Dept. of The World Is Bigger Than We Are
Sunday, 17 November 2013 09:22 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
kaffy_rWhat Once Was Wrong, the Inevitable Will Crown Right
When I was a little girl, I used to read comic strips in my daily newspaper. One of them was a would-be Buck Rogers strip called, if I remember correctly, Brick Bradford (which information I had to retrieve from Wikipedia. It certainly ran a long time.)
One of the adventures in that otherwise forgettable strip has stayed with me ever since. The hero sets down on a planet with a toxic atmosphere, with beings he at first thinks are unintelligent beasts. He and his colleagues eventually come to realize that this is a planet that was once like Earth, but which has become so polluted that it now has a completely different ecosystem, to which all those of the planets beings who survived have adapted. To them, Brick's obligatory scientist colleague narrates, Earth's atmosphere would be deadly.
The story fascinated me for two reasons: a) the idea that something we would consider absolutely wrong - an environment, say - would be absolutely natural to other beings, indeed necessary and non-toxic. I considered it compelling both environmentally (although I didn't think of it in those terms back in 1966 or 1967, which may have been when I read it) and philosophically; b) the idea that our world could end, that we would end, but that it might be OK, because something equally important or intelligent or what-have-you, might grow to take our place in a vastly changed world.
All of which leads me to this: Thanks toljgeoff for alerting me to this article. For all that I've just said, I'd much rather we managed, somehow against all logic, to stick around. I guess I'm not quite mature or enlightened enough to take the approach of the writer. And he's right, not me.
When I was a little girl, I used to read comic strips in my daily newspaper. One of them was a would-be Buck Rogers strip called, if I remember correctly, Brick Bradford (which information I had to retrieve from Wikipedia. It certainly ran a long time.)
One of the adventures in that otherwise forgettable strip has stayed with me ever since. The hero sets down on a planet with a toxic atmosphere, with beings he at first thinks are unintelligent beasts. He and his colleagues eventually come to realize that this is a planet that was once like Earth, but which has become so polluted that it now has a completely different ecosystem, to which all those of the planets beings who survived have adapted. To them, Brick's obligatory scientist colleague narrates, Earth's atmosphere would be deadly.
The story fascinated me for two reasons: a) the idea that something we would consider absolutely wrong - an environment, say - would be absolutely natural to other beings, indeed necessary and non-toxic. I considered it compelling both environmentally (although I didn't think of it in those terms back in 1966 or 1967, which may have been when I read it) and philosophically; b) the idea that our world could end, that we would end, but that it might be OK, because something equally important or intelligent or what-have-you, might grow to take our place in a vastly changed world.
All of which leads me to this: Thanks to
ljgeoff for alerting me to this article. For all that I've just said, I'd much rather we managed, somehow against all logic, to stick around. I guess I'm not quite mature or enlightened enough to take the approach of the writer. And he's right, not me. 
no subject
Date: Tuesday, 19 November 2013 08:06 pm (UTC)We have a lovely planet. But we also are part of that planet, and we have a duty to this old globe to become better, to be part of the beauty. We aren't, most of us, born monsters. We can, most of us, learn to listen to the better angels of our natures. When I see the bad we do, I, too, despair ... but I see so much good within us, that I want to fight for it.
no subject
Date: Sunday, 24 November 2013 06:51 am (UTC)No, we're not 'born monsters', but as a species we are born with a number of behavioural proclivities that, if expressed, can lead to monsterhood (note that I said can, not will). The sad and often heartbreaking part is that it takes only a small number of monsters to foul up systems, sometimes beyond repair. And so it goes. The best way to ameliorate that, to some degree at least, is to encourage every new generation to think - to think wide], to think realistically, and, yes, to think hopefully. Teach yer children well, y'know... :-)
no subject
Date: Tuesday, 26 November 2013 02:52 am (UTC)Now I accept that getting upset about species!fail! won't change the way we evolved,
You're right about that. I prefer to try and look to the future, though, because we are, as far as I know, the only species that has, theoretically at least, the brain power to actively make choices about that future. That's the intriguing possibility we have to pursue, because we may yet teach ourselves to be a credit and not a debit to the neighborhood. I'm quite realistic; I think it's an uphill and very possibly hopeless mission. But I can't stop volunteering for the mission; I was born here and I have a duty to make 'here' a better place, if I can.
The best way to ameliorate that, to some degree at least, is to encourage every new generation to think - to think wide], to think realistically, and, yes, to think hopefully.
Indeed. And since even if we disappear, we could really foul up the neighborhood to the point where a lot of other residents could be hurt, I think it's worthwhile to try to ameliorate whatever damage we've done to the extent we can. I think you and I may both be hopeful. We just express it a little differently.
So fighting to get better is a win-win thing. If we're successful, well, woo-hoo! If we're not successful, at least we tried.
no subject
Date: Sunday, 1 December 2013 12:47 am (UTC)