I think those concepts flow from an underlying view of the world: mainly that it's broken or fallen and needs to be repaired. That is, it's man's job to remake the world according to his utopian design. You can be born the wrong gender, for example, and a surgeon can "fix" that flaw. Similarly, you might have the wrong opinion about those surgical procedures, and social engineering can "fix" you so you think a man can really be a woman. The "climate" can be fixed so it no longer changes. There won't be any pollution from factories. The list goes on and on. That utopian view culminates in the "New Jerusalem". A computer simulation world where nobody feels pain or dies. You can't have bad thoughts. You are "good"--by design.
An obvious question is: "who's design"? The utopia world they want seems to be defined by its lack of flaws, rather than a positive view. It's defined in opposition to nature and other people--who the utopians view as flawed. Over my lifetime, the list of flaws have proliferated from "racism" of "whites" versus "blacks" to a whole cornucopia of grievances about genders, race, etc... The concept of "microaggression" is a great example. If you push the hair out of your face, you might be bullying a bald man.
The flip side of this concept is that the natural order is inherently good. This is the base concept of a variety of philosophical schools from Daoism to Stoicism, and there are even Christians who partake of this point of view--although I think the biblical concept of original sin and salvation is the basis of the utopian mindset.
The Natural Order view is that man's job is to understand his place in the natural world and adapt to it, rather than constantly change it to suit his apparent needs. Man's apparent needs are fueled by delusion.
These two concepts are orthogonal. Currently, the utopian concept is dominant. It's the position of the media and the establishment. People like Bill Gates see their job is to "manage" nature and humanity to build their utopian design. Bill Gates, for example, believes the temperature of Earth can be regulated even though the geological record shows wild variations.
In fact, the whole of the order of Earth has changed multiple times. New types of life have emerged and gone away. The composition of the atmosphere has changed multiple times. If the nature of the Earth is to change, then trying to maintain it as a constant--make the entire thing into an amusement park is fundamentally contrary to its essential nature.
No comments:
Post a Comment