Industrial Society Destroys Mind and Environment

[sushil yadav]

Sushil, I enjoyed reading your comments. I whole-heartedly agree in regards to excess consumerism. When will people learn that buying new clothes or new anything does not lead to happiness. As long as the marketers keep bombarding people with advertisements, then it will continue up until there are no natural resources left.
One of my goals on this rock is to spread the message about the destructive effects of the consumer society. Not many people listen, but one or two do occasionally. Good to know there are some people out there who think the same.

Fent,

Thanks for your comment on consumerism.

Industrial Society is destroying necessary things [Animals, Trees, Air, Water and Land] for making unnecessary things [Consumer Goods].

When we make consumer goods we kill Animals/ Trees, Air/ Water and Land - directly or indirectly.

Industrial Society destroys ecosystems - all Industrial Societies destroy ecosystems.

It hardly matters whether it is "Capitalist Industrial Society" - "Communist Industrial Society" - or "Socialist Industrial Society".

Industrial Society destroys ecosystems at every stage of its functioning - when consumer goods are produced - when consumer goods are used - when consumer goods are discarded/ recycled.

Raw material for industry is obtained by cutting up Forests. It is extracted by mining/ digging up the earth. It comes by destroying/ killing Trees, Animals and Land.

Industries/ Factories use Water. The water that comes out of Factories is contaminated with hundreds of toxic chemicals. Industry kills Water. What to speak of Rivers - entire Oceans have been polluted.

Industry/ Factories burn millions of tonnes of fuel and when raw material is melted/ heated up, hundreds of toxic chemicals are released into the atmosphere. Industry kills Air.

Industrial Society has covered millions of square miles of land with cement and concrete. Industry kills Land.

When consumer goods are discarded/ thrown away in landfills it again leads to destruction of ecosystems.

When consumer goods are recycled, hundreds of toxic chemicals are released into air, water and land.

Consumer goods are sold/ marketed through a network of millions of kilometers of rail / road network and shipping routes which causes destruction of all ecosystems that come in the way.


Growth Rate - Economy Rate - GDP.

These are figures of "crimes against Nature".
These are figures of "destruction of Ecosystems".
These are figures of "Insanity, Abnormality and Criminality".


sushil_yadav
Industrial Society Destroys Mind and Environment
ePhilosopher
Corrupt
ForeignPolicy

[sushil yadav]

where did we go wrong?

Hassooni,

Thanks for asking the question.

Our planet can provide necessary things - food, shelter and clothing - to all people . It cannot provide unlimited consumer goods.

Infinite growth and development on a tiny planet that is just 40,000 km in circumference?

Industrial Society is insane.


sushil_yadav
Industrial Society Destroys Mind and Environment
ePhilosopher
Corrupt
ForeignPolicy

[sushil yadav]

Humans have spent more than 99% of their time on earth in non-industrial societies.

Non-industrial society destroys ecosystems for food, clothing and shelter.
Industrial society destroys ecosystems for food, clothing and shelter plus thousands of unnecessary consumer goods.

Industrial society destroys necessary things - animals, trees, air, water and land for making unnecessary things - consumer goods.

Non-industrial societies have sustained on earth for thousands of years.
Industrial society has destroyed all ecosystems within 200 - 250 years.


"Growth Rate" - "Economy Rate" - "GDP"

These are figures of "Ecocide".
These are figures of "crimes against Nature".
These are figures of "destruction of Ecosystems".
These are figures of "Insanity, Abnormality and Criminality".



Destroy consumerism......before it is too late.

Destroy Industrial Society......before it is too late.



sushil_yadav

Corrupt
ePhilosopher
ForeignPolicy

[Cyrene]

Thats a lot of shit.

Its a shame that industrial society couldn't come close to effecting the envrionment as much as a single space rock. Perhaps you're unfamiliar with mass extinction(s)?

If humanity deflects one rock from this orb, it'll have saveed more of the environment, then it could ever hope to destroy so far, or in the immediate future.


---

and if you want to save the environment (whatever that fucking means) there would be no other train of thought then 'scientific' to accurately or effiently, get that done. I'm not sure how abandoning science would ever help protect the environment, as every shred of knowledge about it, has been given to us, through science.

Forget it.

[sushil yadav]

Sushil,
I respect your values in this!. It is very true! So few ppl today understand this. They don't understand how to live without these things like new clothes every year, playstations etc! We are destroying outsleves and our planet. Our natural desire for objects which capitalism has encouraged is turning the west into puffer fish and the 3rd world into slaves!

Technology will ultimately lead to our undoing. The sad thing is the word "progress" has such a positive connotation and commericals for super sleek gadgets have us believe the future tech world will be paradise. They say its inevitable. And most people adhere to it.

A person is being stabbed repeatedly at regular intervals - every hour.

Some people are trying to save the victim.

The sane way to save is - you first stop the attack – you prevent the attack.

What these insane people do - they allow the attack to be continued. They don’t stop it - they don’t prevent it.

Instead, what they do - They say we are going to save the victim by using technology - the best technology - the best medical care.

Bring this technology - Bring that technology.

Bring this technology - Bring that technology.

They give the victim the best technology - the best medical care.
In the meantime the stabbing continues – every hour – even while the best medical care is being given.

One can imagine the fate of the victim.



Ecosystems are getting destroyed due to production of consumer goods.

Every consumer good is made by killing animals, trees, air, water and land - directly or indirectly. [ more killing of nature takes place when consumer goods are used and discarded]

Industrial society is destroying necessary things - animals, trees, air, water and land for making unnecessary things - consumer goods.

The sane way of saving ecosystems is - you stop production of consumer goods - you reduce production of consumer goods to the minimum level.

But the insane Industrial Society continues producing consumer goods [ in fact production is being increased every day]

The insane response of Industrial Society is - We will save the environment with technology - the best technology.

Bring this technology - Bring that technology.

Bring this technology - Bring that technology.

In the meantime production of consumer goods continues - 3 billion people living in cities are continuously engaged in - making , buying and selling of consumer goods - killing the ecosystems moment by moment.

One can imagine the fate of environment.


Height of Insanity.......Height of Abnormality.

Destroy Industrial Society.....before it is too late.
Destroy consumerism..... before it is too late.



sushil_yadav

ePhilosopher
ForeignPolicy
Corrupt

Industrial Society Destroys Mind and Environment

[sushil yadav]

Thats a lot of shit.

Its a shame that industrial society couldn't come close to effecting the envrionment as much as a single space rock. Perhaps you're unfamiliar with mass extinction(s)?

If humanity deflects one rock from this orb, it'll have saveed more of the environment, then it could ever hope to destroy so far, or in the immediate future.

and if you want to save the environment (whatever that fucking means) there would be no other train of thought then 'scientific' to accurately or effiently, get that done. I'm not sure how abandoning science would ever help protect the environment, as every shred of knowledge about it, has been given to us, through science.

Forget it.

Mr. Genius,

What kind of weird logic is that?

Because a rock/ meteorite could wipe out all species we should not bother about environment and should continue destroying the ecosystems.

When you fall sick you rush to the doctor.
When you fall sick you rush to the hospital.

When you fall sick you forget the rock/ meteorite - and rush to save yourself.

When environment is in danger - when ecosystems are sick/dying you remember the rock/ meteorite and say there is no need to heal.

Why is it necessarily true that technology would lead to our undoing?

If we look to the past, to lesser times. There is no paradise there.

Humans have spent more than 99% of their time on earth in non-industrial societies.

It is highly amazing that people have taken for granted a lifestyle that has barely existed for 50 - 100 years.

People started thinking "this is the way to live".

This is not the way to live - This is the way to die.

Industrial Society has destroyed necessary things[animals, trees, air, water and land] for making unnecessary things[consumer goods].

People who are going for infinite growth and development on a small planet [whose circumference is just 40,000 km] are insane, abnormal and criminal.


In the context of Industrial Society someone has said :

"It is like adding extra floors to your building by removing bricks from the lower floor/ foundation."



sushil_yadav
Corrupt
ePhilosopher
ForeignPolicy
Industrial Society Destroys Mind and Environment

[Echo]

You still don't participate in environmental groups?

[Cyrene]

Mr. Genius,

What kind of weird logic is that?

Because a rock/ meteorite could wipe out all species we should not bother about environment and should continue destroying the ecosystems.

I never said that, you did. I said that humans are capable of doing more good than harm, and all the bitching about human 'harm' to the environment doesn't mean a whole lot, when we've put ourselves into a position where we can prevent mass extinctions of the like that we're not capable of creating ourselves.

When environment is in danger - when ecosystems are sick/dying you remember the rock/ meteorite and say there is no need to heal.

What I am saying is that pointing at humans and crying 'devil' about environmental destruction is meaningless because humans can prevent random environmental destruction which is greater than that we could commit ourselves.

What humans have done to this planet would dissapear in the first few thousand years after we're gone, in-fact, more than likely accelerating new plant and forest growth by massive amounts. The same isn't true of say, a meteor strike, which we could potentially stop in just a few short years.

As to ecosystems dying because of humans, yeah thats horrendous especially in areas of hardcore biodiversity like rain-forests or giant coral reefs, destroying species which could result in better medicine or better understanding or better science, but you have to realize that at the same time we're creating new environments that other species adapt to/exploit.

For example, coyotes were not nearly as successful before humans as they were after humans. They pretty much used our roads/fields to colonize an entire continent, and thats despite systematic efforts by all humans to exterminate them, their population has been rising, continously, despite our best efforts.

hunter-gatherers also wiped out a lot of species, more than we'd care to go over i'm sure.

[sushil yadav]

You still don't participate in environmental groups?

Echo,

I do participate in environmental groups - many of them

Humans are collectively destroying ecosystems for food, clothing, shelter and consumer goods.

What can be cut - what can be reduced/ eliminated?

It is the consumer goods.

We need to reduce production and consumption of consumer goods to the minimum level.

Our planet can fulfill our needs - not our greed.


sushil_yadav
Corrupt
ePhilosopher
ForeignPolicy
Industrial Society Destroys Mind and Environment

[sushil yadav]

Work has destroyed ecosystems.

On a small planet whose circumference is just 40,000 km work has turned into overwork, unnecessary work, destructive work.

Most of the 3 billion people living in cities - 50% of world population - are engaged in overwork, unnecessary work, destructive work.

It is very important to understand the reasons for doing work.

Why do we work?

It is generally thought that people work because - they are smart, intelligent and hardworking. People work in order to feed themselves and their families.

Above reasons are totally wrong.

In the East sages had discovered thousands of years ago that people cannot stop working. People work because they cannot stop working.

Anyone who wants proof of this can try the following. Take leave from work for 10 days. Try to sleep continuously. Try to indulge in pleasure/ entertainment continuously. Try to relax continuously.

The energy generated by the food we eat forces us to work ceaselessly.

Energy = Energy[Physical Work] + Energy[Mental Work] + Energy[Suffering/ Subjective Experience]

All three energies on the right side are inversely proportional to one another.

When we do hard physical work or hard mental work or a combination of physical work and mental work almost all energy is used up in doing work.

When we stop physical work and mental work, the unused energy is experienced as suffering/ anxiety/ restlessness/ discomfort. This suffering is so intense - so unbearable - that most people cannot stop physical activity and mental activity simultaneously for even 2 minutes - they can stop work/activity only under the influence of drugs and alcohol.

There is no higher purpose behind work.

People do not work because they want to work.
People do not work for their family.
People do not work for their nation.
People do not work for any reason.

People work because they cannot stop working.

It does not matter what kind of work we do - whether it is physical work or any kind of mental work. As soon as we stop working we suffer from restlessness, anxiety, uneasiness and discomfort.

In Yoga and Meditation the goal is to stop Physical Activity and Mental Activity simultaneously - and then transform the subjective-experience of restlessness/ anxiety/ suffering into peace. This requires ability and years of effort. A large number of people in the east have tried to do this but very few have succeeded - maybe a few hundred or a few thousand in the entire history. Stopping work is not an option for most people living in this world.

Today 50% of world population - 3 bilion people are living in cities. These people cannot do farming in cities. Most of the people living in cities are engaged in unnecessary work - making things, buying things and selling things - leading to an endless cycle of unnecessary and destructive work.

Our small planet which is only 40,000 km in circumference cannot sustain a city-based industrial society.

A city-based industrial society destroys necessary things for making unnecessary things.

A city-based industrial society destroys animals, trees, air, water and land for making consumer goods.

In a city-based industrial society work turns into overwork, unnecessary work, destructive work.



sushil_yadav
Corrupt
ePhilosopher
ForeignPolicy
Industrial Society Destroys Mind and Environment

[capslockf9]

Thought is the enemy of nature.

[earthy]

Thought is the enemy of nature.

What do you mean?

[capslockf9]

The animal we call human lived
; eons before it experienced thought. Up to that point the animal existed as part of the eco-system . It lived harmouniosly in the system.

It lived in the system were if too many rabbits exist ; there willl be an increase of foxes.When increase of foxes occured a decrease of rabbits happened. The animal we call human lived in that system.

If thought had not showed up the system would not have been altered.

[sushil yadav]

For several decades environmentalists have been warning modern society that ecosystems are getting destroyed - that consumerist lifestyle is not sustainable.

But modern society which was busy chasing progress, growth and development did not listen. It refused to believe there was any environmental crisis or problem. It said science and technology will always find a solution - if earth gets destroyed we will move on to another planet.

In the name of Science and Technology impossible dreams were sold to people in the last few decades.

Moving to another planet would probably rank as the most impossible of all impossible things.

One space shuttle exploded during take off - another exploded on the return journey.

So far man has not been able to go beyond the moon. There is no other life sustaining ecosystem/ planet within our solar system. Outside the solar system planets and galaxies are millions of light years away - billions of light years away.

So when are we moving to a new home ?

Next year - or 5 years later ?


sushil_yadav
PowerSwitch
StrategyTalk
Industrial Society Destroys Mind and Environment

[Three Times Great]

its always amusing, the hypocrisy of those who criticize and pretend to reject that which they cannot even live without-- raging against that which they depend on daily to survive.

posting your hatred of society and technology in an internet forum....

likely driving in your car, shopping at the grocery store buying food shipped to you from around the world, watching TV, using electricity and modern heating/cooling, buying clothes on sale because they were made cheaply by utilizing labor from halfway around the world, reading newspapers and books printed on trees, wearing your "green" t-shirts which required countless industrial labor, innovation, technological work, energy and time to create.... acting outraged and self-righteous about the "evils of industrial society and technology" while counting out dollars from your imitation-leather plastic purse to pay for your latte at starbucks... a funnier spectacle of self-contradiction and pathetic intellectual ineptitude can hardly be imagined.

[Diekon]

its always amusing, the hypocrisy of those who criticize and pretend to reject that which they cannot even live without-- raging against that which they depend on daily to survive.

posting your hatred of society and technology in an internet forum....

likely driving in your car, shopping at the grocery store buying food shipped to you from around the world, watching TV, using electricity and modern heating/cooling, buying clothes on sale because they were made cheaply by utilizing labor from halfway around the world, reading newspapers and books printed on trees, wearing your "green" t-shirts which required countless industrial labor, innovation, technological work, energy and time to create.... acting outraged and self-righteous about the "evils of industrial society and technology" while counting out dollars from your imitation-leather plastic purse to pay for your latte at starbucks... a funnier spectacle of self-contradiction and pathetic intellectual ineptitude can hardly be imagined.

This is allways the standard rebuttal against arguments that criticise modern society. I'm not saying the poster of OP is right all the way, or in any way, but I do think this particular argument just doesn't hold. It's pointless. We are part of our culture, for a large part we can't help as social beings to live in this world. Living in the jungle isn't really an option. This doesn't deniy us the right to criticise modern society and technology. What's wrong, is constantly complaining about it, In Real Life, when there isn't a clear cut solution. Then you have to deal with it, just like everybody else.

But what is wrong with discussing it on a message board like this? Can't we talk about it, and shouldn't the arguments be dealt with on their own merit? No, because i'm typing this on a computer... Meh.

[Three Times Great]

its always amusing, the hypocrisy of those who criticize and pretend to reject that which they cannot even live without-- raging against that which they depend on daily to survive.

posting your hatred of society and technology in an internet forum....

likely driving in your car, shopping at the grocery store buying food shipped to you from around the world, watching TV, using electricity and modern heating/cooling, buying clothes on sale because they were made cheaply by utilizing labor from halfway around the world, reading newspapers and books printed on trees, wearing your "green" t-shirts which required countless industrial labor, innovation, technological work, energy and time to create.... acting outraged and self-righteous about the "evils of industrial society and technology" while counting out dollars from your imitation-leather plastic purse to pay for your latte at starbucks... a funnier spectacle of self-contradiction and pathetic intellectual ineptitude can hardly be imagined.

This is allways the standard rebuttal against arguments that criticise modern society. I'm not saying the poster of OP is right all the way, or in any way, but I do think this particular argument just doesn't hold. It's pointless. We are part of our culture, for a large part we can't help as social beings to live in this world. Living in the jungle isn't really an option. This doesn't deniy us the right to criticise modern society and technology. What's wrong, is constantly complaining about it, In Real Life, when there isn't a clear cut solution. Then you have to deal with it, just like everybody else.

But what is wrong with discussing it on a message board like this? Can't we talk about it, and shouldn't the arguments be dealt with on their own merit? No, because i'm typing this on a computer... Meh.

agreed that usage of certain symbols/methods in order to necessarily criticize those symbols/methods is not contradictory per se. however, the specific case of using advanced modern technology without even thinking, instinctively, unquestioningly, DOES contradict the fundamental argument against technological progress, because it implies that the arguer himself does not understand the relation he enters into with the technology that he is openly refuting or rejecting. it implies that one does not understand ones own argument, particularly when one attempts to refute or reject systems or premises which that individual himself is DEPENDENT on and in fact uses regularly; the fact that the individual himself DOES NOT SEE THIS relation he bears to that which he criticizes is more crutial than the mere fact that he depends upon these things himself, however both aspects render his argument self-contradictory or irrelevant.

and yes, of course we are part of society and have cultures, and that this is a GOOD thing; likewise we should always be evaluating and judging these cultures and societies in terms of values we have, making them better over time. however, this is not the place from which such blatant general attitudes of anti-society, anti-technology arise-- they arise from an emotional reaction of revenge, envy, hypocrisy, ones own inability to even understand that which one tries to criticize. we can certainly point to specific aspects of society, technoology that are problematic, and propose solutions... but the wanton disregard of such systems per se, without defining an alternative, without understanding the systems themselves nor why they obtain, nor the relations one enters into automatically and unquestioningly, IS contradictory.

"acting outraged and self-righteous about the "evils of industrial society and technology" while counting out dollars from your imitation-leather plastic purse to pay for your latte at starbucks" DOES exemplify the condescending and self-righteous ignorant blindness and hypocrisy of these so-called 'progressive intellectuals' of our modern times. these people are no more than unthinking parrots, sets of popular, intellectually-empty chiches-- useful tools and sounding boards for mass movements and political power elites.

the funniest part is that these conditioned walking contradictions consider themselves "radical", when in reality there is nothing less radical that the oversocialized liberal hippies who preach gospels of "industrial society's" destruction; who could be more useful to society itself, who could ensure society's reterritorializations and complete marginalization of TRUE movements of REAL change better than the collective unfocused murmorings of millions of such conditioned automatons?

[Diekon]

agreed that usage of certain symbols/methods in order to necessarily criticize those symbols/methods is not contradictory per se. however, the specific case of using advanced modern technology without even thinking, instinctively, unquestioningly, DOES contradict the fundamental argument against technological progress, because it implies that the arguer himself does not understand the relation he enters into with the technology that he is openly refuting or rejecting. it implies that one does not understand ones own argument, particularly when one attempts to refute or reject systems or premises which that individual himself is DEPENDENT on and in fact uses regularly; the fact that the individual himself DOES NOT SEE THIS relation he bears to that which he criticizes is more crutial than the mere fact that he depends upon these things himself, however both aspects render his argument self-contradictory or irrelevant.

and yes, of course we are part of society and have cultures, and that this is a GOOD thing; likewise we should always be evaluating and judging these cultures and societies in terms of values we have, making them better over time. however, this is not the place from which such blatant general attitudes of anti-society, anti-technology arise-- they arise from an emotional reaction of revenge, envy, hypocrisy, ones own inability to even understand that which one tries to criticize. we can certainly point to specific aspects of society, technoology that are problematic, and propose solutions... but the wanton disregard of such systems per se, without defining an alternative, without understanding the systems themselves nor why they obtain, nor the relations one enters into automatically and unquestioningly, IS contradictory.

"acting outraged and self-righteous about the "evils of industrial society and technology" while counting out dollars from your imitation-leather plastic purse to pay for your latte at starbucks" DOES exemplify the condescending and self-righteous ignorant blindness and hypocrisy of these so-called 'progressive intellectuals' of our modern times. these people are no more than unthinking parrots, sets of popular, intellectually-empty chiches-- useful tools and sounding boards for mass movements and political power elites.

the funniest part is that these conditioned walking contradictions consider themselves "radical", when in reality there is nothing less radical that the oversocialized liberal hippies who preach gospels of "industrial society's" destruction; who could be more useful to society itself, who could ensure society's reterritorializations and complete marginalization of TRUE movements of REAL change better than the collective unfocused murmorings of millions of such conditioned automatons?

I agree with you that oversocialized hippies as you call them, can be a pain and don't do much to inspire further dialogue. But pointing the finger at them is perhaps equally fruitless. What I'd like to see for a change is a considered diagnoses of the bad (and the good) influences of modern society and technology on man, because in my opinion there's at least some incriminating evidence that deserves a better look. As it is now, you generally get, either the unadjusted fool that lives outside of society and the hypocrite hippie who are not to be taken seriously, or the defender of western society who thinks it's bad form to criticise the society that supports you. Nothing good can come of it, in terms of moving forward and creating solutions to the problems of today.

Maybe... maybe i'm taking this to serious .

[sushil yadav]

its always amusing, the hypocrisy of those who criticize and pretend to reject that which they cannot even live without-- raging against that which they depend on daily to survive.

posting your hatred of society and technology in an internet forum

Three Times Great,

Mr. Genius, When did I ever justify my use of computer/ internet? When did I ever claim that I am not a part of society that is destroying ecosystems - show me when - show me where.

The topic of my article says - Industrial Society Destroys Mind and Environment. The words Industrial Society include most people living in cities in this world - you as well as me.


TechnoWorshipper, I find it ironic that you have no concern/ compassion for Environment despite the fact that you owe your very existence to nature/ environment.

Why do you breathe the Air?

Why do you drink the Water?

Why do you eat the Food that comes from Soil? - Why don't you have Computers for breakfast, lunch and dinner.

Take all your technology to the Moon - and try producing a single grain of Food without using any natural ingredient from Earth.


In the absence of Nature your grandfather would'nt have lived.
In the absence of Nature your father would'nt have lived.
In the absence of Nature you would'nt have lived.

Show some respect to Nature.


sushil_yadav
PowerSwitch
EnviroLink
StrategyTalk
Industrial Society Destroys Mind and Environment

[Three Times Great]

its always amusing, the hypocrisy of those who criticize and pretend to reject that which they cannot even live without-- raging against that which they depend on daily to survive.

posting your hatred of society and technology in an internet forum

Three Times Great,

Mr. Genius, When did I ever justify my use of computer/ internet? When did I ever claim that I am not a part of society that is destroying ecosystems - show me when - show me where.

when did i ever say that you considered yourself to not be a part of society? i in fact claimed quite the opposite.

you seem not to understand my argument.

The topic of my article says - Industrial Society Destroys Mind and Environment. The words Industrial Society include most people living in cities in this world - you as well as me.

i agree.

TechnoWorshipper, I find it ironic that you have no concern/ compassion for Environment despite the fact that you owe your very existence to nature/ environment.

where did i say i am a technoworshipper? show me when - show me where.

i have concern for the environment to the extent that to do otherwise would compromise my individual survival and life, in any specific case or manner.

Why do you breathe the Air?

because i am an individual member of a mammalian species which has evolved to extract oxygen (O2) from the atmosphere via respiration in order to provide its cells with energy.

Why do you drink the Water?

see previous response, except substitute water (H2O) for oxygen.

in addition to providing energy, water is the medium within which most chemical and mechanical process operate, and therefore the body/organs require optimum levels of water saturation to function successfully.

Why do you eat the Food that comes from Soil? - Why don't you have Computers for breakfast, lunch and dinner.

i dont think you can survive on a diet of computers, but youre certainly welcome to try.

Take all your technology to the Moon - and try producing a single grain of Food without using any natural ingredient from Earth.

what would that prove, if i did?

In the absence of Nature your grandfather would'nt have lived.
In the absence of Nature your father would'nt have lived.
In the absence of Nature you would'nt have lived.

Show some respect to Nature.

where did i say i dont respect nature? i respect it the same way every lifeform does, to the extent that i must in order to secure my survival.

you didnt really address or respond to a single point i made, all you did was make false accusations that i worship technology, which i never said and which is untrue, and demonstrate that life evolves with certain conditions for its continued existence, which i never contested and which was never in doubt.

clearly you do not see my argument at all, so how do you expect to critique it?

learn to paint with a finer brush.....

[capslockf9]

Thought is the enemy of nature.

Nature will be destroyed by thought. Any thought will always be against nature. Thought will destroy earth and it will destroy the universe.

[sushil yadav]

We are destroying outsleves and our planet.

Technology will ultimately lead to our undoing.

What I'd like to see for a change is a considered diagnoses of the bad (and the good) influences of modern society and technology on man.

I whole-heartedly agree in regards to excess consumerism. One of my goals on this rock is to spread the message about the destructive effects of the consumer society.

Industrial Society has been spreading blatant lies over the years.

"Green Industry", "Green Technology", "Ethical Consumerism", "Sustainable Development".

These are contradictory terms – these are oxymorons.
Industrialization can never be green – it is impossible.

You cannot save a person after you have killed him.
You cannot save ecosystems after you have killed them for making consumer goods.


When we make consumer goods we kill Animals, Trees, Air, Water and Land - directly or indirectly.

Industrial Society destroys ecosystems - all Industrial Societies destroy ecosystems.

It hardly matters whether it is "Capitalist Industrial Society" - "Communist Industrial Society" - or "Socialist Industrial Society".

Industrial Society destroys ecosystems at every stage of its functioning - when consumer goods are produced - when consumer goods are used - when consumer goods are discarded/ recycled.

Raw material for industry is obtained by cutting up Forests. It is extracted by mining/ digging up the earth. It comes by destroying/ killing Trees, Animals and Land.

Industries/ Factories use Water. The water that comes out of Factories is contaminated with hundreds of toxic chemicals. What to speak of Rivers - entire Oceans have been polluted. Industry kills Water.

Industries/ Factories burn millions of tonnes of fuel - and when raw material is melted/ heated up, hundreds of toxic chemicals are released into the atmosphere. Industry kills Air.
Industrial Society has covered millions of square miles of land with cement and concrete. Industry kills Land.

When consumer goods are discarded/ thrown away in landfills it again leads to destruction of ecosystems.

When consumer goods are recycled, hundreds of toxic chemicals are released into air, water and land.

Consumer goods are sold/ marketed through a network of millions of kilometers of rail / road network and shipping routes which causes destruction of all ecosystems that come in the way.



We have limited resources/ ecosystems on earth which is just 40,000 km in circumference.

If we destroy ecosystems for fewer things the ecosystems will last longer.

If we destroy ecosystems for more things [consumer goods] the ecosystems will finish much sooner.

The fewer things we make the more sustainable we are.

This is common sense - plain common sense - which the so called smart, intelligent, advanced, civilized and developed Industrial Society does not possess.


sushil_yadav
PowerSwitch
EnviroLink
StrategyTalk
Industrial Society Destroys Mind and Environment

[capslockf9]

Industrial Society Destroys Mind and Environment


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k34R-LVe ... re=related

[Knox]

Thought is the enemy of nature.

Nature will be destroyed by thought. Any thought will always be against nature. Thought will destroy earth and it will destroy the universe.

Krishnamurti?

Don't neglect that thought can't end by an act of will. The only thing that ends thinking is the realization of truth, that is, the completion of thought.

When a person is confronted with a lie or a contradiction, the mind goes into gear until it resolves the issue, or it is diverted onto another lie or contradiction. The will has no control over this.

Anyway, who's the good guy and who's the bad guy? Nature disguises truth, thought reveals it.

[capslockf9]

Thought is the enemy of nature.

Nature will be destroyed by thought. Any thought will always be against nature. Thought will destroy earth and it will destroy the universe.

Krishnamurti?

Don't neglect that thought can't end by an act of will. The only thing that ends thinking is the realization of truth, that is, the completion of thought.

When a person is confronted with a lie or a contradiction, the mind goes into gear until it resolves the issue, or it is diverted onto another lie or contradiction. The will has no control over this.

Anyway, who's the good guy and who's the bad guy? Nature disguises truth, thought reveals it.

I changed the old adage to: The truth will first PISS YOU OFF and then it will set you free.
But back to Krishnamurti. I think what he said is that once you experience truth, thought is trumped. He did not expound mediation but he did agree that thinking inhibited awareness. Thought needs to get out of the way to see truth.