Tree of Knowledge

I've been trying to get more news from different places. I went through the Boston Globe online today, but I found myself back at HuffingtonPost. Why? I'm not really sure. I like to read the comments on all the stories, I think they're possibly more informative than the articles themselves sometimes. The topics are often mindless pulp, but I can't seem to help surfing their site.

I was reading this article and couldn't help but scroll down to the comments. One in particular stood out to me, and it has made me think. Here's a quote from "WasteNJ" " We seem to be the only species on Earth that doesn't fit into the environment naturally...that must destroy to exist."

And I began to wonder, must we destroy to exist?

Let's look at life BEFORE modern technology. We would live in huts, farm our own food, reproduce, create art, participate in religion, and die. Did we destroy then?

Certainly if you farm a piece of land for too long, and you don't take care to rotate your crops, you can destroy the earth. When you build a house, regardless of whether or not it's a rudimentary shelter, you're taking something away from somewhere else; however, when birds and beavers create nests is that destructive?

So at what point did we start destroying, because there is not a doubt that we destroy now. I don't think it's just related to energy use, my first hypothesis. The collapse of Rome, or Babylon are often linked to environmental destruction, and that's WAY pre-energy.

So at what point did we go from small pastoral farms and small village centers to large empires? Was it a desire for power? Was it increased population size? Was it increased knowledge? If we look at Medieval Europe, life was pretty basic until new ideas about the world came out of the return of crusaders. New ideas led to innovation and inventions and the whole Renaissance period. People wanted nicer cloth and better food, and more knowledge.

It seems to me like knowledge is a double edged sword. The story of Adam and Eve and their desire for knowledge is an analogy of that fact. The more we separate ourselves from animals, the more we bring about destruction of the natural world. Or, the greater our life, the greater our life's impact will be.

Even now, when we are aware that our destruction may cause the end of our species, we destroy. We destroy when trying to fix the problems; even wind turbines require resources from the earth. But is there a way to reach an equilibrium? Can we give back to the earth? The world destroys and rebuilds itself all the time. Erosion is creation and creation is erosion.

So I think that we destroy because we exist, not in order to exist, but we have the opportunity to create life as well. Creation is an equal and oppositive force. And if we can be great enough to stop taking indiscriminately from the earth, then hopefully, in some way, our impact will be one of lasting greatness.