A unique conversation about Human development in Nature

An opinion (part of a longer conversation) about Human development in Nature:

  1. Have you even read Endosymbiotic Theory? It basically states that the fundamental principle behind nature is mutualism and symbiosis. That the world is symbiogenesis in nature. We have a pretty good how nature operates in a macro sense and yes you are right is dialectically opposed to human CIVILIZATION. Or rather just the last >1% of human existence.
  2. I am saying that creating the abstract concept of “humanity” is dehumanizing and reductionist in nature. It reduces human life to numbers or abstract concepts rather than the very real experience of the individual. That such categorization of life is in and of itself commodification and such commodification is intrinsically exploitative and goes against the mutualistic principles of nature.
  3. I did not say humans were good-natured balanced beings, but rather that being balanced beings within our ecosystem was in our best interests and ego the path of an egoist joke myself.,
  4. Capitalism or communism are both flawed systems because they are dependent upon finite resources and will always fail.
  5. And yes I agree that is what humanity needs to become. That also happens to be the root principles behind animism and many pagan religions
  6. I would say the best way forward is to revert to a more animistic religion as it all about developing mutually beneficial relationships with nature along with using what we have learned and applying the principles of managed ecosystem permaculture to increase the abundance of the land to support the greatest amount of all life, including humans.
  7. We have been trying to educate people for years and it has been almost completely worthless and has done nothing to curb the ever-increasing energy usage per capita of the world. After decades of education, we are more consuming than ever. And we don't have a whole lot of time left to make any necessary changes and at this point, “green” or “sustainable” have become marketing tools for products that are neither green nor sustainable. I am afraid the only solution is a collapse and die off.
  8. And in the end, what I am doing is forming a sustainable forest-based managed ecosystem permaculture farm. Perhaps I can use it to form a community.


  1. Fully agree.
  2. This is why I am suggesting to leave our ideologies and philosophies aside and look at everything from the viewpoint of Nature. From Nature’s point of view, Humanity is potentially the greatest thing ever, an unparalleled “assembly of unique individuals”, who can use their special individual qualities, diversity, abilities for the sake of the whole. In such a “Humanity” each can retain who they are, what they have but learn how to complement the whole, creating a living, exponentially developing mosaic.
  3. In theory, it is in our best interest, and still, we cannot act like that as a deeper, mostly hidden “software” drives us towards ruthless competition, success at the expense of others. Even when we cooperate, create “unions” it is temporary as it lasts only until each party’s self-interest benefits. If my egotistic self-interest does not benefit — and that benefit is calculated in an inherently self-serving, excessive way — all deals are off and we start ruthlessly competing again.
  4. I fully agree. They are mostly flawed as they are the construct of a Human mind that is disconnected from true, Natural reality. Everything we create is arbitrary, based on our inherently subjective, selfish, egocentric perception, calculations. This is why first of all we need to become “similar” to Nature in our qualities, so we could understand what our true, natural necessities and available resources are.
  5. see 6.
  6. I do not think any religion can help us, our problem is not what we believe in, but what we know, experience, what we can build on in practice. Instead of faith systems, we need a unique, empirical, Natural science, but one that first helps by giving us a new, truly objective viewpoint of reality, through which we can finally research and understand Nature.
  7. And this is the point of this educational method I mentioned, which was never tried before on a mass scale, it has been passed on from generation to generation in very small, mostly hidden groups. So far everything Humanity tried remained confined to our original selfish nature and was built by, understood by our inherently subjective, egocentric, and thus very limited and distorted perception and consciousness. When we succeed in “upgrading” our consciousness and perception so we could integrate into and understand Nature, then based on Nature’s laws we can rebuild Humanity on new foundations. Then we will be able to adapt, harness our original nature into nature’s fully integrated system. But since we do it consciously, purposefully, and above, against our original “software”, we will remain fully conscious observers, partners of Nature even after integrating. We are talking about changing a so far blind, instinctive Human development to a fully conscious, proactive process, where we develop ourselves — guided by Nature.
  8. I have no experience in that.
  9. The point is, as I tried to explain above — that first, we have to change, “reprogram”, “upgrade” the Human being. Before that, without it, we are just chasing our own tail. Only the “upgraded Human being” will be able to “get one’s hands dirty” and start building a very different society. We can see very clearly how all political, economic, social, agricultural, military “solutions” fail, and make everything worse, as we are not changing the “user”/”builder”. So the community I am talking about is dealing with the “reprogramming”, “upgrading”, “re-education” of Human beings in small, practical environments. Everything else will unfold after.