Special Report: Someone Gets It Right.

ROME – After singing of "Fields of Gold," British rock star Sting is tending fields of grapes as he prepares to market red wine made at his country estate in Tuscany.
Some 30,000 bottles of wine produced on the property will go on sale in September, mainly in Britain and the United States, Paolo Rossi, the estate's manager, said Thursday.
In 1997 the former Police frontman purchased a 16th-century villa, called Il Palagio, in Figline Valdarno, a small village some 19 miles (30 kilometers) south of Florence.
Over the years he has turned the surrounding 860 acres (350 hectares) into an organic farm that also produces honey, olive oil, fruit, vegetables and Tuscan salami.
"When I came here to Figline I wanted first of all to feed my family," Sting said on Tuesday during an event at the village where the 57-year-old star spoke of the time he spends at Il Palagio.
"I also wanted to use agriculture with practices that would nourish the land and not deplete the land and so we went to traditional methods with farming, we got rid of pesticides, we shunned monoculture, and it works, the farm is also a garden," he said in the remarks broadcast by local television Rtv38.

He takes from the land for the right reasons, and takes care of the land while taking from it.
Now I know that is obviously the goal of farmers and agriculturists worldwide, but they do it only to ensure that more will be available to take in the following harvest season. Perhaps if we focus of the preservation of the land while using it (for preservations sake) then a full harvest would be an added side-effect. Wouldn't everyone win out?
(unedited.mind)

Corn Flakes Aren't Just for Breakfast Any More

...According to the folks at the UAA Sustainability fair, it's also good for eating our breakfast out of. When I played witness to this modern miracle, my first inquiry was to ask about the adverse effects of corn dishware. After all, everything had bad along with the good, right?
Right. When I asked the presenter this question, she stumbled and really had no idea. Now, I won't blame her, but I will admit that it'was a bit disappointing that she came prepared only to pitch the wonderful things about this end of sustainability. To me, that's like the doctor who endorses the next wonder drug without paying heed to whether or not it causes liver damage.
A bit of light internet sleuthing found the apparent answer: Cost. I don't quite recall the numbers(You can use Google just as well as I can.) but it turns out that these Biodegradable products are more expensive than regular cheap plastic, incredibly more so. Now, is that simply the cost of saving our planet, or is it an unnessesary expense? Hmmmm.
I also wonder if these products have any ill effects on the the human body or the food that they will one day hold. I doubt it, but one never knows.
However skeptical I may be, I do see the merit in the efforts of people who are trying to improve our planet, as opposed to those that are either doing nothing, or knowingly endangering it.
So, I say "Bravo!" to the scientific minds that came up with the idea, and I say "keep on trying."
As for the fair itself, I got to see something that I otherwise might not've bothered to get to.
I'm not a big fan of sustainability fairs and the like in general, but this time I gave in and made didgeridoos with the hippies. 'Twas great fun, although I still question what is so sustainable about making didgeridoos from PVC pipe. Hmmmmm.
(unedited.mind)

Poor Homo-Who?

Homo Magister is a curious fellow who shakes up the world like a bowl of Jell-O.
He wanted the sun to go 'round the earth,but astronomers scorned him and reacted with mirth.
He wanted mankind to be a godlike creature,but Darwin showed him his origins in slime, like a sci-fi double feature.
He wanted to think he was born building great civilizations,but anthropologists found a startling revelation; for 2 million years, since the first human birth we lived peacefully in tribes as part of the earth.
Everything he thought turned out to be wrong,but he still keeps singing that same old song.
Even if the evidence can't quite be produced,and his logical thinking is poorly deduced.
He props up his ego and tells himself talesof being superior to butterflies, puppy dogs and whales.
He says his god gave him dominion over it alland excuses the mess he's made 'cause he had quite a fall.
But he'll get it right one day this surely he knowson earth or in heaven or old star trek episodes.
'Cause he's king of the hill and so highly evolved,if he wasn't could he create so many problems unsolved?
The greenhouse and ozone and nuclear radiation,mass extinction, world war, an apocalyptic invitation.
Though the signs suggest he won't survive for much longer, he huffs and he puffs and says he'll get stronger.
He'll stomp and he'll chomp and devour the planet, but it won't do his bidding no matter how much he damns it!
It just spews him and eschews him and reminds him again,that like the dinosaurs, his story is reaching its end.
With his last breath he proclaims he could not be mistaken,but wonders about that road he'd not taken,the one that the Hopi and Lakota stayed on so true through eons of travels under skies so blue.
Homo Magister lingers on this final thought and learns that the world cannot be bought,
that salvation was never something he had to attain, it was given to him like the wind, sun and rain.
And now he's been stripped of his claim as world's Lord and Master, delusions of grandeur killed poor homo Magister.

Contentment is Not a Four Letter Word

Ahh, contentment. Ahh, satisfaction, These words even taste sweet when you speak them aloud. There have been poems written about them, songs written for them, and even lives lost in search of them. Isn't that really the key to ourt lives? After we've found our reason to exist in this world, and we've found ourt happiness within it, what more is there to want?
Ishmael poses a problem. And, as well know, every problem begs a solution. We've read this book and now we wonder what the heck we do with the things we've uncovered. Let sleeping wolves lie? I think not.
The problem, which has been ignored for so long, has been realized.
The ugly truth will no longer be ignored but instead looms threateningly in front of us, blocking the light of future for the human race, a future which we may very well have destroyed by paying no attention to the past. What to do, what to do? It seems that the only thing to do is to work toward a collective solution; to fundamentally change our lifestyles and adjust our habits in an extreme way. Others may argue that we need to blend the best parts of the “taker” lifestyle with the best of the “leaver” philosophy, creating a utopian society in which we all, the “community of life, “can live not only live happily but to truly live contentedly, with no façade of happiness but real meaning of purpose to which we can all wake up in the morning. Gee, that sounds nice. Forgive the first person sarcasm here, but if this could’ve been done, wouldn’t this type of panacea already have come to be? To borrow the colloquialism, blending the “best of both worlds” certainly sounds appealing, but I believe that the fundamental working philosophy of taker culture prevents this from happening. However, if there is no solution to be had as a group, then what are we left with but ourselves? Humans have been taught for centuries that individuals are weak, that they must come together as whole to be strong- take the bundle of sticks illustration as an example. Everything we’ve been told throughout our maturation stresses that we have to work together and build “synergy” to succeed in anything.
Feel free argue the point of working together all you like, but I digress- Individuality is not a prohibiting factor in solving the problem at hand. Nay, I say that individuality itself is the solution. Now, I’m not supposing that our culture does not reward individuality; it does. However, our culture stresses the selfish type that spawns jealousy and competition among own people. Therefore, we are seemingly not only at war with the planet, but also constantly battling among ourselves, and it cannot end until one thing is satisfied. Very simply, we are all looking for our reason to exist. Each night we lay down to rest, the majority of us are defeated in our internal quest to find our place in this world, to find where we truly belong. Few of us are satisfied because that is what taker culture does- it creates the illusion of contentment by surrounding us with material possessions and one-hit wonders, but in reality leaves us knowing that we are not whole. Now, I’d like you to have a moment to breathe and take in what you’ve just read. I want you, dear reader, to chew on your thoughts, digest your conclusions, and read on- I promise you answers. Onward!
We’ve established that no solution can be found when acting as a group; the human race as one. We cannot make blanket changes for every person. We’ve also supposed that the answer to solving this potentially catastrophic problem of ours is to use our individuality. How does this work? Making changes individually must work simply because our diversity prevents us from solving the problem any other way. We each must find what truly satisfies us enough that we no longer feel the need to destroy the world looking for a sense of belonging. The answer lies not in the taking of the world, but in the partaking of the world. This can be related in a concept of a hungry man sitting in front of a bountiful feast. Now, understand that this man is hungry, and every last bit of the food on the table is exactly to his liking.
All his favorites are present, and he doesn’t quite know where to start, so he begins to eat…and eat and eat. He gorges himself, thinking that he’ll only be satisfied when he has it all. However, what the man forgets are two things. First, that there are other guests waiting to eat who also enjoy the various delicacies that have been prepared. Second, and even more so, the man does not realize that he would’ve been just as happy had he only taken enough to tame his appetite, thus not only satisfying his hunger, but also avoided the feeling of being bloated. For some reason, every time this man sits down to a similar table, he feels that he must eat it all, and after a while, the natural consequences of overeating come- Obesity, diabetes, and even death. If we relate this man to taker culture, the food to the resources of earth, and the other dinner guests to all the non-human life on the planet, we can see quite easily that there is really is no valid reason to overeat, or as the case may be, to take everything for ourselves. We don’t need to have the world, we only need to find the parts of the world that will make us happy as individual people, and it is then and only then that we can find the true joy in life- Not just our own life, but the life of all other living things, the life of the planet, and perhaps most of all, the life of our future that could be so bright, I think I’ll need shades.

We must find joy for ourselves -by ourselves- so that we can put put all logic asleep and survive together.

For now, I'll say no more.
(unedited.mind)

Broken Britain? Nay, I say "Broken World"

Forget the photos above and instead read the following article and take a moment to ponder.

"LONDON – Ahhh, Britain. The land of Shakespeare and the Beatles, Churchill and the Queen. Rolling green hills, groovy London shops, hip plaids splashed over raincoats and umbrellas.
Cut to the reality of 2009: the highest teen pregnancy rate in western Europe, a binge drinking culture that leaves drunk teens splayed out in the streets and rising knife crime that has turned some pub fights into deadly affairs.
Ahhh, Britain.
In the latest symbol of what some are calling "broken Britain," 13-year-old Alfie and his 15-year-old girlfriend Chantelle became parents last week. The news sparked a flurry of handwringing from the media — and even ordinary folk admitted it didn't help that Alfie barely looked 10, let alone 13, as he cradled his newborn daughter.
Alfie's father, who reportedly has nine or 10 children of his own, gamely promised to have a "birds and the bees" chat with his son to prevent him from producing a second child before he grows facial hair.
Somehow that was not reassuring.
Sir Bernard Ingham, once press secretary to former Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, told the Associated Press that people from across Britain's political spectrum are in despair over the country's social breakdown.
"It's an indication that we've lost our way, that people don't know the difference between right and wrong," he said of young Alfie. "The plain fact is society can't proceed on this basis. I think this is an indication of broken Britain."
Ingham said Britain's binge drinking and youth violence reflect the same general fall in standards and discipline.
"I think in time there will be a swing against this permissiveness," he said, noting a shift from British debauchery in the 18th century to Victorian straight-laced standards 100 years later.
Binge drinking has produced a rise in liver disease among Britons in their 20s and the unpleasant reputation of British "lager louts" at holiday resorts across Europe.
On any given night, London residents can see drunken teens staggering through the Underground subway system. Usually their friends help them, but sometimes collapsed teens are left on their own until police or transit staff intervene.
The rise in knife crime harkens back to the 1950s "West Side Story" era in the United States. The number of robberies carried out with knives rose 18 percent for the third quarter of 2008 compared to the year before, according to government figures released in January.
Too often now, public disputes have ended in teen stabbing deaths. Rob Knox, an 18-year-old actor in a "Harry Potter" film, was killed in May, while Ben Kinsella, the 16-year-old brother of a television soap actress, was stabbed to death in June. Both were trying to break up fights in London.
Other, less well-known youths have also died in knife fights.
All this was bemoaned, but the final straw came this week, when Britain's intensely competitive tabloids focused on the young, clueless Alfie.
Alfie's daughter Maisie was reportedly conceived when he was 12. Chantelle's parents let the lad spend the night with their daughter, 14 at the time, at their public housing unit near Eastbourne, 70 miles southeast of London.
There are still some questions about the birth. The Sun newspaper did not say whether any tests were conducted to prove the boy's paternity, and The Sunday Times reported that at least two other teens claimed to have slept with the young mother.
Alfie told The Sun he plans to look after his newborn daughter. But in a heartbreaking interview, the boy admitted he didn't know what the word "financially" meant and acknowledged he doesn't even get an allowance."

...And people say we are still in control of our own culture. Were I not so wildy opposed to the fundamental "Our world is dying" message of DQ's philosophy, I'd be qute inclined to side with the point of Ishmael. We say that our hope is always in the "next generation," and yet we fail to remember that we are the ones that will bring up this "new generation." "They'll fix things" we say, and then they go on to grow up and attain positions as doctors, scientists, politicians, and other world leaders. Guess what? All they have from which to base their own conclusions on how to live is from the ways that they were taught growing up; from their parents/mentors. We see it in nature every day. The animal young learn the way to live from their "parents." The don't question what they've learned, because they are taught to follow a set of natural laws that almost every other creature on the planet follows, except us. They have no reason to question these laws. Why? Simple. Because they work. Because of this vicious cycle, it make me wonder whether we even have the capacity to save ourselves. Even Daniel Quinn is at heart, a taker, albeit one who realized the apparent error of his ways. However, that still doesn't change his actions when he gets up each day and lives the life of a succesful author, practicing the oh-so-comfortable taker ways which which we have all become accustomed to.

I'll say it again- Do we actually have the capacity to save ourselves? I think we all remember the last time a group of young people thought that they could change the world. See photos at top of page.

(unedited.mind)

Biology = The Study of Life

[Pardon the above misspelling.]

Hmm. There we go again. As a scientist-in-training, I have a curious desire to study the life and world that surrounds me, and this video, simple as it is, intrigues me. The funny thing about science is that we seem to bungle about, following our methods, collecting data, and trying to act intelligent, when the majority of our biggest discoveries and advances come from complete accidents. Take the X-Ray for example, which is a technology that has literally changed the face of medicine and its applications from healthcare to military technology have only served to further our "conquest of the world." X-Ray was first discovered by Physics professor Wilhelm Rontgen Röntgen who was investigating cathode rays. In the course of one of his experiements involoving a tube and a screen, he noticed a faint green glow about 1 meter away. The invisible rays coming from the tube to make the screen glow were passing through the cardboard he had set up. He found that these rays would also pass through books and papers. The funny thing is that he didn't even know what he had discovered. This is man who had spent his entire life studying the earth, and only discovered the medical use of the rays by complete accident when he saw a picture of his wife's hand on a photographic plate formed due to X-rays. Thus, medical X-Rays were born. Doesn't that make you wonder if perhaps we, the "rulers of the world" really are just bumbling dangerously about with no clue what we are actually doing? Liken us to a rocket, if you will. It can fly about, doing no one any kind of harm. It has the capacity for good as well great destruction, but really has no clue what it is meant to do. It has to recieve instructions from somewhere. How do we receive our instructions, you ask? If Quinn is to be believed, our place is obvious: Another species in the community of Earth.

(unedited.mind)

Taker Thunderbolt, Grounded

...Close your eyes and imagine the world as Ishamael tells his pupil; without humans on it.
Are you picturing the great untamed forest, red with tooth and claw, just as in the book? Good.
Now, close your eyes once more and zoom in a little closer. Imagine that humanity had been there, and that you had been there. Imagine that all you knew was crushed, littered and scattered about, everything you had owned and read about, littered around like one giant dump.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bmxyj6iInMc
Now, how do you feel?
What caused this destruction? Was it you, or was it someone that you knew?
Or, was it all of humanity? Did we destory it willingly or did our lack of understanding of what we were doing to the planet bring about the destruction?
If you could've done it differently, what would you have done?
I think that the REM song embodies what is so oddly funny about Quinn's concept. We know we are destroying the world, and we know that the end will come eventually, and yet we seem to not care, going on living our lives, doing nothing to "save the world." Is it because we know that it cannot be saved?
"It's the end of the world as we know it...and I feel fine."
Yep, I do. I'm going to lunch now. I know all that I've learned from this book, and yet I still feel indifferent. Funny eh?
(unedited.mind)

I Was Saving the World.

So I was sitting at my computer, typing away, when a stranger sat down next to me and inquired as to what I evidently so deep in thought about. When he asked, I answered. "I'm solving the problems of humanity" I said, without looking up or cracking a grin. This answer was the product of a mind intent on usuing its resources elsewhere, and not intended to satisfy the question. Instead of questining this earth-shattering disocovery he had made, the stranger snorted softly and left the room, in no small hurry. Perhaps I was crazy?
Isn't it interesting that instead of considering for a moment that perhaps I could be intent on solving world hunger, sustainable energy, and other deep-set issues, he refused to take it seriously and shrugged me off. Perhaps he is like most of us, who consider the problems of the world just that- problems that cannot be solved.
Anyhow, we touched on diversity in class today. Some people took it mean diversity in the physiological or anatomical sense, but I took it be diversity of opinion. Everyone has a different idea of what is right and how they should live, and so really, none of us can agree on anything long enough to accomplish a collective goal. If any of you read the parable by DQ that Prof. Rearden recently posted, it shows my point exactly. To finish off this thought, I'd like to show you a literal example of what I mean. I think everyone agrees that we are in a recession, or a depression, so to speak. Now, could we solve this problem if we came together as whole? Sure. Will we? No, because there will always be people like Ashley Judd who focus on the "poor Alaskan wolves" instead of what is really the larger, and arguably more important question at hand. Take a look at the video here:
It seems that Judd has finally earned her Hollywood stripes and along the way, provided award-winning comic relief. With Washington poised to shove a trillion-dollar “stimulus” pork pie down our throats, we need all the distractions we can get. I give Judd’s unintentionally entertaining performance in a new Sarah Palin-bashing animal rights ad two diversionary thumbs up.The Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund sponsored the YouTube video starring Judd,andthey’ve dubbed their campaign “Eye on Palin.” With all the serious, socially responsible celebrity earnestness she could muster, Judd decried aerial hunting of wolves in the GOP Alaska governor’s state. “It is time to stop Sarah Palin, and stop this senseless savagery,” Judd intoned.Casting herself as an environmental expert, Judd attacked Palin for “casting aside science and championing the slaughter of wildlife.” The video shows a wolf being shot, writhing in pain, with an ominous soundtrack throbbing and menacing photos of Palin flashed across the screen. “Riddled with gunshots, biting at their backs in agony, they die (pause for quiver) a brutal death,” Judd enunciates slowly as wolf squeals punctuate the video. Defenders of Wildlife assails Gov. Palin for proposing a $150 bounty for every dead wolf killed by aerial hunters.She’s cruel and bloodthirsty and she must be stopped!It’s a compelling, black-and-white story line. But like the world Ashley Judd inhabits, this plot is make-believe.Fact is, the policy is intended to protect other animals – moose and caribou – from overpopulation of wolves. Alaskans rely on caribou and moose for food. Not all Americans care to live on environmentally-correct starlet diets of tofu salad and Pinkberry yogurt.Neither Palin nor the aerial hunters in those scary low-flying planes that have Judd quivering promote the program out of malice and animal insensitivity. On the contrary, they are the true, compassionate conservationists. The bounty helped state biologists collecting wolf age data and provided incentives to reduce the wolf population when wildlife management efforts had fallen behind. This is about predator control. But to liberal, gun-control zealots thousands of miles away, it’s all heartless murder.Federal law makes specific exceptions to aerial hunting for the protection of “land, water, wildlife, livestock, domesticated animals, human life, or crops.” Targets are not limited to wolves. And, as Alaska wildlife officials note, the process is tightly controlled and “designed to sustain wolf populations in the future.”No matter. As Judd proclaimed, “It is time to stop Sarah Palin.” That is the true aim of left-wing lobbying groups and their allies in Hollywood. Palin is a threat not to Alaska’s wolves, but to the liberal establishment’s wolves. Defenders of Wildlife isn’t targeting the ads in states affected by these policies. They’re running the Judd-fronted ads across battleground states. It’s about electoral interests, not wildlife interests. The eco-Kabuki theater is just plain laughable.On a deadly serious note, Judd’s selective concern for savagery is not lost on longtime observers of the activist entertainer’s political forays. A militant, pro-choice feminist, Judd lashed out at the Republican ticket during the campaign: “[A] woman voting for McCain and Palin is like a chicken voting for Colonel Sanders.” Yet, not a peep has been heard from Judd about the serial predators of Planned Parenthood who have been caught on tape urging young girls to cover up statutory rape to facilitate abortion procedures. And she won’t be starring in any YouTube ads decrying grisly late-term abortion procedures.In a starlet’s world, “senseless savagery” only applies to the poster pet of the month.

So, again, with people like this who are always deviating from the larger problem at hand, we can't get anywhere. "With Ashley Judd Gone, Will There Be Hope for Wolves?"
HA.
(unedited.mind)

The Penultimate Peril?

Click "2012" above to start the minifilm.
So, we are the takers, and we've taken advantage of the world more and more, until now, when the world "lies bleeding beneath our feet."
The Mayan calendar ends o. January 21st, 2012. Of course, the world was supposed to end in Y2K. Hmm, last time I checked, we're still here. The devil was supposed to come and destroy the world at 06/06/06 as well. Of course, Hillary Clinton did get back into politics, but last time I checked, we're still here.
However, if we accept the DQ hyopthesis that we're nearing the end of our "civilizational flight," could this be it? There's a trailer for the movie "2012," and it showcases a waterfall coming and flooding the entire Earth. Well, if all of our space probes and flights have somehow disturbed the voiud of Outer Space, it is fairly conceivable that a giant meteor could come down and smash into Earth. It's not so crazy to think that a Meteor landing in an Ocean with that much force could well flood the world. And whose fault would it be? Ours, the takers. Why? Because we've conquered where we were never meant to interfere. We've all heard "Boldly going where no man has gone before." Hmm. So we boldy go wherever we please, conquering as we please, without relalzing that we may well be enacting our own destruction.
Many of us have seen the sequel to "Bruce Almighty," namely "Evan Almighty." In that movie, God came down and told Evan, the modern-day Noah, that he was going to flood the Earth once again. In the end, it was really a giant metaphor for the local Dam breaking and destroying dirty politics in Washington. However, even such a relatively small event had large-scale effects. If the end of the world is coming, via 2012 or our civilizational plane crash, could it be for the better? Perhaps we need a large-scale disaster to knock us back into our senses. Perhaps we are meant to be rulers of the world, but have not enacted this "destiny" correctly, just like the son of a King, born to rule the throne, but does such a bad job with the crown that his people overthrow him and put in place a new King. The end doesn;t have to be an explosion of Earth or the death of all taht is on it. Could this be the different kind of "end" that Quinn talks of?
(unedited.mind)

In response to "Flight."

I was surprised to find that so few people had more thoughts on the "Flight" video that we viewed.
As I mentioned in class today, this video is purely chapter six in video form as opposed to prose.The bird is white, standing for purity and nature, and the artists uses deep red and black for the video, symbolizing pain, suffering, desolation, and all that "bad stuff."It shows the innocence of a man chasing the bird, imagining that he can fly and then longing to conquer the air, so he builds a flying contraption, and as the technology advances further, so does his and its capacity for evil and bad. Due to our flaws as Humans, we screw up something that has the potential for good, and instead use it to "enact the story" as Quinn puts it. However, I think that this video misses that good that is there, even amongst the evil. In WWII, when bombs were flying, some of those bombs were from good people who were trying to destroy evil. Although destruction ensues from both forces, one comes from good intentions. Isn't that worth something?
As a last point, I'd like you to think back and remember when Ishmael deems all humanity to be "flawed," thus causing us to always be screwing up this perfect paradise that we were supposedly meant to create.
Aren't other forms of life flawed as well? Surely Nature can't be perfect. I'll refrain from answering my own question as I so often do, and I'll let you, the reader answer this. You can draw your conclusion from scientific research, books you've read, the Ishmael school of thought, or simply from what you can see around you. You'll embark of a journey of your own as you ponder, or perhaps you will simply embark on a journey back to whatever you were doing before you read this. Either way, there is no way to escape the question. The answer is just outside the door.
(unedited.mind)

What's In A Name?

I'll take for granted that you've noticed the chosen wording in the above image.

In this moment, I'd like to take it back for a moment. ("Bring it on Back by Jet playing in background.)

Because we've enacted this story of becoming rulers of the world, and because we seemingly have no higher power to answer to, what now?

I don't believe anyone argues that we aren't rulers of the world. There is no doubt that we have conquered, but the question is- Are we meant to be the conquerors?

I'll depart from my usual from my usual gregariousness, and truncate the blabbing here: Because we have become the rulers of the world, has the world, or at least some parts of it, become dependent on us?

You can relate to our society if you like. Take the poor man who has no job, collects unemployment, and survives solely on the social security system he have in place. You could also look to the institutionalized convict who has been imprisoned so long that he, just like the poor man, has become dependent on "the system," and would be lost without it. Actually, following DQ's philosophy, that's a half-decent analogy. The world is like the convict, and has been imprisoned under our rule for so long, does it still remember the days when we were no different than the dog? Does it still remember the days where it flourished by its own knowledge, or has it become dependent on this life-support system that we've set up for it? It's similar to the brain-dead patient whose real self is gone, but whose body remains due to the tubes and machines that keep its processes "alive." The body still produces urine and gases, takes in oxygen, the heart still pumps blood, and the lungs still expand, but is the real life still there? I think not. We have the world on a life-support system that is keeping not only the earth alive, but also providing what we need to keep us alive. However, a life support system can only work so long. The thought here is a bit too philosophical for my taste, but no less valid. Chew on that, dear readers.

(unedited.mind)

There Is No Title.

There is also no discussion. Make like a Native and be still. I want you to take two minutes of your time and play no music, speak nothing, write nothing. I want you to ponder this picture and all that is represents for humanity and our culture, as well as what it means in relation to Quinn's hypothesis of specific knowledge.
(unedited.mind)

Technology, etc.

So, is technology the death of us, or are we the death of us? Is there really any death at all?
I made that knife because I find satisfaction in working with my hands. I'll go on to finish it and decorate it, and one day use it when I am hunting. It will be the knife that will skin the next bear that I kill.
Now, does that mean that I am considering the bear to be beneath me? Does this signify my supposed belife that all there is is meant for my use? Or, does this simply mean that I am partaking of my surroundings, and that this is the natural order of the food chain? I use every part of the bear that I can. I don't kill it due to dislike, or purely for fun. I leave the other bears to do as they please, and should I need more, I will come back. I think that the key to one of our major problems in this world (draining resources) is excess. Ahh, sweet excess; the American way, and arguably the human way. Why else would we Supersize our meal when all we really need is the normal portion? Why do we choose the 60" TV when we could see the picture just fine on 30"? We can come to the conclusion that this need for excess stems from two possible sources:
1. The fear of "not getting enough"
2. Following the DQ school of thought, it stems from the internal desire to conquer. By getting that extra 30", are we claiming that we are the master by having the best, therefore making us the best?
The fundamnetal problem is excess, and until we can identify the reason that we pyschologically need so much when all we really need is enough to satisfy our bodies, we cannot work toward a solution. This is also the problem with what we were discussing in class today: We discussed how we should live, and we discussed it as though it actually existed as a law, (which it may or may not) without ever thinking back to the fact that no one has even admitted its official existence as a law. Ahh, semantics.
(unedited.mind)

Is The Knowledge of the End Worse Than The End Itself?

...So we can see our supposed destruction and yet we do nothing? We know what is supposedly coming, and yet we live as we have?
If Quinn is so brilliant and sees these problems so clearly, and if all that he proposes if true, then the conclusion is horrible- We are doomed. So, are we doomed to die, or is the real death in the knowledge that we will no longer live. If Quinn really believed all of the things that he wrote, then he'd be one scared man. If all that knowledge was truth in someone's head, I can't imagine that they'd want to go on living. No, I'm not advocating suicide, and I'm not saying I hate Quinn or that I wish he would die (I don't) I just find it amazing that he and others seem to know all of these horrible things and yet keep on living, knowing what is to come.
(unedited.mind)

...And it continues

...Because I can't come up with anything more creative at the moment.
Now, I'll get right to the point.
Last week, we were discussing the book (what else?) and were having a discussion in which a great majority of the class seemed to be of the opinion that Man is destroying the world, and that we should share our "rule" with the trees, the birds, and the bees, so to speak.
Well, it seemed like everyone had their mind quite set when someone mentioned that perhaps a Gorilla might be one to rule the world (as opposed to us.)
Now here's the thing: everyone laughed. In this case, it was the type of laugh that seemed to intone disbelief and a sense of "Like that'd happen." Hmm. Wasn't it not so long ago when several people seemed fierce for the point mentioned prior? I think that the laughter in the room only proved my point, and showed all what is in our hearts and minds, what we know to be true. That is, Man will alwsy rule. Does anyone truly believe that we are not meant to rule this Earth? Is anyone truly convicted that some of organic form of life could do better than us, other than Quinn and PETA? I think not.
Sincerely Yours,
(unedited.mind)

Ish-meal

Ishmeal? It's a bird! It's a plane! No, wait it's a misspelling! No, it's not any of these, tempting choices though they may be. It's the title of this post, for which you, the reader, is meant to chew on. Chew on my thoughts, thick and loquacious, chew on yours, or since we're talking so much about mastication, grab a quick snack, a comfortably warm blanket and settle down. I'm not exactly sure how long this particular journey will take. After all, when you venture off into my thoughts, you'd better be prepared to camp out.
It is funny to think that all Ishmael has taught us so far has met with so few disagreements. After all, what he is trying to teach and tell is really a story of shame- Shame on us and shame on most western-styled cultures in our world, chiding us for not respecting our surroundings. Even the prose in my last sentence would be a target for which Ishmael would surely aim to bring into view my use of the word our. The point is, I think, is that our world is simply not ours, it's just a home in which we inhabit, along with many others species large and small, carnivore and herbivore. We all live in the same world, and yet we "the takers", as Ishamael so eloquently names us, seem hellbent on taking it over, and not just conquering it, but assuming that we don't need to, assuming that all there is has belonged to us from the beginning. No, in fact, the troubling thing is that we seem to have lost our sense of caring. "Where is the love?"(As the Black Eyed Peas might say) Where is the good stewardship? I personally believe that this planet is for our use, but along with that gift comes a responsibility (insert Spiderman 1 music here.) The responsibility we have is simple, and I believe that the important ones can be listed.
1. What we use, use well.
2. Waste not, want not.
3. Share. Are there really so many hungery humans mouths to feed on the earth that we can't leave enough for the rest of organic life?

Ah, if only it were that simple.
So, wer have arrived at the point where it seems as though we could destroy the world, at the point where it seems that though there is no happy medium between the environmentalists, conservationists, those who live in excess, and those who are left wanting.
What do we do now? That is the question, as the bard would say.
'Till next time,
(uneditedmind)

And So it Begins...

Ok, I'm blogging.
"Blog" is an abbreviated version of "weblog," which is a term used to describe web sites that maintain an ongoing chronicle of information. A blog is a frequently updated, personal website featuring diary-type commentary and links to articles on other Web sites. Blogs range from the personal to the political, and can focus on one narrow subject or a whole range of subjects.
Many blogs focus on a particular topic, such as web design, home staging, sports, or mobile technology. Some are more eclectic, presenting links to all types of other sites, and others are more like personal journals, presenting the author's daily life and thoughts.
This one in particular will focus on one reader's journey through a book called "Ishmael," and my own personal attempts at "figuring it all out," and my thoughts on "saving the world." So, will you journey with me?