[Buddha-l] Course of Nature (1)

[Jim Peavler]

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