If we really liked the law of the jungle we would have adopted it properly. Instead we have left the jungle and become sophisticated. A race apart from the demands of the law of the jungle. We no longer need to be ruled by the jungle, but instead choose to think we rule it. We are no longer a species subject to environment and evolution. We now dictate the environment and our evolution.
If we are rich enough.
Because if we aren’t rich enough we have to be in tune with our environment and our evolution. Or else we die. And we might die anyway – sooner than we like – but increasing our chances is key.
Talking of the Keys …
By Jeff Schmaltz, MODIS Rapid Response Team, NASA/GSFC
A documentary last night looked at the Florida Keys and their “front line” role in the hurricane season. Humans and human settlement become evermore sophisticated in enjoying life in this turbulent idyll – ever more resilient withstanding the ravages of hurricanes. A lot of that “sophistication” always has to be reconstructed. Rebuilt. With evermore sophisticated materials and machinery.
This documentary found that the indigenous wildlife was perfectly suited to recovering (without any sophistication at all). That “slow evolution” over millennia – and in tune with a slowly changing environment – leaves “the jungle idiginets” perfectly suited to being in tune with “the jungle”.
(and they never even “left the jungle” to do that!)
We like the law and we hate the law. We defend the law and we attack the law. Our law. The sophisticated law. The rich law. The debatable law. The law of preference. The which set of facts do I prefer “law”?
Our son and girlfriend have just begun an adventure travelling the “wilderness” in a far away country. Their negotiations over a camper-van went well. And the agreed sum was duly transferred – not.
The banking system between one country and another meant a delay of almost 24 hours before funds moved from one to the other. Here in England that would never have happened! There it did.
And the “indigenous wilderness” solution?
For our son and his girlfriend to stay the night (being generously fed and watered) because distances in the “wilderness” are so vast. And our two “English visitors” had to work hard at losing their “English reserve” (i.e. an evolved suspicion of being murdered as they slept). They did and they weren’t. And the following morning, after a hearty breakfast, funds were exchanged and they left with their new camper-van. There is no “law” for that kind of response and kindness.
Not our sophisticated evolved suspicious kind.
And I am constantly encouraged at the depth and global commonality of human kindness where none is necessary (i.e. exclusive of any investment v return). I think we can be “above the law” if we allow kindness, allow generosity, allow trust and friendship where none is necessary. We can allow that in every environment and every occasion. We can “evolve” that care and humanity not for a return on our well-being – but for our very “being” – for our becoming who we can become – who we are …
Back to that “I Am “ again.
Always “I am”.
Because it works.
people get all defensive and angry when I attempt to explain to them how the planet works, they don’t get it that this is the umpteenth time such changes have and will happened and we are all still here. It’s just that it is on our watch,
LikeLiked by 1 person
The current debate seems to side-step “our” involvement. That climate change – if indeed “changing” is nature being nature, and even if we are speeding things up a bit (which we may mot be), we cannot stop “change” anyway.
Never been sure why the need to excuse our behaviour from the conversation.
And then I saw this. Not climate change but community …