Is Nature Important?

Highlights from our meeting on 05/28/03

1. Why do we seem to be acting in a way that is so destructive to nature?
2. What is nature?
3. Are national parks, city parks, and gardens, maintained by man, nature?
4. Isn't nature really just inhospitable wilderness?
5. But isn't everything, including man, a part of nature?
6. Shouldn't we distinguish between "Nature" as all inclusive and "nature" as that part of all-inclusive Nature which is independent of man?
7. Isn't it arrogant of man to assume that he actually has the power to control nature and to destroy nature?
8. Won't man destroy himself before he can ever succeed at destroying nature?
9. But isn't it also true that man can destroy large parts of nature before he destroys himself?
10. Isn't that, in fact, our greatest fear, that we will destroy ourselves by destroying those parts of nature that are vital to our own survival?
11. Does nature even "care" if we destroy ourselves?
12. Does nature care if we destroy all life on this planet?
13. Is there really anything unnatural about a dead planet?
14. So if it is our own survival that is at stake, why are we acting so recklessly toward nature?
15. How can we know for sure which parts of nature are vital to our own survival?
16. Is it a question of long-term versus short-term planning?
17. Isn't it short-term thinking that is responsible for the rapid depletion of our natural resources?
18. Is our economy structured in a way that rewards short-term profits over the long-term welfare of the planet?
19. Isn't a more "native" lifestyle more respectful of nature and therefore more sustainable?
20. Wasn't that the argument of Rousseau and others of the Romantic Movement who advocated a return to the way of the "Noble Savage"?
21. Hasn't that philosophy been discredited as being no longer feasible?
22. Isn't the world population already too large to allocate sufficient land to each individual to live that lifestyle?
23. Isn't the population growing fastest in the underdeveloped countries?
24. Aren't these countries already in crisis over insufficient natural resources to sustain the Noble Savage lifestyle?
25. Hasn't agricultural technology made it possible to feed a much larger world population than was previously possible?
26. But is this technology sustainable?
27. Aren't we losing top soil at an alarming rate with our modern agricultural techniques?
28. Aren't we also becoming more and more dependent on chemical fertilizers and pesticides?
29. Don't all these chemicals have long-term destructive consequences on our environment?
30. Isn't our industrial pollution destroying whole fishing industries in some locations?
31. Can newer and newer technology compensate for the destruction it itself has caused?
32. Is the problem in the technology or in the culture?
33. Isn't the problem that our culture rewards short-term thinking?
34. Is the reign of the patriarchal power structure to blame for emphasizing acting on the environment as opposed to relating to it?
35. Wouldn't a feminist, matriarchal system be better at relating to Mother Nature?
36. But don't we need both the masculine and the feminine?
37. Isn't either one, in isolation from the other, destructive to both?
38. Don't we want and need the best of both the masculine and the feminine?
39. Isn't this best achieved by the union and integration of the masculine and the feminine?
40. Isn't vertical integration also essential to any new nature-friendly culture?
41. Wouldn't such an "integral world-view" emphasize stewardship rather than exploitation?
42. What does it mean to have an "integral world-view"?
43. Doesn't it mean recognizing that everything is inter-related and inter-dependent?
44. Is that what some call the "great web of life"?
45. Does that put humans on the same level as other animals?
46. Doesn't man occupy a special position in relation to the rest of nature?
47. Isn't man in a position above other animals, and other animals above plants?
48. Isn't there a special responsibility that goes with that special position?
49. Isn't that responsibility a kind of stewardship?
50. Doesn't that kind of stewardship include a responsibility to treat other animals humanely?
51. So does that then mean that the web has a hierarchical structure?
52. As we become more conscious, don't we also become more powerful and more responsible?
53. Are hierarchies necessarily bad?
54. Wouldn't an enlightened, integral hierarchy bind power with responsibility and willing stewardship?
55. Wouldn't such willing stewardship, not only protect those parts of nature vital to our own survival but also promote the mindful, humane, treatment of all living things for its own sake?
56. Wouldn't such a culture, for instance, seek a humane alternative to the "concentration camp" method of raising cows and chickens used by agribusiness today?
57. But where does our culture come from?
58. Does it come from Hollywood?
59. Does it come from Madison Avenue?
60. Didn't it use to come from parents?
61. Is there a long-term process currently at work that will change our culture?
62. Isn't culture always changing?
63. What determines where culture will go in the long-term?
64. What will our culture look like 30 years from now?
65. Isn't it in large part determined by who teaches our children and what they teach them?
66. Won't those who plan for the long-term be more influential in the long-term, than those who only plan for the short-term?
67. Does that mean that a minority of long-term thinkers can steer the course of long-term change, despite the sea of short-term thinkers?
68. For that to be true, isn't it also necessary that the long-term thinkers act in synchrony and not in isolation?
69. Is it possible that such a critical mass of mindfully aware individuals acting in synchrony could represent the beginning of a collective global consciousness?

What is the relationship between non-conformity and self-actualization?

Highlights from our meeting on 05/21/03

1. Can you be self-actualizing if you are a conformist?
2. What does it mean to be a conformist?
3. Doesn't it mean that you do what everyone else does?
4. What does self-actualizing mean?
5. Doesn't that mean becoming your unique self?
6. Is your unique self something you were born with?
7. Is a self-actualized person, someone who has manifested his unique self?
8. Does that mean that a self-actualized person has reached his end state of being?
9. Can animals be self-actualizing?
10. Aren't animals already at their end state of being?
11. Does that mean that animals are already self-actualized?
12. Doesn't self-actualizing mean more that just reaching the limit of your conscious development?
13. Can't it be said that there are 4 stages in man's conscious development?
14. Aren't these stages characterized by the perspectives of (a) things happen to me, (b) things happen by me, (c) things happen through me, and (d) things happen as me?
15. Does self-actualized then mean having reached the stage where "things happen as me"?
16. What is the difference between self-actualized and enlightened?
17. Doesn't self-actualized imply maximizing your own unique and separate self, or "being all you can be"?
18. Doesn't enlightenment imply transcending the ego or separate self so that one is no longer operating as a separate self?
19. Are either of these end-points achievable?
20. Isn't there always further to go?
21. Isn't enlightenment and self-actualization, like development, a process rather than an end-point?
22. So does that mean one can be self-actualizing, without being self-actualized?
23. Is one always self-actualizing, or is this a process which only starts after more basic processes have finished?
24. Would one of the more basic processes be the process of conforming?
25. Does conforming meet a basic need for having a feeling of belonging?
26. Can one belong to a community or subculture without conforming?
27. Can a rebel be a conformist?
28. Is a rebel, who is in a subculture of rebels, a conformist or non-conformist?
29. What role does motive play in being a conformist?
30. By conformist, don't we mean someone who intentionally adjusts his behavior to be like everyone else?
31. Isn't intent the distinguishing component?
32. So if one acts like everyone else by accident, does that mean he is not a conformist?
33. Who is everyone else?
34. Can't a conformist in one setting be a non-conformist in another?
35. Couldn't a Buddhist be a non-conformist in the general population and a conformist in a Buddhist monastery?
36. If the Buddhist's motivation is not driven by the desire to be the same, but rather by higher aspirations, isn't he still a non-conformist even in the monastery?
37. Isn't it true that we can be conformists in some ways while simultaneously being non-conformists in other ways?
38. Doesn't being a conformist beg the question, conforming to what?
39. Couldn't one intentionally conform to some standards or conventions, such as traffic laws, while not conforming to others, such as fashion trends?
40. Couldn't one also conform or not conform to values of one's parents or even your own past values?
41. Isn't some conformity necessary to solve problems on a group or community level?
42. Isn't that what moral codes represent?
43. What about problems where the good of the individual conflicts with the good of the group?
44. Doesn't over-fishing hurt all fisherman collectively, while individual restraint hurts the individual fisherman?
45. Can't a higher authority, such as the federal government, impose conformity to solve such a problem?
46. But what if there is no higher authority?
47. Isn't the European Union an attempt to create a higher authority to conform to in order to solve problems that are not solvable by individual countries acting by themselves?
48. Isn't that also what the individual states did in this country to form the United States?
49. Isn't that the goal of the United Nations?
50. Is some form of conformity, then, a necessary foundation for creating a peaceful community of nations or individuals?
51. Is a peaceful community a prerequisite for individual self-actualization?
52. Can someone be self-actualizing in a non-free, totalitarian environment?
53. How about in a concentration camp?
54. Didn't Viktor Frankl write about exactly that in his book, Man's Search For Meaning?
55. Wasn't he self-actualizing where the only freedom remaining was the freedom to choose one's attitude?

Does God really exist?

Highlights from our meeting on 05/07/03

1. Isn't God just a story that we have been told for so long that we simply accept it as true?
2. Is God Love?
3. Is God is just energy?
4. Don't sudden unexplained jumps in evolution, such as flying, feathered dinosaurs, suggest the existence of God?
5. Is God the answer we use to answer the questions to which we have no other answer?
6. Does God, then, represent everything that is mysterious in out lives?
7. But what about direct personal experience?
8. Don't many people report having direct personal experiences which seem to be of a divine nature?
9. Could they just be due to brain chemistry anomalies?
10. Don't certain conditions or situations seem to promote the likelihood of having such experiences?
11. Don't near death experiences seem to bring about such phenomenon?
12. Can't some psychotropic drugs also induce such experiences?
13. Does the demonstrable involvement of brain chemistry activity invalidate the interpretation that these are divine experiences?
14. Don't all human experiences involve some sort of brain chemistry activity?
15. Haven't researchers demonstrated the ability to invoke all sorts of subjective experiences by stimulating various parts of the brain?
16. Don't psychotic individuals also seem to have very convincing hallucinations that can be traced to internal brain chemistry dysfunction?
17. So what is the difference between the experience of seeing an on-coming truck and the hallucination of an on-coming truck?
18. What is the difference between the experience of the divine and the hallucination of the experience of the divine?
19. Won't the brain chemistry activity be very similar?
20. Isn't the difference in the source of the stimulation?
21. In the case of hallucinations, isn't the source some internal dysfunction or short circuit?
22. In the other case, isn't the source from somewhere other than the individual himself?
23. Isn't another difference the eventual outcome or effect of the experience?
24. Isn't it true that the hallucination of a truck can frighten you, but the actual truck can flatten you?
25. Don't scientists emphasize the need for repeatability and independent verification of empirical experience to determine its validity?
26. Aren't there specific spiritual practices which, when followed diligently over a long period of time, dependably lead to certain experiences of a consciousness greater than ones own?
27. Is science even relevant in the search for God?
28. Can something that is inherently beyond the rational mind be comprehended by the rational mind?
29. As long as we are stuck in our rational minds, aren't we like little mice scurrying about in our little world with no awareness of the perspective of the eagle?
30. Don't the mystics say that in the higher state of consciousness, all becomes one and time ceases to exist?
31. So does that mean that if I go into a higher state of consciousness and become one with the truck, I won't get flattened?
32. Don't we need a way to reconcile great spiritual truths with plain common sense?
33. Doesn't there need to be some vertical integration between the world of the eagle and the world of the mouse?
34. Well, if the eagle wants to consume the mouse, doesn't it have to descend into the world of the mouse?
35. Can the eagle, then, operate in both worlds?
36. How can a mouse or man experience the higher world?
37. Is it a higher world, or simply this world properly seen?
38. Where does the wave need to look to experience the ocean?
39. Waves appear to be separate, but isn't it true that, when properly seen, they are no longer separate, but rather undulating manifestations of one great ocean?
40. Is God the great wholeness, of which we, and everything else in the universe, are but fleeting, undulating manifestations?
41. Is this wholeness, alive and conscious?
42. Does it have a will?
43. Is it still evolving?
44. Don't all living things have a need to grow?
45. Is there anything living that is not changing?
46. If God or the Universe is alive, isn't it also changing and growing?
47. Is God, then, a work in progress, changing and growing as we and everything else in the Universe are changing and growing?