgust for the dirty masses that is hidden behind the earth worship. We have to remember the value of human life.