Nature: First Post of 2019

Pexels, accessed 1/24/2019

Author's Note: I apologize if this one is difficult to read and understand. I'm attempting to wrap my words and head around a lot of new concepts that likely have already been said by better writers than I, but are still new to my head space. Please bear with me.

The only conceptual entity that I submit to is nature. I don't view it as a mother. I know it doesn't care if we live in this form and place, or in another. It survives on death and decay, using it to produce the world in which we live (physics through to social, and potentially beyond). That is apparent from just watching a hunt. If you don't learn how to evolve, adapt, and transform yourself and people intentionally with a mind to consequence and effect for yourself and others, you will more likely die and fail to be as well as you (all) can be.

Another thing to keep in mind: there is no duality. Pain and pleasure are two sides of the same coin that is sensory experience; yin and yang still form a united whole. Duality is just a pair of concepts that we made subconsciously in our heads from our experiences and biology. All is one, all is absolute, and we are but mediocre novice apprentices to the art and science of social construction and evolution as a larger-than-kin group of groups. Not everyone has neurological, psychological, and social traits needed to survive in this place well (myself included). We are different as a species, and that is a wonderful thing when we're all able to sing out our songs with others taking turns, blending, and finding new, common, or unique tunes to play into the infinity that is time. In this way, humanity can celebrate its unity, while at the same time preserving and honoring the uniqueness of every one or one group of people. The lesson that I've derived from my readings in social psychology (some can be found at this in-blog literature review) is that humans work better together with nature, than working at odds with each other and nature. Competition has its place to solve challenges and address the conflicts that will inevitably continuously arise in perpetuity between people and peoples. But history has shown that every empire collapses, just as every illegitimate institution or dictatorial person inevitably does (see the concepts of revolution, evolution, and death). But that doesn't mean we have to take lives, kill livelihoods, and destroy ecosystems in the pursuit of competition. If we don't have to do those things to survive, we should not do them, or accept the influence of those who won't or don't learn, adapt, and behave in a healthy and pro-social fashion. Americans complain about being lonely and miserable, and have never considered if it's their own emphasis on individuality, self, and material stuff that creates those problems.
 
I know that those who won't or don't learn to apply these lessons and traits in private and public. These people need to be considered by society as toxic because the defacto effects of their influence in society at large. This is demonstrated by the relative health of societies where there were and are extreme forms of inequity in wealth and social standing along any line of social and individual differentiation (Wilkinson and Pickett). People who tolerate or perpetuate these forms of inequality and inequity hurt others and themselves. Their neurological/psychological phenotype creates the Hell that they try desperately to avoid and deny. Violence, anti-social behavior, and infliction of undesired pain and suffering on others and the environment is the behavioral outcome of this phenotype. The social effects of the policies and public choices made by the affected individuals are felt in our lived world as well (Wilkinson and Pickett). 

For example, the United States' population is, for the most part, poorer as a result of the Right-wing logic that has permeated our otherwise functional public institutions at all levels, or not doing as well as they could have otherwise been doing. My bet is that with a more progressive, adaptive, evidence-based, and compassionate logic in our public sector institutions will yield healthier and happier outcomes for the people in society, the society itself, and the environment in which the society lives. My bet is that if a government with such a logic chose to be proactive in ensuring the well-being of the public at large, and down to its constituent groups and people in the environment, while respecting the need for agency, self-discovery, and personal growth (as defined by the individual relative to others), it could grow a more sustainable and lasting monument than anything that was physically crafted. Imagine a permanent turn for human society and history; the rehabilitation of our prodigal children, the conservative Right, and the intentional production of a healthy, happy, adaptable, compassionate, and capable large group of groups of humans. What a world this could be for all of us, including those beings we haven't encountered yet.