An interesting topic for 'Classical Wisdom', as the Classical period is when the impetus to control Nature really kicked in, with agriculture becoming universal, the dominance of city states and monarchs (usually men - yes, patriarchy starts here), with all the warfare associated with these changes, ... plus new gods. The New Gods of agriculture and civilisation (of control), systematised and forced into official pantheons by the elite (which was not necessarily acknowledged by ordinary people), took over from, demonised and were constantly at war with the Old Gods: the Olympians versus the Titans or the Aesir versus the Giants. It is no surprise, then, that Gods of Agriculture are often also Gods of War - or at least defence: Mars, Swiatowid, Thor... and of course St/Green George who has come down to us embodying the dragon-slaying myth for the modern West - or actually controlling the dragon, as the power of Nature, for human ends. George can of course unchain the dragon at need (as on the left-hand panel of the wonderful 'Trinity Reredos' in Manchester Cathedral, by Mark Cazelet: https://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/4279627)! These are the gods we have used to get us to where we are today, but they can also show us a way back to a more positive relationship with Nature.
"Is controlling nature possible and should we?" Its is possible, just refer to cloud seeding, a big thing with the UAB that is currently used to bring rain. Another example can be seen with Charles Hatfield in San Diego. Thus technology can be linked to ancient Egypt, formerly known as al-kimia, from where we get the word Alchemy. This is the process to change nature- both literally and allegorical to the nature of man.
With regard to working with nature the first step as in many things is to take the Hippocratic oath to ‘do no harm’ and even if you’re pretty certain check and challenge to ensure there are no unintended consequences. Coupled with an ample dose of humility and maybe, just maybe we can get it right.
I love that. I often think of the comical (though disastrous) history of animal introductions in Australia - the cane beetle and the cane toad - and how often the best of intentions can have horrendous consequences.
Maybe, but who knows? In any case, writers who use "we" have loaded the argument in their favor -- without doing the persuading an essay requires -- by assuming the uniform agreement of, the totality of inclusion of, all readers. "We" is a lazy, underhanded rhetorical device typical of the non-rigorous college "writing" courses since the 1970s (the "write what you know, write what you feel" school, I call it). Before that, one could never use it in an argument. That is how I was trained: never "we," and almost as never, "I."
Why? Because a writer can not assume the reader already agrees with what he must prove.
Fair point! I assumed a universal hubris - which I thought would appease the ancient gods ;-) But you are correct, I shouldn't just lump the entirety of humanity into any category. Obviously I haven't built any cities, so perhaps I shouldn't have even included myself...
I hesitated to expand upon the idea, rather simplifying to a question, because your writing is generally excellent and there are real offenders on Substack. But when the commenter opined an answer, I thought I might expand upon it. I meant it to you as a gentle reminder, if you’d be willing to consider it. To the offenders, however….
Record the point at which you caught the ruler, to the nearest cm. Measure from the bottom of your thumb. You can use this table to convert the measurement on the ruler into your reaction time in seconds. The less time it takes you to catch the ruler, the faster your reaction.
An interesting topic for 'Classical Wisdom', as the Classical period is when the impetus to control Nature really kicked in, with agriculture becoming universal, the dominance of city states and monarchs (usually men - yes, patriarchy starts here), with all the warfare associated with these changes, ... plus new gods. The New Gods of agriculture and civilisation (of control), systematised and forced into official pantheons by the elite (which was not necessarily acknowledged by ordinary people), took over from, demonised and were constantly at war with the Old Gods: the Olympians versus the Titans or the Aesir versus the Giants. It is no surprise, then, that Gods of Agriculture are often also Gods of War - or at least defence: Mars, Swiatowid, Thor... and of course St/Green George who has come down to us embodying the dragon-slaying myth for the modern West - or actually controlling the dragon, as the power of Nature, for human ends. George can of course unchain the dragon at need (as on the left-hand panel of the wonderful 'Trinity Reredos' in Manchester Cathedral, by Mark Cazelet: https://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/4279627)! These are the gods we have used to get us to where we are today, but they can also show us a way back to a more positive relationship with Nature.
Great points!
"Is controlling nature possible and should we?" Its is possible, just refer to cloud seeding, a big thing with the UAB that is currently used to bring rain. Another example can be seen with Charles Hatfield in San Diego. Thus technology can be linked to ancient Egypt, formerly known as al-kimia, from where we get the word Alchemy. This is the process to change nature- both literally and allegorical to the nature of man.
It's a fascinating history of cloud seeding... excellent reference.
With regard to working with nature the first step as in many things is to take the Hippocratic oath to ‘do no harm’ and even if you’re pretty certain check and challenge to ensure there are no unintended consequences. Coupled with an ample dose of humility and maybe, just maybe we can get it right.
I love that. I often think of the comical (though disastrous) history of animal introductions in Australia - the cane beetle and the cane toad - and how often the best of intentions can have horrendous consequences.
Anya and Team,
You are an amazing and inspirational Crew.
Keep Going.
As Nike would say “ There is No Finish Live”
Brian
Thank you!!!!
…..Finish Line….🙈
Was considering not renewing my subscription to CW as so many sirens beckoning.
But!!! Just could not and would not pull the plug.
Too many insights and too much emotional oxygen contributed by You and the Team.
I am definitely in for another year.
Best and Hugs to All.
So glad you can join us!!! We have an exciting year ahead :D
Who is this "we" exactly?
I think the "we" referral is to us humans, especially those with out sized egos whom believe nature can be controlled.
Maybe, but who knows? In any case, writers who use "we" have loaded the argument in their favor -- without doing the persuading an essay requires -- by assuming the uniform agreement of, the totality of inclusion of, all readers. "We" is a lazy, underhanded rhetorical device typical of the non-rigorous college "writing" courses since the 1970s (the "write what you know, write what you feel" school, I call it). Before that, one could never use it in an argument. That is how I was trained: never "we," and almost as never, "I."
Why? Because a writer can not assume the reader already agrees with what he must prove.
Fair point! I assumed a universal hubris - which I thought would appease the ancient gods ;-) But you are correct, I shouldn't just lump the entirety of humanity into any category. Obviously I haven't built any cities, so perhaps I shouldn't have even included myself...
I hesitated to expand upon the idea, rather simplifying to a question, because your writing is generally excellent and there are real offenders on Substack. But when the commenter opined an answer, I thought I might expand upon it. I meant it to you as a gentle reminder, if you’d be willing to consider it. To the offenders, however….
Record the point at which you caught the ruler, to the nearest cm. Measure from the bottom of your thumb. You can use this table to convert the measurement on the ruler into your reaction time in seconds. The less time it takes you to catch the ruler, the faster your reaction.