Forwarded on behalf of JC. J C wrote: >> Man's conflict with "himself" is the SAME THING as man's conflict >> with nature. >> >> 'Fraid not. Lessee--what were those 4 conflicts we learned about in >> 8th grade lit? Man against self, >man against man, man against >> nature, man against god. Think that's it. > > > I can make a solid (but by nature not a proof) that man's struggle > against God is simply man's struggle against his own psychological > demons. But to do so would require much more text than any of us > would like to read in one single email. > > In short, it is my belief that man has created the god that is most > expedient and convenient for him when it comes to dealing with things > that are outside of man's realm of power. This does not say that God > does not exist, merely that our definition of him is a product of our > fears and insecurities, and indeed, our extreme aversion to facing > reality head on. > > The god we worship is a well-disguised scapegoat. Impotent like any > scapegoat, and ultimately worthless and inhibitive to the true growth > of those that use It/Him/Her/Whatever. > > So that's man vs man, man vs other man and man vs environment, which I > mentioned in an email I accidentally mailed only to Steve. > > And yes, I acknowledge that I engaged in wordplay, and that the uses > of nature are more varied than I allowed. > My reply is that willy nilhi, this doesn't show that man's conflict with himself is the same thing as man's conflict with nature, and for that matter than man's conflict with god is the same thing as man's conflict with nature. Someone wanted to claim that there would be no difference between an extinction event caused by man and one caused by an asteroid; there is a great difference. The asteroid does not choose its path, nor can it change it; man--or men, or Man--can. Snarkhunter