[Buddha-l] Course of Nature (1)

[jkirk]

Thanks for posting 1 & 2--they seem to have got the aryavedans
off my back.
Joanna 

-----Original Message-----
From: buddha-l-bounces at mailman.swcp.com
[mailto:buddha-l-bounces at mailman.swcp.com] On Behalf Of Jim
Peavler
Sent: Sunday, June 01, 2008 5:00 PM
To: Buddhist discussion forum
Subject: [Buddha-l] Course of Nature (1)

Now that the discussion is over, from a Buddhist point-of-view at
least, I feel emboldened to comment simply on the concept of
Nature  
and the Course of Nature in general, in response to the
statement:   
"Because man experiences as progress that which agrees with the
direction in which overall existence moves forward over time . .
."

Looking back on what is known about, and what I understand from
reading about what is known about the history of the earth and
life on earth, there should be no teleological assumptions made
about what is called "the Course of Nature".  The above quotation
seems to not only assume that something called "Nature" moves in
a direction, but that we humans ought somehow get in step with
that movement.

What we normally mean by "nature" is that which happens "outside"
of human activity (human being commonly assumed to be somehow
"unnatural").

This view of nature (without human intervention) can not be said
to be moving in any particular direction at all, but simply
everything changes all the time. It has no goal and no end-point.
(Cosmically we can say that the universe is expanding and will or
will not contract someday, stars will burn out or explode, and
all kinds of things on the cosmic scale, but I think this cosmic
view is probably irrelevant to the current discussion. "The
Course of Nature" seems to usually refer to this earth.)
Evolution, for example, has no "direction", no "plan", no goal or
endpoint. Evolution changes by random variation and extinction.
The major tool of evolution is extinction. Thousands of
variations have become extinct for every variation that survives,
and it appears that the "Course of Nature" is that everything
will become extinct.

But it is "unnatural" to leave human beings out of our view of
nature.  
And, once humans are included, the nature of Nature changes. Then
we begin to view Nature as having laws, direction, a "course".
The "Course of Nature" is a way humans (who are a legitimate part
of that
nature) view Nature. Humans tend to view Nature as what happens
outdoors. Any effect humans have on Nature, especially things
that seem "bad", are viewed as "unnatural", and as affecting the
Course of Nature.  If we humans plant grass and trees and restore
long-gone wildlife to places they have vacated, this seems "good"
and "natural".  
If we pollute the water and air and drive thousands of species to
extinction, this is seen as bad and unnatural.

I think it is reasonable to think that change is change, change
is "natural", and that change is not going in any particular
direction and has no "course". And the source of the change (its
"karma") is largely irrelevant.


Jim Peavler
jmp at peavler.org



_______________________________________________
buddha-l mailing list
buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com
http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG. 
Version: 8.0.100 / Virus Database: 269.24.4/1476 - Release Date:
5/31/2008 12:25 PM