,! ,PHILOSOPHY ( ,SOCIAL ,ECOLOGY 
,ESSAYS ON ,DIALECTICAL ,NATURALISM 

,PEOPLE 3 

,AU?OR 3 ,MURRAY ,BOOK*9 

,SECTIONS 7,T,O,C7 3 
     

O ,D$ICATION 

      #aa ,WORDS2 #aai ,*>ACT]S     

O ,PREFACE TO ! ,SECOND ,$ITION 

      #c1#f#a ,WORDS2 #b#c1#i#d#f ,*>ACT]S     

O ,9TRODUCTION 3 ,A ,PHILOSOPHICAL ,NATURALISM 

      #a1#c#a ,WORDS2 #f#g1#d#g#d ,*>ACT]S     

O ,*APT] #a 3 ,T[>D A ,PHILOSOPHY ( ,NATURE3 ,! ,BASES = AN ,ECOLOGICAL ,E?ICS 

      #h1#e#b#i ,WORDS2 #e#g1#e#b#b ,*>ACT]S     

O ,*APT] #b 3 ,T[>D A ,PHILOSOPHY ( ,NATURE3 ,! ,BASES = AN ,ECOLOGICAL ,E?ICS 

      #f1#f#d#b ,WORDS2 #d#c1#b#d#b ,*>ACT]S     

O ,*APT] #c 3 ,?9K+ ,ECOLOGICALLY3 ,A ,DIALECTICAL ,APPROA* 

      #a#c1#b#g ,WORDS2 #h#f1#a#h#a ,*>ACT]S     

O ,*APT] #d 3 ,HI/ORY1 ,CIVILIZATION1 & ,PROGRESS3 ,\TL9E = A ,CRITICISM ( ,MOD]N ,RELATIVISM 

      #i1#c#f#d ,WORDS2 #f#c1#d#d#a ,*>ACT]S     

O ,NOTES 

      #f1#h#h ,WORDS2 #d#b1#h#f#e ,*>ACT]S 

,SECTIONS 7,CONT5T7 3 

O ,D$ICATION 
,D$ICATION 

  

,= ,JANET ,BIEHL1  

DE>E/ ( COMPANIONS & CLOSE/ ( COLLEAGUES 

O ,PREFACE TO ! ,SECOND ,$ITION 
,PREFACE TO ! ,SECOND ,$ITION 

  

,?IS $ITION ( ,! ,PHILOSOPHY ( ,SOCIAL ,ECOLOGY HAS BE5 SO RADICALLY REVIS$ & CORRECT$ ?AT 9 MANY RESPECTS IT IS A NEW BOOK4 ,I HAVE RETA9$ 9 MO/ ( !IR ESS5TIALS ! ESSAYS ?AT APPE>$ 9 ! FIR/ $ITION1 BUT ,I HAVE SIGNIFICANTLY ALT]$ MANY ( MY ORIG9AL =MULATIONS4 ,I HAVE ALSO ADD$ A NEW ESSAY1 0,HI/ORY1 ,CIVILIZATION1 & ,PROGRESS0 WRITT5 E>LY 9 #a#i#i#d1 :I* CRITICALLY EXAM9ES 9 G5]AL T]MS ! SOCIAL & E?ICAL RELATIVISM SO MU* 9 VOGUE TODAY4 

,MO/ ( ! ESSAYS 9 ?IS BOOK W]E WRITT5 AS POLEMICS1 DIRECT$ AGA9/ V>I\S T5D5CIES ?AT SURFAC$ 9 ! ,AM]ICAN ECOLOGY MOVEM5T 9 ! #a#i#hS4 0,T[>D A ,PHILOSOPHY ( ,NATURE10 PUBLI%$ 9 ,MI*AEL ,TOB9'S MISNAM$ COLLECTION1 ,DEEP ,ECOLOGY1 9 #aihe BUT WRITT5 ?REE YE>S E>LI] = ! J\RNAL ,TELOS1 WAS DIRECT$ AGA9/ ! !N-CURR5T 5?USIASM = TURN+ SY/EMS !ORY 9TO ECOLOGICAL PHILOSOPHY4 0,FRE$OM & ,NECESSITY 9 ,NATURE10 PUBLI%$ 9 ! ,CANADIAN J\RNAL ,ALT]NATIVES 9 #a#i#h#f1 *ALL5G$ ! NEO-,D>W9IAN VIEW ( ! NATURAL WORLD FO/]$ BY A CLU/] ( V]Y CONV5TIONAL ECOLOGI/S & 9ITIAT$ MY CRITIQUE ( 0BIOC5TRISM40 0,?9K+ ,ECOLOGICALLY10 9ITIALLY PUBLI%$ 9 #aihg 9 ANO!R ,CANADIAN J\RNAL4 ,\R ,G5]ATION1 WAS WRITT5 TO CRITICIZE ! ,NEW ,AGE 0P>ADIGM0 ?AT WAS !N BE+ 9FLICT$ ON ! ECOLOGY MOVEM5T1 AS WELL AS C]TA9 LEAD]S ( ,E>? ,FIR/61 :O W]E !N ADVANC+ A CRUDELY MISAN?ROPIC MESSAGE FROM !IR /RON<OLD 9 ! ,AM]ICAN ,SUNBELT4 ,APPE>+ H]E 9 ! ORD] 9 :I* !Y W]E WRITT5 7EXCEPT = ! 9TRODUCTION71 !Y >E ?US SET 9 V]Y DI/9CT TIME FRAMES1 ) EMPHASES APPROPRIATE TO ISSUES ?AT HAVE EM]G$ OV] ! PA/ F\RTE5 YE>S4 ,I WI% TO ?ANK ALL PREVI\S PUBLI%]S ( !SE ESSAYS = !IR P]MISSION TO REPUBLI% !M1 BO? 9 ! ORIG9AL & 9 ?IS REVIS$ $ITION4 

,AL?\< TIMES HAVE *ANG$ S9CE !SE ESSAYS FIR/ APPE>$1 ! PROBLEMS !Y TRI$ TO ADDRESS >E /ILL ) US4 ,GREGORY ,BATESON'S VIEWS NO LONG] 5JOY ! PREEM95CE ?AT !Y DID 9 ! #a#i#hS1 = EXAMPLE1 BUT HIS SUBJECTIVISM & MANY ( HIS >GUM5TS PLAY$ A MAJOR ROLE 9 =M+ ! 9N]WORLDLY1 RELATIVI/IC1 & P]SONALI/IC ,ZEITGEI/ ( PRES5T ,NEW ,AGE IDEOLOGUES1 :ILE SY/EMS !ORY APPROA*ES /ILL SURFACE 9 MANY CURR5T !ORETICAL WORKS ON ECOLOGY4 ,FRITJ( ,CAPRA IS /ILL FO/]+ HIS ECLECTIC M$LEY ( SCI5CE & MY/ICISM1 ( ,PRIGOG9IAN SY/EMS !ORY & 0,CALI=NIA COSMOLOGY40 0,BIOC5TRISM10 ANTIHUMANISM1 DEEP ECOLOGY1 & NEO-,MAL?USIANISM HAVE BECOME EV5 MORE POPUL> ?AN !Y W]E :5 ,I WROTE 0,?9K+ ,ECOLOGICALLY40 ,NEW VIEWS HAVE MELD$ ) OLD] ONES3 TODAY1 IT IS PHILOSOPHICAL RELATIVISM & PO/MOD]NISM ?AT >E P]COLAT+ ?R\< ! ECOLOGY MOVEM5T2 H5CE ! NEW CLOS+ ESSAY1 0,HI/ORY1 ,CIVILIZATION1 & ,PROGRESS40 ,9 REVIS+ ALL ! ESSAYS1 ,I HAVE TRI$ TO G5]AIIZE ! VIEWS EXPRESS$ 9 ! ORIG9AL V]SIONS TO MAKE !M AS RELEVANT AS POSSIBLE TO PRES5T-DAY DISCUSSION4 ,LET ME ADD ?AT )\T ! ASSI/ANCE & $ITORIAL 9SI<TS ( ,JANET ,BIEHL1 TO :OM ?IS BOOK IS D$ICAT$1 !SE REVISIONS W\LD HAVE BEE N DIFFICULT TO MAKE4 ,I W\LD ALSO LIKE TO EXPRESS MY ?ANKS TO ,NA?ALIE ,KLYM AT ,BLACK ,ROSE ,BOOKS = H] VALUABLE WORK 9 PRODUC+ ?IS BOOK4 

,TWO O!R *ANGES 9 ! PRES5T $ITION %\LD BE S+L$ \T4 ,FIR/1 ,I HAVE EXCIS$ FAVORABLE REF]5CES TO ! ,FRANKFURT ,S*OOL & ,!ODOR ,ADORNO4 LIKE ,LESZEK ,KOLAK[SKI1 ,I HAVE COME TO REG>D MU* ( ,ADORNO'S WORK AS 9TELLECTUALLY IRRESPONSIBLE1 WAYW>D1 & POORLY !ORIZ$1 DESPITE ! BRILLIANCE ( HIS /YLE 7AT TIMES7 & HIS (T5 9SI<TFUL EPIGRAMS4 ,?IS IS NOT TO REJECT HIS DEF5SE ( SPECULATIVE REASON AGA9/ POSITIVISM -- :I* WAS :AT 9ITIALLY ATTRACT$ ME TO HIS WORK & TO ! ,FRANKFURT ,S*OOL -- EV5 AS H IS WRIT+S EXUDE 5ORM\S PESSIMISM AB\T REASON & ITS DE/9Y4 

,SECOND1 ,I HAVE REMOV$ MY FAVORABLE ALLUSIONS TO IDEAS ?AT HAVE S9CE BECOME C5TRAL TO EC(EM9ISM4 ,! EXCIT+ *ALL5GE ?AT RADICAL FEM9ISM POS$ 9 ! E>LY #a#i#gS WAS ITS UNIV]SAL CONDEMNATION ( HI]>*Y AS SU*1 :I* APPEAL$ TO ME S9CE ,I MYSELF HAD MADE SU* A CONDEMNATION MORE ?AN A DECADE E>LI]4 ,EV5 9 ! LATE #a#i#gS1 :5 EC(EM9ISM EM]G$1 CLAIMS ( ! 09NATE0 SUP]IORITY ( FEMALES OV] M ALES & ( WOM5'S SUP]IOR EMOTIONAL & COGNITIVE ABILITIES1 & OPPOSITION TO 0LOGOC5TRISM10 W]E NOT YET PROM95T4 ,ONLY LAT] WAS EC(EM9ISM R$UC$ TO ! ANTIRATIONAL & CRUDELY VISC]AL LEVEL ( A ,/>HAWK1 :]E 9VOCATIONS ( MAGIC1 GODDESS WOR%IP1 & WIT*CRAFT BECOME 0FEM9I/0 WAYS ( ELUD+ REALITY4 ,TOO MANY EC(EM9I/S1 ALBEIT NOT ALL1 N[ T5D TO PRIVILEGE WOM5 OV] M5 COGNITIVELY & MORALLY1 :ILE ! ORIG9AL UNIV]SALI/ & EGALIT>IAN APPROA* ( ! FEM9I/ MOVEM5T HAS WI!R$ SIGNIFICANTLY4 

,:E!R ! READ] AGREES ) ALL MY VIEWS OR NOT1 !SE ESSAYS1 ,I BELIEVE1 >E REQUIR$ READ+ = ANYONE :O WI%ES TO UND]/& SOCIAL ECOLOGY4 ,!Y SEEK1 MORE SUGGE/IVELY ?AN EXHAU/IVELY1 TO E/ABLI% ITS PHILOSOPHICAL F\NDATIONS & MODES ( ?\<T4 7,LET ME 9SI/ ?AT !Y >E ! WORKS ( NEI!R A 0,HEGELIAN10 A 0NEO-,HEGELIAN10 NOR A 0PO/-,HEGELIAN10 TO USE CURR5T ACADEMIC J>GON1 BUT RA!R ( A DIALECTICIAN UPON :OM ,HEGEL EX]CIS$ A CONSID]ABLE 9FLU5CE47 ,A R\ND$ UND]/&+ ( SOCIAL ECOLOGY AS ,I HAVE =MULAT$ IT1 H[EV]1 ALSO REQUIRES A READ+ ( AT LEA/ TWO ( MY O!R BOOKS1 ,REMAK+ ,SOCIETY & ,URBANIZATION ,)\T ,CITIES1 :I* EXPLORE SOCIAL ECOLOGY'S HI/ORICAL & POLITICAL ASPECTS4 

,REC5T DEVELOPM5TS 9 QUASI-LEFTI/ SOCIAL ?9K+ HAVE OBLIG$ ME TO SIGNIFICANTLY ALT] ! WAY ,I CONCEIVE NATURE1 SOCIETY1 & REASON1 AS WELL AS HI/ORY1 CIVILIZATION1 & PROGRESS1 AS ! READ] WILL F9D 9 ! CLOS+ ESSAY4 ,ALL !SE WORDS HAVE A MULTIPLICITY ( MEAN+S1 BUT ! MEAN+S ?AT >E MO/ P]VASIVE TODAY >E NOT ! ONES ?AT ,I 9T5D :5 ,I USE !SE WORDS4 ,N[ADAYS1 = EXAMPLE1 ! ECOLOGY MOVEM5T MO/ (T5 REG>DS NATURE EI!R AS A 0SOCIAL CON/RUCTION0 OR A 0WILD]NESS0 ( ONE SORT OR ANO!R1 :ILE O!RS SEE SOCIETY AS ANY AGGREGATION ( LIFE-=MS1 9CLUD+ FLOCKS ( BIRDS & H]DS ( DE]4 ,BO? )9 & )\T ! ECOLOGY MOVEM5T1 REASON IS REG>D$ AS A M5TAL SKILL1 HI/ORY AS A M]E SUCCESSION ( EV5TS1 CIVILIZATION AS A ,EUROC5TRIC PREJUDICE1 & PROGRESS AS A MY?4 ,YE>S ( GIVE-&-TAKE ) BO? SUPPORT]S & OPPON5TS ( MY VIEWS HAVE OBLIG$ ME TO SL[LY BUT CONSCI\SLY GIVE !SE WORDS A MORE SPECIFIC PHILOSOPHICAL MEAN+ ?AN !Y HAVE 9 CONV5TIONAL DISC\RSE4 ,SOME ( !SE *ANGES >E DISCUSS$ 9 ! NEW 9TRODUCTION TO ! ,BLACK ,ROSE $ITION ( ,! ,ECOLOGY ( ,FRE$OM2 O!RS REQUIRE ELUCIDATION H]E4 

,AS ,I EXPLA9 9 ! 9TRODUCTION TO ?IS BOOK4 ,NATURE PROP]LY 5COMPASSES EV]Y?+ >\ND US1 FROM ! ORGANIC BE+S ?AT WE NORMALLY DESIGNATE AS 0NATURAL0 TO ! LIFELESS MOON ?AT APPE>S ON RELATIVELY CL\DLESS NI<TS -- ?AT IS1 ! TOTALITY ( ,BE+4 ,H[EV]1 IF WE >E TO USE ! WORD ,NATURE 9 ANY MORE SPECIFIC S5SE1 WE %\LD USE AN ADJECTIVE BE=E IT TO DESCRIBE :AT ASPECT ( 0NATURE0 WE >E TALK+ AB\T -- SOME?+ ?AT ,I (T5 DID NOT DO 9 !SE ESSAYS1 [+ TO ! TIME P]IOD 9 :I* !Y W]E WRITT54 ,! READ] :O 5C\NT]S ! WORD  
NATURE H]E91 UNMODIFI$ BY ANY ADJECTIVE1 %\LD N[ TAKE IT TO REF] TO MY NOTION ( 0FIR/ NATURE10 OR ! CUMULATIVE EVOLUTION ( ! NATURAL WORLD1 ESPECIALLY ! ORGANIC WORLD4 ,?IS FIR/ NATURE EXI/S 9 BO? CONT9UITY & DISCONT9UITY ) 0SECOND NATURE10 OR ! EVOLUTION ( SOCIETY4 ,AS ,I DISCUSS 9 SOME DETAIL 9 0,?9K+ ,ECOLOGICALLY10 SECOND NATURE DEVELOPS BO? 9 CONT9UITY ) FIR/ NATURE & AS ITS ANTI!SIS1 UNTIL ! TWO >E SUBB$ 9TO 0FREE NATURE0 OR 0,NATURE0 R5D]$ SELF-CONSCI\S 9 A RATIONAL & ECOLOGICAL SOCIETY4 

,SOCIETY1 9 TURN1 IS MORE ?AN M]E CONSOCIATION OR COMMUNITY4 ,IT IS 9/ITUTIONALIZ$ COMMUNITY1 /RUCTUR$ A RO UND MUTABLE ORGANIZATIONAL =MS ?AT MAY RANGE FROM TOTALIT>IAN DESPOTISM TO LIB]T>IAN MUNICIPALISM4 ,AS SU*1 SOCIETY IS SPECIFIC TO HUMAN BE+S2 9DE$1 AN EXPRESSION LIKE 0SOCIAL 9SECTS0 IS1 FROM MY /&PO9T1 NONS5SICAL & OXYMORONIC1 CONFLAT+ A FIX$1 G5ETICALLY PROGRAMM$ AGGREGATION ( ANIMALS ) ! DEVELOPM5TALLY /RUCTUR$ CONSOCIATION ( HUMANS4 ,AS = REASON & RATIONALITY1 :5 ,I USE !SE T]MS )\T ANY QUALIFY+ ADJECTIVE1 ,I MEAN DIALECTICAL REASON1 A SECUL> DIALECTICAL LOGOS1 AS CONTRA/$ ) 9/RUM5TAL OR CONV5TIONAL REASON1 AN ORD9>Y M5TAL SKILL4 ,HI/ORY1 AS ,I >GUE 9 ! F9AL ESSAY1 IS ! CULTURAL & SOCIAL UNFOLD+ ( REASON1 NOT SIMPLY A SUCCESSION ( EV5TS OV] TIME1 = :I* ,I RES]VE ! WORD ,*RONICLES4 ,CIVILIZATION IS ! ACTUALIZATION 9 V>Y+ DEGREES ( HI/ORICAL UNFOLD+1 :ILE  
,PROGRESS IS1 MORE LOOSELY1 ! SELF-DIRECTIVE ACTIVITY ( ,HI/ORY & ,CIVILIZATION T[>D 9CREAS+ RATIONALITY1 FRE$OM1 & SELF-CONSCI\SNESS 9 RELATION%IPS BETWE5 HUMAN & HUMAN1 & 9 ! RELATION%IP ( HUMANITY TO ! NATURAL WORLD4 

,LET ME /ATE AS CLE>LY & FIRMLY AS POSSIBLE ?AT ,I DO NOT REG>D ,HI/ORY & ,PROGRESS AS UNIL9E>1 9EVITABLE1 TELEOLOGICAL1 OR 9 ANY S5SE PR$ET]M9$4 ,! P[] ( SPECULATIVE REASON TO LOGICALLY PROJECT BEYOND ! GIV5 9TO :AT IS YET TO COME IF HUMANITY ACTS RATIONALLY -- A P[] ?AT IS ONE ( \R HI<E/  
HUMAN ATTRIBUTES -- DOES NOT MEAN ?AT :AT RATIONALLY 0%\LD BE0 WILL 9DE$ NECESS>ILY 0BE40 ,TO CON/ITUTE ! ALL-IMPORTANT /&>D BY :I* WE MAY JUDGE ! RATIONALITY ( A SOCIETY IS A FIRMLY HELD FUNCTION ( DIALECTICAL REASON4 ,WE W\LD LOSE \RSELVES 9 A QUAGMIRE ( SOLIPSI/IC RELATIVISM IF WE W]E TO ABDICATE ! P[] ( REASON TO 0JUDGE0 ,HI/ORY1 ,CIVILIZATION1 & ,PROGRESS4 ,EV5 ! MO/ DY$-9-!-WOOL ANTIRATIONALI/S & RELATIVI/S EX]CISE ?IS P[]1 IRRESPECTIVE ( !IR CONVICTIONS AGA9/ DO+ SO4 ,AS ANY ?9K+ P]SON W\LD AGREE1 PEOPLE DO 9DE$ IMAG9E ! WORLD AS IT MI<T BE1 9 CONTRA/ TO :AT IT IS 9 REALITY1 EV5 9 !IR DAYDREAMS4 ,!Y DO HAVE ! WILDE/ FANTASIES AB\T !IR CULTURE & ITS 5VIRONM5T4 ,& !Y DO HOLD ! MO/ SEEM+LY UNREALI/IC CON/ELLATIONS ( IMAGES & 0PATT]NS ( CULTURE0 AB\T BASIC ASPECTS ( !IR EXP]I5CE4 ,NONE ( ?IS DO ,I D5Y -- QUITE ! CONTR>Y1 HUMANITY'S CONT9UAL /RUGGLE ) ITS IMAG9ATION LIES AT ! V]Y HE>T ( ! T5SIONS )9 E>LY SOCIETY1 :I* 9 TURN HAS HI/ORICALLY L$ TO V>Y+ DEGREES ( RATIONAL SELF-UND]/&+ AS WELL AS FRI<T5+1 (T5 ATAVI/IC REGRESSIONS4 

,GIV5 !SE OBS]VATIONS1 IT W\LD BE SIMPLI/IC & ONE-SID$ TO IGNORE ! MORAL & CULTURAL P>ADOXES EMB$D$ 9 SOCIAL DEVELOPM5T4 ,HUMANITY DID NOT EM]GE AB NOVO1 )\T ROOTS 9 ANIMAL EVOLUTION4 ,! HUMAN BE+ HAS BE5 & /ILL IS AN ANIMAL ) EMOTIONAL /ATES ?AT >E ANIMALI/IC1 LIKE 0FI<T & FLI<T0 REACTIONS & TORM5T+LY BASIC FE>S4 ,BUT HUMANS >E ALSO ANIMALS ( A V]Y SPECIAL K9D3 WE >E HI<LY 9TELLIG5T BY COMP>ISON ) O!R SPECIES -- 9DE$1 QUALITATIVELY SO -- & AS SU*1 WE HAVE ! ABILITY NOT ONLY TO ADAPT TO \R 5VIRONM5TS BUT 9T5TIONALLY TO ALT] !M SIGNIFICANTLY4 ,9 %ORT1 WE CAN DO M ORE ?AN ADAPT2 WE CAN 9NOVATE1 AL?\< WE DO NOT ALWAYS 9NOVATE WILL+LY IF WE CAN SURVIVE 9 A GIV5 5VIRONM5T )\T DO+ SO4 

,\R 9TELLIG5CE IS ALSO HI<LY PROBLEMATIC4 ,IT MAKES NOT ONLY = 9NOVATION BUT = =ESI<T1 FANTASY1 IMAG9ATION1 CREATIVITY -- & CRUELTY4 ,9DE$1 MU* P]SONAL & SOCIAL IRRATIONALITY /EMS FROM ! 9T5TIONALLY1 WILL1 SELF-ASS]TIV5ESS1 & FANTASIES ( \R ANIMALITY 9=M$ BY \R 9TELLIG5CE4 ,AS ,M>X SUGGE/$1 WE /ILL LIVE 9 PREHI/ORY & HAVE YET TO F9D \R WAY T[>D A SELF-CONSCI\S1 HUMANE1 COOP]ATIVE1 & EMPA!TIC SOCIAL LIFE4 ,) \R ANIMALI/IC AS WELL AS HUMAN ATTRIBUTES1 WE EVOLVE 9 AN EV]-*ANG+ WORLD & FACE />K PROBLEMS ( SURVIVAL & WELL-BE+4 ,AP>T FROM ?OSE PEOPLE :O 9HABIT PLACES ) B5IGN PHYSIOGRAPHIC CONDITIONS1 WE >E SUBJECT TO MAT]IAL 9SECURITY1 CONTE/+ WILLS1 *ALL5GES TO \R S5SE ( SELF & SELF-REG>D1 FE>S ( DISEASE1 DIM9I%+ PHYSICAL P[]S ) AGE1 FRI<T5+ DREAMS1 & SO =?4 ,WE ADDRESS !SE ABID+ PROBLEMS ) RELATIVELY DEVELOP$ M9DS ?AT >E /ILL 5CAS$1 AS IT W]E1 9 EXTREMELY POT5T ANIMAL ATTRIBUTES4 

,HI/ORY IS ! PA9FUL MOVEM5T ( HUMAN BE+S 9 EXTRICAT+ !MSELVES FROM ANIMAL EXI/5CE1 ( ! EM]G5CE ( T5SIONS FROM A COMB9ATION ( NONHUMAN & HUMAN ATTRIBUTES1 & ( PROGRESSIVELY ADVANC+ T[>D A MORE UNIV]SALLY HUMAN /ATE ( AFFAIRS1 H[EV] IRREGUL> OR UN/EADY ?IS ADVANCE MAY BE4 ,! PROBLEMS ?AT HUMANS RETA9 FROM E>LY SOCIETY CONT9UE TO EXI/ 9 ONE WAY OR ANO!R TO ?IS DAY1 & !IR RESOLUTION 9 P>T OR :OLE IS ONE ( ! MEAN+FUL GOALS ( ,HI/ORY1 EV5 AS NEW PROBLEMS >ISE OV] ! C\RSE ( TIME4 ,NOR IS !RE ANY C]TA9TY ?AT !SE PROBLEMS WILL BE RESOLV$4 ,A DESC5T 9TO B>B>ISM -- A PROBLEMATIC ?AT ,M>XI/S W]E RAIS+ DUR+ ! GRIMME/ YE>S ( ,WORLD ,W> ,I,I -- IS JU/ AS POSSIBLE AS ! ATTA9M5T ( A RATIONAL SOCIETY4 

,BUT TO D5Y1 BECAUSE ( SU* />KLY CONFLICT+ ALT]NATIVES 9 SOCIAL DEVELOPM5T1 ?AT !RE >E RATIONAL CRIT]IA BY :I* WE MAY JUDGE ?AT ,PROGRESS IS MYOPIC1 OR EV5 ?AT ,PROGRESS HAS OCCURR$1 IS SELF-DECEPTIVE4 ,IT IS ALL TOO EASY TO REBUKE ,HI/ORY IF ONE M9IMIZES ! G5U9E ADVANCES ?AT HAVE BE5 MADE 9 CULTURE1 SOCIAL RELATIONS1 & TE*NICS4 ,ALL D\BTS AB\T ,HI/ORY1 ,CIVILIZATION1 & ,PROGRESS ASIDE1 IT IS UND5IABLE ?AT WE HAVE DIVE/$ \RSELVES ( MANY ( ! K9%IP TIES ?AT P>O*IALIZ$ US 9TO TRIBAL GR\PS1 & ?AT WE HAVE ACCEPT$ -- ALBEIT ) MANY QUALIFICATIONS -- \R /ATUS AS A HUMAN SPECIES RA!R ?AN AS A FOLK4 ,WE HAVE CREAT$ CITIES ?AT >E OP5 TO /RANG]S1 WE HAVE ADVANC$ TE*NOLOGY TO ! PO9T ?AT A SUFFICI5CY 9 ! MEANS ( LIFE C\LD BE AVAILABLE TO ALL 9 A RATIONAL SOCIETY1 & WE HAVE 9CREAS$ \R KN[L$GE ( ! NATURAL WORLD TO ALMO/ SUBLIME PROPORTIONS4 ,NOT ONLY DO WE KILL EA* O!R ) T]RIFY+ BRUTALITY1 GIV5 \R COMB9ATION ( ANIMALITY ) 9TELLIG5CE1 BUT WE HELP EA* O!R ON A MASSIVE SCALE ) EXTRAORD9>Y S5SITIVITY4 

,H]E1 ,I BELIEVE1 WE >E OBLIG$ TO MAKE A S]I\S DECISION AB\T H[ WE LOOK AT ! PA/4 ,EI!R WE WILL RELATIVIZE ,HI/ORY BY EMPHASIZ+ ! P[] ( ! IRRATIONAL OV] HUMAN BEHAVIOR & ! 5DLESS DIFF]5CES ?AT DI/+UI% CULTURES FROM ONE ANO!R2 OR WE WILL EMPHASIZE ! REM>KABLE COH]5CE ( V>I\S CULTURES & G5]ALIZE FROM !IR SIMIL>ITIES1 EV5 AS WE APPRECIATE !IR DIFF]5CES4 ,*OOS+ ! FIR/ ALT]NATIVE W\LD ULTIMATELY DIM9I% SOCIAL DEVELOPM5T TO A DISCONNECT$ >*IPELAGO ( :OLLY UNIQUE CULTURES :OSE ONLY ,COH]5CE IS PSY*OSOCIAL & 9T]NAL2 :ILE ! SECOND ALT]NATIVE W\LD ALL[ = A DIALECTICALLY RATIONAL UND]/&+ ( ,HI/ORY & A GR\ND = E?ICS4 ,IF \R ANIMALI/IC CAPACITY = IRRATIONAL BEHAVIOR GA9S PRIORITY OV] \R HUMANI/IC POT5TIALITY TO ACT RATIONALLY1 & IF SOCIAL DEVELOPM5T BECOMES ONLY AN 5SEMBLE (  
,*RONICLES 7IF EV5 ?AT7 RA!R ?AN A ,HI/ORY ( MATURATION1 !RE IS NO BASIS = /RIV+ TO A*IEVE A RATIONAL SOCIETY4 

,:AT1 !N1 ( ?OSE SOCIAL FAILURES1 AB]RATIONS1 HORRORS1 & BREAKD[NS ?AT BELIE HUMANITY'S UNIL9E> PROGRESS T[>D ,CIVILIZATION & FRE$OM8.<#a.> ,)\T 9 ANY WAY UND]/AT+ ?IS PROBLEMATIC1 WE MU/ BE W>Y ( OV]/AT+ IT BY DISSOLV+ SOCIAL DEVELOPM5T 9 PSY*OSOCIAL 9T]PRETATIONS1 !REBY M9IMIZ+ ! V]Y REALITY ( SOCIAL MATURATION AS SU*4 ,!RE HAS BE5 A HI/ORICAL SOCIAL DEVELOPM5T1 ALL ITS MANY SETBACKS NOT)/&+1 SETBACKS ?AT CAN 9 P>T BE ATTRIBUT$ TO ELITES ( AGONI/IC M5 :OSE P[] GAVE !M ! SCOPE TO PLAY \T !IR DE/RUCTIVE FANTASIES1 IMPULSES1 & DESIGNS ON A L>GE SOCIAL /AGE4 ,9 !IR ACTIVITIES !Y HAVE 0GONE TOO F>0 SO TO SPEAK1 DEMONICALLY PU%+ CULTURES BEYOND ! RATIONAL FRAMEWORK ( !IR HI/ORICAL TIME4 ,SU* DI/ORTIONS BECOME ESPECIALLY PROBLEMATICAL DUR+ TIMES ( TRANSITION1 :5 E/ABLI%$ SOCIAL =MATIONS >E BE+ NEGAT$ & NEW ONES >E EM]G+ ) UNC]TA9TY & AMBIGUITY4 ,?IS OV]EXT5SION ( ! 0NEGATIVE0 7TO USE ,HEGEL'S T]M7 OCCURR$ AT NUM]\S TIMES & 9 NUM]\S PLACES1 :5 0ANTI!SES0 BECAME 5DS 9 !MSELVES & DID NOT DEVELOP AS A RATIONAL OR PROGRESSIVE TRANSC5D5CE4 ,NEI!R TRIBAL1 FEUDAL1 AUTOCRATIC1 REPUBLICAN1 NOR EV5 CLASSICAL DEMOCRATIC POLITICAL SY/EMS HAVE BE5 HI/ORICALLY IMMUNE TO ?IS PH5OM5ON4 

,& YET IT W\LD BE A GROSS SIMPLIFICATION ( SOCIAL DEVELOPM5T TO AHI/ORICALLY DI*OTOMIZE ! HI]>*ICAL1 CLASS1 & EV5 /ATE =MATIONS ( ! PA/1 ON ! ONE H&1 & ! TORTUR\S EF=TS ( HUMANITY TO ADVANCE T[>D FRE$OM1 ON ! O!R4 ,P>ADOXICALLY1 9 ITS EM]G5CE \T ( B>B>ISM--9DE$1 \T ( SIMPLE ANIMALITY -- HUMANITY MAY HAVE HAD TO DEP5D UPON PRIE/S1 *IEFTA9S1 & P]HAPS /ATE-LIKE =MATIONS TO OV]COME P>O*IALISM1 LACK ( 9DIVIDUALITY1 K9%IP BONDS1 G]ONTOCRACIES1 & PATRI>*IES1 TO CITE SOME KEY SOCIAL FEATURES ( TRIBAL & EV5 CIVILIZ$ CULTURES4 0,EVILS0 !SE >E1 TO BE SURE1 BUT1 IF WE >E TO BELIEVE ,MI*AEL ,BAKUN91 0SOCIALLY NECESS>Y EVILS10 A PHRASE ) :I* HE HI/ORICALLY *>ACT]IZ$ ! /ATE & ?AT ,PET] ,KROPOTK9 E*O$ 9 HIS FAM\S ,5CYCLOP$IA ,BRITANNICA >TICLE1 0,AN>*ISM0 ,! GR\NDWORK = MAK+ A CIVILIZATORY PROCESS POSSIBLE -- NOTABLY ! EM]G5CE ( CITIES1 T]RITORIAL =MS ( CONSOCIATION1 WRIT+1 AN EXP&+ MORAL S5SIBILITY1 A RATIONAL & 9CIPI5TLY SECUL> \TLOOK ON ! WORLD1 TE*NOLOGICAL ADVANCES ?AT L$ TO AGRICULTURE1 METALLURGY1 & RELATIVELY SOPHI/ICAT$ CRAFTS -- ALL MAY HAVE REQUIR$ :AT WE W\LD REG>D TODAY AS UNACCEPTABLE 9/ITUTIONS ( SOCIAL CONTROL BUT ?AT AT AN E>LI] TIME MAY HAVE BE5 IMPORTANT 9 LAUN*+ A RATIONAL SOCIAL DEVELOPM5T4 

,9 ANY CASE1 TO AHI/ORICALLY C\NT] POSE 0VIRTUE0 TO 0EVIL0 )\T ANY HI/ORICAL QUALIFICATIONS & M$IATIONS CAN BE V]Y NAIVE4 ,9 MU* E>LI] HI/ORICAL ]AS1 0GOOD0 & 0EVIL0 HAD NOT EV5 ACQUIR$ ! DEF9ITIONS !Y HAVE TODAY1 AFT] ?\S&S ( YE>S ( HUMAN SOCIAL DEVELOPM5T4 ,! /ATE'S 9VASION ( PATRI>*AL AU?ORITY2 ITS SUB/ITUTION ( A RELATIVELY RATIONAL SY/EM ( LAW = ! PATRI>*'S >BITR>Y & ABSOLUTE AU?ORITY OV] ALL O!R MEMB]S ( A FAMILY OR CLAN2 & ! ABROGATION ( BLOOD V5GEANCE AS A WAY ( RESOLV+ CONFLICTS -- ALL1 TO CITE SOME SIGNIFICANT ADVANCES1 PLAY$ A ROLE ?AT WAS RELATIVELY LIB]ATORY 9 ITS HI/ORICAL CONTEXT1 GIVE N A G5]AL FRAMEWORK ( DOM9ATION 9 E>LY HI]>*ICAL SOCIETIES4 ,PATRI>*S1 = EXAMPLE1 W\LD HAVE SE5 ! /ATE'S FUNCTION 9 ?IS RESPECT AS 0EVIL40 

,LIKE ! HI/ORICAL REPLACEM5T ( K9%IP TIES ) CIVIC TIES1 B>T] ) M>KETS1 AGR>IAN ISOLATION ) CITIES1 P>TICUL>ISM ) GR[+ UNIV]SALISM1 & SUP]/ITION ) SECUL>ISM1 !RE W]E C]TA9 =MS ( SOCIALLY REGULATIVE 9/ITUTIONS ?AT1 :ILE OPPRESSIVE 9 MOD]N EYES1 OP5$ POSSIBILITIES = LIB]ATORY DEVELOPM5TS ?AT O!RWISE MI<T NEV] HAVE EM]G$4 ,BUT AL?\< ! V]Y REAL B>B>ISM ( PA/ & PRES5T REMA9S AN 0EVIL10 AS ,BAKUN9 OBS]V$1 IT WAS NOT A HI/ORICAL 0NECESSITY0 9 ANY S5SE AK9 TO ,BAKUN9'S1 = WE CAN NEV] KN[ :AT RATIONAL ALT]NATIVES MAY HAVE EXI/$ AT ANY TIME4 ,AT NO TIME CAN WE SURR5D] TO ! 09EVITABILITY0 ( DOM9ATION 9 C]TA9TY ?AT LAT5T LIB]ATORY POSSIBILITIES DO NOT EXI/4 

,9 NO S5SE1 !N1 %\LD MY REM>KS BE SE5 AS AN 0EXCUSE0 = B>B>IC BEHAVIOR1 PA/ OR PRES5T4 ,RA!R1 ,I 9T5D !M 9 GREAT P>T TO BE ! PREMISE = TRY+ TO UND]/& H[ IT IS ?AT ! IRRATIONAL DIM5SIONS ( ! PA/1 ) !IR MANY B>B>ITIES1 NEV] COMPLETELY /IFL$ ! RATIONAL DEVELOPM5T ( HUMANITY & YET MAY HAVE EV5 9T]ACT$ ) IT AT TIMES TO YIELD SOCIAL ADVANCES )9 A BROADLY EVIL FRAMEWORK4 ,IT BEHOOVES US TO /UDY ! HI/ORICAL & SOCIAL 9T]ACTIONS BETWE5 ! LEGACY ( FRE$OM & ! LEGACY ( DOM9ATION1 9 DEGREE AS WELL AS 9 K9D1 NOT TO SIMPLIFY !M OR EV5 BRU% !M ASIDE ) PSY*OSOCIAL CATEGORIES OR AHI/ORICALLY 5UM]ATE !M ON A SOCIAL L$G] ( DEBITS & CR$ITS4 ,IF WE >E TO ?9K 9 A GRAD$ & NUANC$ MANN]1 ) A MODICUM ( 9TELLECTUAL RESPONSIBILITY1 AB\T ! PA/ & PRES5T1 WE >E OBLIG$ TO EXPLORE ! SOCIAL CONDITIONS 9 :I* -- (F5SIVE AS IT MAY SEEM TO 0POLITICALLY CORRECT0 MOD]N M9DS -- C]TA9 =MS ( DOM9ATION P>ADOXICALLY PROVID$ ! /IMULUS = 9CREAS+ FRE$OM1 CULTURALLY IF NOT 9/ITUTIONALLY4 

,DO WE HAVE NO O!R GR\ND ?AN \R P]SONAL PREF]5CES = DEAL+ ) ! SOCIAL ISSUES ( ! PA/ & PRES5T8 ,ATTITUDES1 WI%ES1 DESIRES1 & IMAG9$ WAYS ( LIFE >E DEEPLY ROOT$ 9 EXI/+ SOCIAL CONDITIONS -- NOT EV5 \R MO/ LIB]AT+ 0PREF]5CES0 HAVE SOLELY P]SONAL ORIG9S4 ,TODAY !Y REFLECT POSSIBILITIES & HOPES ?AT W]E NOT AVAILABLE TO ! RADICAL CULTURE ( ONLY A FEW G5]ATIONS AGO4 ,! CRY TO 0DEM& ! IMPOSSIBLE10 :I* SURFAC$ AMONG ,FR5* /UD5TS 9 ,MAY-,JUNE #a#i#f#h1 RE/$ MASSIVELY ON ! EXTRAORD9>Y POSSIBILITIES ?AT ADVANCES 9 TE*NOLOGY & MAT]IAL LIFE HAD OP5$ UP1 NOT SIMPLY ON ALI5ATION -- :I*1 9 FACT1 !SE V]Y ADVANCES SIGNIFICANTLY G5]AT$4 

,! ESSAYS 9 ?IS BOOK CRITIQUE ! COMMON VIEW ?AT -- [+ TO ! 0IMPOSSIBILITY0 ( =MULAT+ AN OBJECTIVE CRIT]ION = DET]M9+ :AT IS RATIONAL OR IRRATIONAL1 REAL OR IMAG9>Y1 TRUE OR FALSE1 GOOD OR EVIL1 SELF-DET]M9+ OR AU?ORIT>IAN -- \R ATTITUDE ?AT FRE$OM IS DESIRABLE & TYRANNY HATEFUL MU/ HAVE ONLY A CONT+5T SUBJECTIVE BASIS4 ,:5 ?IS ATTITUDE IS =M$ 9 
AB/RACTO1 )\T ANY ROOTS 9 HI/ORICAL DEVELOPM5T OR MAT]IAL PRECONDITIONS1 IT REMA9S !ORETICALLY UNJU/IFI$ & A M]E MATT] ( OP9ION4 ,UN=TUNATELY1 ?IS IS AN 9DULG5CE WE CAN ILL AF=D4 ,! CONDITION ( ! WORLD IS F> TOO DESP]ATE & *AOTIC = US1 (T5 FROM ! FA/NESS ( ! ACADEMY1 TO ADVANCE A MORAL1 SOCIAL1 & CULTURAL 9COH]5CE ?AT RE/S PRIM>ILY ON ATTITUDES1 TA/ES1 & MATT]S ( OP9ION ?AT !MSELVES BEG = RATIONAL EXPLANATION4  
  

-- ,M>* #a#e1#a#i#i#d  

O ,9TRODUCTION 3 ,A ,PHILOSOPHICAL ,NATURALISM 
,9TRODUCTION3  

 ,A ,PHILOSOPHICAL ,NATURALISM 

  

,:AT IS NATURE8 ,:AT IS HUMANITY'S PLACE 9 NATURE8 ,& :AT IS ! RELATION%IP ( SOCIETY TO ! NATURAL WORLD8 

,9 AN ]A ( ECOLOGICAL BREAKD[N1 ANSW]+ !SE QUE/IONS HAS BECOME ( MOM5T\S IMPORTANCE = \R EV]YDAY LIVES & = ! FUTURE ?AT WE & O!R LIFE-=MS FACE4 ,!Y >E NOT AB/RACT PHILOSOPHICAL QUE/IONS ?AT %\LD BE RELEGAT$ TO A REMOTE1 AIRY WORLD ( METAPHYSICAL SPECULATION4 ,NOR CAN WE ANSW] !M 9 AN (FH& WAY1 ) POETIC METAPHORS OR UN?9K+1 VISC]AL REACTIONS4 ,! DEF9ITIONS & E?ICAL /&>DS ) :I* WE RESPOND TO !M MAY ULTIMATELY DECIDE :E!R HUMAN SOCIETY WILL CREATIVELY FO/] NATURAL EVOLUTION1 OR :E!R WE WILL R5D] ! PLANET UN9HABITABLE = ALL COMPLEX LIFE-=MS1 9CLUD+ \RSELVES4 

,AT FIR/ GLANCE1 EV]YBODY 0KN[S0 :AT NATURE IS4 ,IT IS ?AT :I* IS ALL >\ND US -- TREES1 ANIMALS1 ROCKS1 & ! LIKE4 ,IT IS ?AT :I* 0HUMANITY0 IS COAT+ ) PETROLEUM OR DE/ROY+4 ,BUT SU* PRIMA FACIE DEF9ITIONS FALL AP>T :5 WE EXAM9E !M ) SOME C>E4 ,IF NATURE IS 9DE$ :AT IS ALL >\ND US1 WE MAY REASONABLY ASK1 !N1 IS A C>EFULLY MANICUR$ SUBURBAN LAWN NOT NATURE8 ,IS ! SPLIT-LEVEL H\SE IT SURR\NDS NOT NATURE8 ,>E ITS FURNI%+S NOT NATURAL8 

,TODAY1 ?IS SORT ( QUE/ION IS LIKELY TO ELICIT A HEAT$ AV[AL ?AT ONLY WILD1 PRIMORDIAL10 OR EV5 NONHUMAN NATURE IS AU!NTICALLY NATURAL4 ,O!R PEOPLE1 NO LESS ?\<TFUL1 WILL REPLY ?AT NATURE IS BASICALLY MATT]1 OR ! MAT]IALIZ$ /UFF ( ! UNIV]SE 9 ALL ITS =MS -- :AT PHILOSOPH]S SWEEP+LY RAIL ,BE+4 ,! FACT IS ?AT WIDE PHILOSOPHICAL DIFF]5CES HAVE EXI/$ = C5TURIES 9 ! ,WE/ OV] ! V]Y DEF9ITION ( TOE WORD NATURE4 ,!SE DIFF]5CES REMA9 UNRESOLV$ TO ?IS DAY1 EV5 AS NATURE IS MAK+ HEADL9ES 9 5VIRONM5TAL ISSUES ?AT >E ( 5ORM\S IMPORTANCE = ! FUTURE ( NE>LY ALL LIFE-=MS4 

,DEF9+ NATURE BECOMES AN EV5 MORE COMPLEX TASK :5 WE 9CLUDE ! HUMAN SPECIES AS P>T ( IT4 ,IS HUMAN SOCIETY ) ITS 5SEMBLE ( TE*NOLOGIES & >TIFACTS -- NOT TO SPEAK ( SU* 9EFFABLE FEATURES AS ITS CONFLICT+ SOCIAL 9T]E/S & 9/ITUTIONS -- ANY LESS P>T ( NATURE ?AN NONHUMAN ANIMALS8 ,& IF HUMAN BE+S >E P>T ( NATURE1 >E !Y M]ELY ONE LIFE-=M AMONG MANY O!RS1 OR >E !Y UNIQUE 9 WAYS ?AT PLACE MAJOR RESPONSIBILITIES ON !M ) RESPECT TO ! RE/ ( ! WORLD ( LIFE1 RESPONSIBILITIES ?AT NO O!R SPECIES %>ES OR IS EV5 CAPABLE ( %>+8 

,:ATEV] NATURE MAY MEAN1 WE MU/ DET]M9E 9 :AT WAY HUMANITY 0FITS0 9TO IT ,& WE MU/ CONFRONT ! COMPLEX & *ALL5G+ QUE/ION ( ! RELATION%IP ( SOCIETY -- MORE SPECIFICALLY1 ! DIFF]5T SOCIAL =MS ?AT APPE>$ 9 ! PA/1 ?AT EXI/ TODAY1 & ?AT MAY APPE> 9 ! FUTURE -- TO NATURE4 ,UNLESS WE ANSW] !SE QUE/IONS ) REASONABLE CL>ITY -- OR AT LEA/ FULLY DISCUSS !M -- WE WILL LACK ANY E?ICAL DIRECTION 9 DEAL+ ) \R 5VIRONM5TAL PROBLEMS4 ,UNLESS WE KN[ :AT NATURE IS & :AT HUMANITY'S & SOCIETY'S PLACE 9 IT IS1 WE WILL BE LEFT ) VAGUE 9TUITIONS & VISC]AL S5TIM5TS ?AT NEI!R COH]E 9TO CLE> VIEWS NOR PROVIDE A GUIDE = EFFECTIVE ACTION4 

,IT IS EASY TO TRY TO ESCAPE ANSW]+ !SE TR\BL+ QUE/IONS BY IMPATI5TLY REJECT+ !M1 RESPOND+ ) PURE EMOTION1 OR SIMPLY D5IGRAT+ ANY EF=T TO REASON \T A COH]5T REPLY -- 9DE$1 BY ATTACK+ REASON ITSELF AS 0M$DLESOME0 7TO USE ,WILLIAM ,BLAKE'S T]M74 ,TODAY1 EV5 S5SITIVE PEOPLE 9 GR[+ NUMB]S FEEL BETRAY$ BY ! C5TURIES-LONG GLORIFICATION ( REASON1 ) ITS ICY CLAIMS TO EFFICI5CY1 OBJECTIVITY1 & FRE$OM FROM E?ICAL CON/RA9T -- OR ! =M ( REASON ?AT HAS N\RI%$ P>TICUL>LY DE/RUCTIVE TE*NOLOGIES LIKE NUCLEONICS & WEAPONRY4 ,?IS NEGATIVE POPUL> REACTION IS UND]/&ABLE4 ,BUT SW]V+ AWAY FROM A SPECIFIC =M ( REASON ?AT IS L>GELY 9/RUM5TAL & COLDLY ANALYTICAL CREATES PROBLEMS ?AT >E NO LESS DI/URB+ ?AN ?OSE QUE/IONS FROM :I* WE >E SEEK+ TO ESCAPE4 

,9 \R AV]SION TO AN 9S5SITIVE & UNFEEL+ =M ( REASON1 WE MAY EASILY OPT = A CL\DY 9TUITIONISM & MY/ICISM AS AN ALT]NATIVE4 ,UNLIKE 9/RUM5TAL & ANALYTICAL REASON1 AFT] ALL1 A SURR5D] TO EMOTION & MY?IC BELIEFS YIELDS COOP]ATIVE FEEL+S ( 09T]CONNECT$NESS0 ) ! NATURAL WORLD & P]HAPS EV5 A C>+ ATTITUDE T[>D IT ,BUT PRECISELY BECAUSE 9TUITION & 0MY/ICAL BELIEFS0 >E SO CL\DY & >BITR>Y -- :I* IS TO SAY1 SO UNREASON$ -- !Y MAY ALSO 0CONNECT0 US ) ?+S WE REALLY %\LDN'T BE CONNECT$ ) AT ALL -- NAMELY1 RACISM1 SEXISM1 & AN ABJECT SUBS]VI5CE TO *>ISMATIC LEAD]S4 

,9DE$1 FOLL[+ ?IS 9TUITIONAL ALT]NATIVE C\LD POT5TIALLY R5D] \R ECOLOGICAL \TLOOK V]Y DANG]\S4 ,VITAL AS ! IDEA ( 09T]CONNECT$NESS0 MAY BE TO \R VIEWS1 IT HAS HI/ORICALLY (T5 BE5 ! BASIS ( MY?S & SUP]NATURAL BELIEFS ?AT BECAME MEANS = SOCIAL CONTROL & POLITICAL MANIPULATION4 ,! FIR/ HALF ( ! TW5TIE? C5TURY IS 9 GREAT P>T ! /ORY ( BRUTAL MOVEM5TS LIKE ,NATIONAL ,SOCIALISM ?AT F$ ON A POPUL> ANTIRATIONALISM & ANTI-9TELLECTUALISM1 & A P]SONAL S5SE ( ALI5ATION1 AMONG O!R ?+S4 ,?IS MOVEM5T MOBILIZ$ & HOMOG5IZ$ MILLIONS ( PEOPLE ) AN ANTISOCIAL1 P]V]T$ 0ECOLOGI/IC0 IDEOLOGY BAS$ ON 9TUITION1 ) AN 09T]CONNECT$NESS0 ( E>?1 FOLK1 & 0BLOOD & SOIL0 ?AT WAS MILIT>I/IC & MURD]\S RA!R ?AN FREELY COMMUNIT>IAN4 ,9SULAT$ FROM ! *ALL5GE ( RATIONAL CRITIQUE BY ITS ANTI-9TELLECTUALISM & MY?IC NATIONALISM1 ! ,NATIONAL ,SOCIALI/ MOVEM5T EV5TUALLY TURN$ MU* ( ,EUROPE 9TO A CEMET]Y4 ,YET IDEOLOGICALLY1 ?IS FASCI/ TOTALIT>IANISM HAD GA9$ SU/5ANCE FROM ! 9TUITIONAL & MY/ICAL CR$O ( ! ,ROMANTIC MOVEM5T ( ! C5TURY BE=E -- 

SOME?+ NO ONE C\LD HAVE =ESE5 AT ! TIME4 

,FEEL+1 S5TIM5T1 & A MORAL \TLOOK WE SURELY NE$ IF 9/RUM5TAL & ANALYTICAL REASON >E NOT TO DIVE/ US ( \R  
PASSION = TRU?4 ,BUT MY?S1 M9D-NUMB+ RITUALS1 & *>ISMATIC P]SONALITIES CAN ALSO ROB US ( ! CRITICAL FACULTIES ?AT ?\<T PROVIDES4 ,REC5TLY1 A ,GRE5 ORGANIZATION 9 ,CANADA FLIPPANTLY PROCLAIM$ ?AT IT SEEKS 0COOP]ATION0 AS P>T ( ITS 0NEW P>ADIGM0 RA!R ?AN 0CONFRONTATION0 :I* IT CONSID]S P>T ( ! REJECT$ 0OLD P>ADIGM40 ,9 A MORE RADICAL ]A1 CONFRONTATION WAS ! /AT$ PURPOSE ( RADICAL MOVEM5TS6 ,! MY?IC & UNCRITICAL ASPECT ( 09T]CONNECT$NESS0 ?AT REJECTS CONFRONTATION SEEMS TO HAVE R$UC$ ?IS ,CANADIAN ,GRE5 ORGANIZATION TO ! LEVEL ( \TRI<T ACCOMMODATION ) ! /ATUS QUO4 ,H]E1 ! NE$ NOT ONLY TO CONFRONT ! EVILS ( \R TIME BUT TO ,UNCOMPROMIS+LY OPPOSE !M HAS DISAPPE>$ 9TO A ,NEW ,AGE QUAGMIRE ( UN?9K+ 0GOOD VIBES40 ,! 0LOV+0 PA? ( COMPROMISES ALONG :I* SU* 0GOOD VIBES0 LEADS US CAN EASILY 5D+ %E] OPPORTUNISM4 

,IF \R CONTEMPOR>Y REVOLT AGA9/ REASON RE/S ON ! MISGUID$ BELIEF ?AT ! ONLY ALT]NATIVE TO \R PRES5T REALITY IS MY/ICISM1 IT ALSO RE/S ON ! EQUALLY MISGUID$ BELIEF ?AT ONLY ONE K9D ( REASON EXI/S4 ,9 REACT+ AGA9/ 9/RUM5TAL & ANALYTICAL =MS ( REASON1 :I* >E USUALLY ID5TIFI$ ) REASON AS SU*1 WE MAY WELL OV]LOOK O!R 0=MS ( REASON0 ?AT >E ORGANIC & YET RETA9 CRITICAL QUALITIES2 ?AT >E DEVELOPM5TAL & YET RETA9 ANALYTICAL 9SI<TS2 ?AT >E E?ICAL & YET RETA9 CONTACT ) REALITY4 ,! 0VALUE-FREE0 RATIONALISM ?AT WE NORMALLY ID5TIFY ) ! PHYSICAL SCI5CES & TE*NOLOGY IS 9 FACT NOT ! ONLY =M ( REASON ?AT ,WE/]N PHILOSOPHY HAS DEVELOP$ OV] ! C5TURIES -- ,I REF] SPECIFICALLY TO ! GREAT TRADITION ( DIALECTICAL REASON ?AT ORIG9AT$ 9 ,GREECE SOME TW5TY@9FIVE C5TURIES AGO & REA*$ ITS HI< PO9T1 BUT BY NO MEANS ITS COMPLETION1 9 ! LOGICAL WORKS ( ,HEGEL4 

,:AT DIALECTICAL ?9K]S FROM ,H]ACLITUS ONW>D HAVE HAD 9 COMMON1 9 V>Y+ DEGREES1 IS A VIEW ( REALITY2 AS DEVELOPM5TAL -- ( ,BE+ AS AN EV]-UNFOLD+ ,BECOM+4 ,EV] S9CE ,PLATO CREAT$ A DUALISM BETWE5 A SUPRANATURAL WORLD ( IDEAL =MS & A TRANSI5T WORLD ( IMP]FECT S5SIBLE COPIES1 ! P]PLEX+ QUE/ION ( ID5TITY AMID *ANGE & *ANGE AMID ID5TITY HAS HAUNT$ ,WE/]N PHILOSOPHY14 ,9/RUM5TAL & ANALYTICAL =MS ( REASON -- :AT ,I WILL H]E G5]ICALLY CALL CONV5TIONAL REASON.<#b.> -- RE/ ON A FUNDAM5TAL PR9CIPLE1 ! FAM\S 0PR9CIPLE ( ID5TITY10 OR ,A EQUALS ,A1 :I* MEANS ?AT ANY GIV5 PH5OM5ON CAN BE ONLY ITSELF & CANNOT BE O!R ?AN :AT IT IS1 OR :AT WE IMM$IATELY P]CEIVE IT TO BE1 AT A GIV5 MOM5T 9 TIME4 ,)\T ?IS PR9CIPLE1 LOGICAL CONSI/5CY 9 CONV5TIONAL REASON W\LD BE IMPOSSIBLE4 

,CONV5TIONAL REASON IS BAS$ ON AN ANALYSIS ( PH5OM5A AS PRECISELY DEF9$1 & :OSE TRU? DEP5DS UPON !IR 9T]NAL CONSI/5CY & PRACTICALITY4 ,IT FOCUSES ON A ?+ OR PH5OM5ON AS FIX$1 ) CLE>-CUT B\ND>IES ?AT >E IMMUTABLE = ANALYTICAL PURPOSES4 ,WE KN[ AN 5TITY1 9 ?IS WIDELY ACCEPT$ NOTION ( REASON1 :5 WE CAN ANALYZE IT 9TO ITS IRR$UCIBLE COMPON5TS & DET]M9E H[ !Y WORK AS A FUNCTION+ :OLE SO ?AT KN[L$GE ( ! 5TITY WILL HAVE OP]ATIONAL APPLICABILITY4 ,:5 ! B\ND>IES ?AT 0DEF9E0 A DEVELOP+ ?+ *ANGE -- AS1 = 9/ANCE1 :5 S& BECOMES SOIL -- !N CONV5TIONAL REASON TREATS S& AS S& & SOIL AS SOIL1 MU* AS IF !Y W]E 9DEP5D5T ( EA* O!R4 ,! ZONE ( 9T]E/ 9 ?IS K9D ( RATIONALITY IS A ?+ OR PH5OM5ON'S FIXITY1 ITS 9DEP5D5CE1 & ITS BASICALLY ME*ANICAL 9T]ACTION ) SIMIL> OR DISSIMIL> ?+S & PH5OM5A4 ,! CAUSALITY ?AT CONV5TIONAL REASON DESCRIBES1 MOREOV]1 IS A MATT] ( K9ETICS3 ONE BILLI>D BALL /RIKES ANO!R & CAUSES !M BO? TO MOVE FROM ONE POSITION TO ANO!R -- ?AT IS TO SAY1 BY MEANS ( -- EFFICI5T CAUSE4 ,! TWO BILLI>D BALLS >E NOT ALT]$ BY ! BL[ BUT >E M]ELY REPOSITION$ ON ! BILLI>D TABLE4 

,BUT CONV5TIONAL REASON CANNOT ADDRESS ! PROBLEM ( *ANGE AT ALL4 ,IT VIEWS A MAMMAL1 = EXAMPLE1 AS A CREATURE M>K$ BY A HI<LY FIX$ SET ( TRAITS ?AT DI/+UI% IT FROM EV]Y?+ ?AT IS NOT MAMMALIAN4 ,TO 0KN[0 A MAMMAL IS TO EXPLORE ITS /RUCTURE1 LIT]ALLY TO ANALYZE IT BY DISMEMB]+ IT1 TO R$UCE IT TO ITS COMPON5TS1 TO ID5TIFY ITS ORGANS & !IR FUNCTIONS1 & TO ASC]TA9 ! WAY !Y OP]ATE TOGE!R TO ASSURE ! MAMMAL'S SURVIVAL & REPRODUCTION4 ,SIMIL>LY1 CONV5TIONAL REASON1 VIEWS A HUMAN BE+ 9 T]MS ( P>TICUL> /AGES ( ! LIFE-CYCLE3 A P]SON IS AN 9FANT AT ONE TIME1 A *ILD AT ANO!R1 AN ADOLESC5T AT /ILL ANO!R1 A Y\? & F9ALLY AN ADULT4 ,:5 WE ANALYZE AN 9FANT BY MEANS ( CONV5TIONAL REASON1 WE DO NOT EXPLORE :AT IT IS BECOM+ 9 ! PROCESS ( DEVELOP+ 9TO AN ADULT ,D\BTLESS1 :5 DEVELOPM5TAL PSY*OLOGI/S & ANATOMI/S /UDY AN 9DIVIDUAL LIFE-CYCLE1 FEW ( !M -- H[EV] CONV5TIONAL !IR RATIONALITY MAY BE -- IGNORE ! FACT ?AT EV]Y 9FANT IS 9 ! PROCESS ( BECOM+ AN ADULT & ?AT ! TWO /AGES 9 ! LIFE-CYCLE >E 9 V>I\S WAYS RELAT$ TO EA* O!R4 ,BUT ! PR9CIPLE ( ,A EQUALS ,A REMA9S A BASIC PREMISE4 ,ITS LOGICAL FRAMEWORK IS ! AU?ORITY ( CONSI/5CY1 & D$UCTIONS ALMO/ ME*ANICALLY FOLL[ FROM PREMISES4 ,CONV5TIONAL REASON ?US S]VES ! PRACTICAL FUNCTION ( DESCRIB+ A GIV5 5TITY'S ID5TITY & TELL+ US H[ ?AT 5TITY IS ORGANIZ$ TO BE ITSELF4 ,BUT IT CANNOT SY/EMATICALLY EXPLORE PROCESSES ( BECOM+1 OR H[ A LIV+ 5TITY IS PATT]N$ AS A POT5TIALITY TO PHASE FROM ONE /AGE ( ITS DEVELOPM5T 9TO ANO!R4 

,DIALECTICAL REASON1 UNLIKE CONV5TIONAL REASON1 ACKN[L$GES ! DEVELOPM5TAL NATURE ( REALITY BY ASS]T+ 9 ONE FA%ION OR ANO!R ?AT ,A EQUALS NOT ONLY ,A BUT ALSO NOT-,A4 ,! DIALECTICAL ?9K] :O EXAM9ES ! HUMAN LIFE-CYCLE SEES AN 9FANT AS A SELF-MA9TA9+ HUMAN ID5TITY :ILE SIMULTANE\SLY DEVELOP+ 9TO A *ILD1 FROM A *ILD 9TO AN ADOLESC5T1 FROM AN ADOLESC5T 9TO A Y\?1 & FROM A Y\? 9TO AN ADULT4 ,DIALECTICAL REASON GRASPS NOT ONLY H[ AN 5TITY IS ORGANIZ$ AT A P>TICUL> MOM5T BUT H[ IT IS ORGANIZ$ TO GO BEYOND ?AT LEVEL ( DEVELOPM5T & BECOME O!R ?AN :AT IT IS1 EV5 AS IT RETA9S ITS ID5TITY4 ,! CONTRADICTORY NATURE ( ID5TITY -- NOTABLY1 ?AT ,A EQUALS BO? ,A & NOT-,A -- IS AN 9TR9SIC FEATURE ( ID5TITY ITSELF4 ,! UNITY ( OPPOSITES IS1 9 FACT1 A UNITY QUA ! EM]G+ 0O!R0 :AT ,HEGEL CALL$ 0! ID5TITY ( ID5TITY & NONID5TITY0 

,! ?9K+ ( CONV5TIONAL REASON TODAY IS EXEMPLIFI$ -- & DISA/R\SLY RE9=C$ -- BY ! 0TRUE OR FALSE0 QUE/IONS ?AT MAKE UP MO/ /&>DIZ$ TE/S4 ,ONE MU/ D>K5 A BOX TO 9DICATE ?AT A /ATEM5T IS EI!R 0TRUE0 OR 0FALSE0 -- & DO SO QUICKLY1 ) M9IMAL REFLECTION4 ,!SE TE/S1 SO COMMONPLACE TODAY1 ALL[ = NO NUANC$ ?\<T OR AW>5ESS ( TRANSITIONS4 ,?AT A PH5OM5ON OR /ATEM5T MAY WELL BE BO? TRUE & FALSE -- DEP5D+ ON ITS CONTEXT & ITS PLACE 9 A PROCESS ( BECOM+ O!R ?AN :AT IT IS -- IS EXCLUD$ BY ! LOGICAL PREMISE ON :I* !SE TE/S >E BAS$4 ,?IS TE/+ PROC$URE MAKES = BAD M5TAL HABITS AMONG Y\NG PEOPLE1 :O >E S*OOL$ TO TAKE SU* TE/S SUCCESSFULLY1 & :OSE C>E]S & FUTURE LIFEWAYS DEP5D ON !IR SCORES4 ,BUT ! ?\<T PROCESS DEM&$ BY SU* TE/S COMP>TM5TALIZES & ESS5TIALLY COMPUT]IZES O!RWISE RI* M9DS1 DEPRIV+ Y\NG PEOPLE ( !IR NATIVE ABILITY TO ?9K ORGANICALLY & TO UND]/& ! DEVELOPM5TAL NATURE ( ! REAL WORLD4 

,ANO!R MAJOR PRESUPPOSITION ( CONV5TIONAL REASON -- ONE ?AT FOLL[S FROM ITS CONCEPTS ( ID5TITY & CAUSALITY -- IS ?AT HI/ORY IS A LAY]$ S]IES ( SEP>ATE PH5OM5A1 A M]E  
SUCCESSION ( /RATA1 EA* 9DEP5D5T ( ! ONES ?AT PREC$E & FOLL[ IT ,!SE /RATA MAY BE CEM5T$ TOGE!R BY PHASES1 BUT !SE PHASES >E !MSELVES ANALYZ$ 9TO COMPON5TS & EXPLOR$ 9DEP5D5TLY ( EA* O!R4 ,?US1 ,MESOZOIC ROCK /RATA >E 9DEP5D5T ( ,C5OZOIC1 & EA* /RATUM EXI/S V]Y MU* ON ITS [N1 AS DO ! ONES ?AT CEM5T !M TOGE!R4 ,9 HUMAN HI/ORY1 ! M$IEVAL P]IOD IS 9DEP5D5T ( ! MOD]N1 & ! =M] IS CONNECT$ TO ! LATT] BY A S]IES ( 9DEP5D5T SEGM5TS1 EA* RELATIVELY AUTONOM\S 9 RELATION TO ! PREC$+ & SUBSEQU5T ONES4 ,FROM ! /&PO9T ( CONV5TIONAL REASON1 IT IS NOT ALWAYS CLE> H[ HI/ORICAL *ANGE OCCURS OR :AT MEAN+ HI/ORY HAS4 ,DESPITE PO/MOD]NISM & PRES5T-DAY HI/ORICAL RELATIVISM1 :I* EXAM9E HI/ORY US+ CONV5TIONAL REASON & !REBY RAVAGE IT1 !RE WAS A TIME 9 ! REC5T PA/ :5 MO/ HI/ORIANS1 9FLU5C$ BY !ORIES ( EVOLUTION & BY ,M>XISM1 REG>D$ HI/ORY AS A DEVELOPM5TAL PH5OM5ON & SUBSEQU5T P]IODS AS AT LEA/ DEP5D+ UPON PRIOR ONES4 ,IT IS ?IS TRADITION ?AT DIALECTICAL REASON UPHOLDS4 

,! 9TUITIONAL APPROA* TO HI/ORY IS NO IMPROVEM5T OV] ?AT ( CONV5TIONAL REASON -- 9DE$1 IT DOES ! OPPOSITE3 IT LIT]ALLY DISSOLVES HI/ORICAL DEVELOPM5T 9TO AN UNDIFF]5TIAT$ CONT9UUM & EV5 9TO UBIQUIT\S1 ALL-EMBRAC+ 0,ONE40 ,! MY/ICAL C\NT]P>T ( ME*ANICO-MAT]IALI/IC /RATIFICATION IS ! R$UCTIONISM ?AT SAYS ?AT EV]Y?+ IS 0,ONE0 OR 09T]CONNECT$10 ?AT ALL PH5OM5A ORIG9AT$ FROM A PULSE ( PRIMAL 5]GY1 LIKE ! ,VICTORIAN PHYSICI/ :O BELIEV$ ?AT :5 HE P\ND$ HIS FI/ ON A TABLE1 ,SIRIUS TREMBL$1 H[EV] FA9TLY4 ,?AT ! UNIV]SE HAD AN ORIG91 :ATEV] IT WAS1 DOES NOT W>RANT ! NAIVE BELIEF ?AT ! UNIV]SE /ILL 0REALLY0 CONSI/S ( NO?+ BUT I ITS ORIG9AT+ S\RCE1 ANY MORE ?AN AN ADULT HUMAN BE+ CAN BE EXPLA9$ 5TIRELY BY REF]5CE TO HIS OR H] P>5TS4 ,?IS WAY ( ?9K+ IS NOT F> REMOV$ FROM ! K9ETIC CAUSE-EFFECT APPROA* ( CONV5TIONAL REASON4 ,NOR DOES ! 09T]CONNECT$NESS0 ( ALL LIFE-=MS PRECLUDE ! %>P DI/9CTIONS BETWE5 PREY & PR$ATORS1 OR BETWE5 9/9CTIVELY GUID$ LIFE-=MS & POT5TIALLY RATIONAL ONES4 ,YET !SE C\NTLESS DIFF]5TIATIONS REFLECT 9NUM]ABLE 9NOVATIONS 9 EVOLUTION>Y PA?WAYS1 9DE$ DIFF]5T K9DS ( EVOLUTION -- BE !Y 9ORGANIC1 ORGANIC1 OR SOCIAL4 ,9/EAD ( APPREH5D+ ?+S & PH5OM5A AS BO? DIFF]5TIAT$ & YET CUMULATIVELY RELAT$1 ! MY/ICAL ALT]NATIVE TO CONV5TIONAL REASON T5DS TO SEE !M1 TO USE ,HEGEL'S FAM\S REM>K1 AS 0A NI<T 9 :I* ALL C[S >E BLACK40 

,CONV5TIONAL REASON1 TO BE SURE1 HAS ITS USEFUL SIDE4 ,ITS 9T]NAL CONSI/5CY ( PROPOSITIONS1 IRRESPECTIVE ( CONT5T1 PLAYS AN 9DISP5SABLE ROLE 9 MA!MATICAL ?9K+ & MA!MATICAL SCI5CES1 9 5G9E]+1 & 9 ! NUTS-&-BOLTS ACTIVITIES ( EV]YDAY LIFE4 ,IT IS 9DISP5SABLE :5 BUILD+ A BRIDGE OR A H\SE2 = SU* PURPOSES1 !RE IS NO PO9T 9 ?9K+ ALONG EVOLUTION>Y OR DEVELOPM5TAL L9ES4 ,IF WE US$ A LOGIC BAS$ ON ANY?+ BUT ! PR9CIPLE ( ID5TITY TO BUILD A BRIDGE OR A H\SE1 A CATA/ROPHE W\LD NO D\BT OCCUR4 ,! PHYSIOLOGICAL OP]ATIONS ( \R BODIES1 NOT T  SPEAK ( ! FLI<T ( BIRDS & ! PUMPLIKE WORK+S ( A MAMMALIAN HE>T1 DEP5D 9 GREAT P>T UPON ! PR9CIPLES WE ASSOCIATE ) CONV5TIONAL REASON4 ,TO UND]/& OR DESIGN A ME*ANICAL 5TITY REQUIRES A =M ( REASON ?AT IS 9/RUM5TAL & AN ANALYSIS ( REALITY 9TO ITS COMPON5TS & !IR FUNCTION+4 ,! TRU?S ( CONV5TIONAL REASON1 BAS$ ON CONSI/5CY1 >E USEFUL 9 !SE >EAS ( LIFE4 ,9DE$1 CONV5TIONAL REASON HAS CONTRIBUT$ IMMEASURABLY TO \R KN[L$GE ( ! ,UNIV]SE4 

,= SEV]AL C5TURIES1 9 FACT1 CONV5TIONAL REASON HELD \T A PROMISE TO DISPEL ! DOGMATIC AU?ORITY ( ! *UR* ! >BITR>Y BEHAVIOR ( ABSOLUTE MON>*S1 & ! FRI<T5+ <O/S ( SUP]/ITION -- & 9DE$1 IT DID A GREAT DEAL TO FULFILL ?IS PROMISE4 ,BUT TO A*IEVE ! CONSI/5CY ?AT CON/ITUTES ITS FUNDAM5TAL PR9CIPLE1 CONV5TIONAL REASON REMOVES E?ICS FROM ITS DISC\RSE & CONC]NS4 ,& AS AN 9/RUM5T = A*IEV+ C]TA9 5DS1 ! MORAL *>ACT] ( ?OSE 5DS1 ! VALUES1 IDEALS1 BELIEFS1 & !ORIES PEOPLE *]I%1 >E IRRELEVANT TO IT1 >BITR>Y MATT]S ( P]SONAL MOOD & TA/E4 ,) ITS MESSAGE ( ID5TITY & CONSI/5CY AS TRU?1 CONV5TIONAL REASON FAILS US NOT BECAUSE IT IS FALSE AS SU* BUT BECAUSE IT HAS /AK$ \T TOO BROAD A CLAIM = ITS [N VALIDITY 9 EXPLA9+ REALITY4 ,IT EV5 R$EF9ES REALITY TO FIT ITS CLAIM1 JU/ AS MANY MA!MATICAL PHYSICI/S R$EF9E REALITY AS ?AT :I* CAN BE =MULAT$ 9 MA!MATICAL T]MS4 ,IT %\LD COME AS NO SURPRISE1 !N1 ?AT 9 \R HI<LY RATIONALIZ$ 9DU/RIAL SOCIETY1 CONV5TIONAL REASON HAS COME TO SEEM REPELL5T4 ,P]VASIVE AU?ORITY1 AN IMP]SONAL TE*NOCRACY1 AN UNFEEL+ SCI5CE & 9S5SITIVE1 MONOLI?IC BUREAUCRACIES -- ! V]Y EXI/5CE ( ALL !SE IS IMPUT$ TO REASON AS SU*4 

,H]E WE F9D \RSELVES 9 SOME?+ ( A QU&>Y4 ,IT IS OBVI\S ?AT WE CANNOT DO )\T ! MU*-DESPIS$ T5ETS ( CONV5TIONAL REASON 9 \R EV]YDAY LIFE2 NOR CAN WE DO )\T MANY TE*NOLOGIES -- 9CLUD+ SOPHI/ICAT$ B9OCUL>S TO WAT* BIRDS & :ALES1 & CAM]AS TO PHOTOGRAPH !M4 ,?IS BE+ ! CASE1 WE CONCLUDE1 LET US TURN TO AN IRRATIONAL1 MY/ICAL1 OR RELIGI\S PRIVATE WORLD TO SUPPORT \R MORAL & SPIRITUAL BELIEFS2 LET US SEEK COMMUNION ) A MY/ICAL 0,ONE0 EV5 AS WE WORK = CORPORATIONS TO SURVIVE4 ,?US1 EV5 AS WE RAIL AGA9/ DUALISM & PLEAD = A GREAT] S5SE ( UNITY1 WE %>PLY DUALIZE \R [N EXI/5CE4 ,EV5 AS WE MAY SEEK AN ELEVAT$ SPIRITUALITY1 COMMUNION1 & CONNECT$NESS1 WE TURN TO RA!R MUNDANE GURUS1 *>ISMATIC P]SONALITIES1 & CULTIC FIGURES :O BEHAVE MORE LIKE 5TREPR5EURS 9 ! V5D+ ( MY/ICAL NO/RUMS ?AN F9ANCIALLY DIS9T]E/$ GUIDES 9 ATTA9+ MORAL P]FECTION4 ,EV5 AS WE D5\NCE A MAT]IALI/IC & CONSUM]I/IC M5TALITY1 WE \RSELVES BECOME AVID CONSUM]S ( CO/LY1 SUPPOS$LY SPIRITUAL OR ECOLOGICAL PRODUCTS1 0GRE50 W>ES ?AT BE> L(TY MESSAGES4 ,?US DO ! MO/ VULG> ATTRIBUTES ( :AT WE REG>D AS ! REALM ( REASON CONT9UE TO 9VADE \R LIVES 9 ! GUISE ( IRRATIONAL1 MY/ICAL1 & RELIGI\S COMMODITIES4 

,\R MAILBOXES >E FLOOD$ ) CATALOGS1 & \R BOOK/ORES >E FILL$ ) PAP]BACKS ?AT (F] US NEW ROADS TO MY/ICAL COMMUNION & A ,NEW ,AGE 9TO :I* WE CAN )DRAW & TURN \R BACKS TO ! H>% REALITIES ?AT CON/ANTLY ASSAIL US4 ,(T51 ?IS MY/ICAL )DRAWAL YIELDS A /ATE ( SOCIAL QUIETISM ?AT IS MORE DREAMLIKE ?AN REAL1 MORE PASSIVE ?AN ACTIVE4 ,PREOCCUPI$ MORE ) P]SONAL *ANGE ?AN ) SOCIAL *ANGE1 & CONC]N$ MORE ) ! SYMPTOMS ( \R P[]LESS1 ALI5AT$ LIVES ?AN ) ! ROOT CAUSES1 WE SURR5D] CONTROL OV] ! SOCIAL ASPECTS ( \R LIVES1 EV5 AS !Y >E SO IMPORTANT 9 %AP+ \R PRIVATE LIVES4 

,BUT !RE CAN BE NO P]SONAL 0R$EMPTION0 )\T SOCIAL 0R$EMPTION01 & !RE CAN BE NO E?ICAL LIFE )\T A RATIONAL LIFE4 ,IF METAPHORS ) MY/ICAL CONNOTATIONS >E NOT TO REPLACE UND]/&+ & IF OBSCURANTISM IS NOT TO REPLACE G5U9E 9SI<T -- ALL 9 REACTION TO ! LIMITATIONS ( CONV5TIONAL REASON & ITS EMPHASIS ON VALUE-FREE =MS ( ?\<T -- WE MU/ EXAM9E ! ALT]NATIVE =M ( REASON ?AT ,I HAVE ALREADY 9TRODUC$4 ,?IS1 LET ME 9SI/1 IS NOT A PHILOSOPHICALLY AB/RACT ISSUE4 ,IT HAS 5ORM\S IMPLICATIONS = H[ WE BEHAVE AS E?ICAL BE+S & = \R UND]/&+ ( ! NATURE ( NATURE & \R PLACE1 9 ! NATURAL WORLD4 ,MOREOV]1 IT DIRECTLY AFFECTS ! K9D ( SOCIETY1 S5SIBILITY1 & LIFEWAYS WE *OOSE TO FO/]4 

,LET US GRANT ?AT ! PR9CIPLES ( ID5TITY1 ( EFFICI5T CAUSALITY1 & ( /RATIFICATION DO APPLY TO A P>TICUL> COMMONS5SICAL REALITY ?AT IS R5D]$ 9TELLIGIBLE BY !IR USE4 ,BUT :5 WE GO BEYOND ?AT P>TICUL> REALITY1 WE CAN NO LONG] R$UCE ! RI* WEAL? ( DIFF]5TIATION1 FLUX1 DEVELOPM5T1 ORGANIC CAUSALITY1 & DEVELOPM5TAL REALITY TO A VAGUE 0,ONE0 OR TO AN EQUALLY VAGUE NOTION ( 09T]CONNECT$NESS40 ,A V]Y CONSID]ABLE LIT]ATURE DAT+ BACK TO ! ANCI5T ,GREEKS PROVIDES ! BASIS ( AN ORGANIC =M ( REASON & A DEVELOPM5TAL 9T]PRETATION ( REALITY4 

,) A FEW NOTABLE EXCEPTIONS1 ! ,PLATONIC DUALISM ( ID5TITY & *ANGE REV]B]AT$ 9 ONE WAY OR ANO!R ?R\<\T ,WE/]N PHILOSOPHY UNTIL ! N9ETE5? C5TURY1 :5 ,HEGEL'S LOGICAL WORKS L>GELY RESOLV$ ?IS P>ADOX BY SY/EMATICALLY %[+ ?AT ID5TITY1 OR SELF-P]SI/5CE1 ACTUALLY EXPRESSES ITSELF ?R\< *ANGE AS AN EV]-V>IEGAT$ UNFOLD+ ( 0UNITY 9 DIV]SITY0 TO USE HIS [N WORDS4.<#c.> ,! GR&EUR ( ,HEGEL'S EF=T HAS NO EQUAL 9 ! HI/ORY ( ,WE/]N PHILOSOPHY4 ,LIKE ,>I/OTLE BE=E HIM1 HE HAD AN 0EM]G5T0 9T]PRETATION ( CAUSALITY1 ( H[ ! IMPLICIT BECOMES EXPLICIT ?R\< ! UNFOLD+ ( ITS LAT5T =M & POSSIBILITIES4 ,ON A VA/ SCALE OV] ! C\RSE ( TWO SIZABLE VOLUMES1 HE ASSEMBL$ NE>LY ALL ! CATEGORIES BY :I* REASON EXPLA9S REALITY1 & $UC$ ONE FROM ! O!R 9 AN 9TELLIGIBLE & MEAN+FUL CONT9UUM ?AT IS GRAD$ 9TO A RI*LY DIFF]5TIAT$1 9CREAS+LY COMPREH5SIVE1 OR 0ADEQUATE0 :OLE1 TO USE SOME ( HIS T]MS4 

,WE MAY REJECT :AT ,HEGEL CALL$ HIS 0ABSOLUTE IDEALISM10 ! TRANSITION FROM HIS LOGIC TO HIS PHILOSOPHY ( NATURE1 HIS TELEOLOGICAL CULM9ATION ( ! SUBJECTIVE & OBJECTIVE 9 A GODLIKE 0,ABSOLUTE10 & HIS IDEA ( A COSMIC ,SPIRIT 7,GEI/74 ,HEGEL R>EFI$ DIALECTICAL REASON 9TO A COSMOLOGICAL SY/EM ?AT V]G$ ON ! !OLOGICAL BY TRY+ TO RECONCILE IT ) IDEALISM1 ABSOLUTE KN[L$GE1 & A MY/ICAL UNFOLD+ LOGOS ?AT HE (T5 DESIGNAT$ 0,GOD40 ,UNFAMILI> ) ECOLOGY1 ,HEGEL REJECT$ NATURAL EVOLUTION AS A VIABLE !ORY 9 FAVOR ( A /ATIC HI]>*Y ( ,BE+4 ,BY ! SAME TOK51 ,FRI$RI* ,5GELS 9T]M+L$ DIALECTICAL REASON ) NATURAL 0LAWS0 ?AT MORE CLOSELY RESEMBLE ! PREMISES ( N9ETE5?-C5TURY PHYSICS ?AN A PLA/IC METAPHYSICS OR AN ORGANISMIC \TLOOK1 PRODUC+ A CRUDE DIALECTICAL MAT]IALISM4 ,9DE$1 SO 5AMOR$ WAS ,5GELS ( MATT] & MOTION AS ! IRR$UCIBLE 0ATTRIBUTES0 ( ,BE+ ?AT A K9ETICISM BAS$ ON M]E MOTION 9VAD$ HIS DIALECTIC ( ORGANIC DEVELOPM5T4 

,TO DISMISS DIALECTICAL REASON BECAUSE ( ! FAIL+S ( ,HEGEL'S IDEALISM & ,5GELS'S MAT]IALISM1 H[EV]1 W\LD BE TO LOSE SI<T ( ! EXTRAORD9>Y COH]5CE ?AT DIALECTICAL REASON CAN FURNI% & ITS EXTRAORD9>Y APPLICABILITY TO ECOLOGY -- P>TICUL>LY TO AN ECOLOGY ROOT$ 9 EVOLUTION>Y DEVELOPM5T4 ,DESPITE ,HEGEL'S [N PREJUDICES AGA9/ ORGANIC EVOLUTION1 :AT /&S \T AMID ! METAPHYSICAL & (T5 !OLOGICAL >*AISMS 9 HIS WORK IS HIS OV]ALL $UCTION ( LOGICAL CATEGORIES AS ! SUBJECTIVE ANATOMY ( A DEVELOPM5TAL REALITY4 ,:AT IS NE$$ IS TO FREE ?IS =M ( REASON FR OM BO? ! QUASI-MY/ICAL & ! N>R[LY SCI5TI/IC WORLDVIEWS ?AT 9 ! PA/ HAVE MADE IT REMOTE FROM ! LIV+ WORLD2 TO SEP>ATE IT FROM ,HEGEL'S EMPYREAN1 BASICALLY ANT9ATURALI/IC DIALECTICAL IDEALISM & ! WOOD51 (T5 SCI5TI/IC DIALECTICAL MAT]IALISM ( OR?ODOX ,M>XI/S4 ,%ORN ( BO? ITS IDEALISM & ITS MAT]IALISM1 DIALECTICAL REASON MAY BE R5D]$ NATURALI/IC & ECOLOGICAL & CONCEIV$ AS A NATURALI/IC =M ( ?9K+4 

,?IS DIALECTICAL NATURALISM (F]S AN ALT]NATIVE TO AN ECOLOGY MOVEM5T ?AT RI<TLY DI/RU/S CONV5TIONAL REASON4 ,IT CAN BR+ COH]5CE TO ECOLOGICAL ?9K+1 & IT CAN DISPEL >BITR>Y & ANTI-9TELLECTUAL T5D5CIES T[>D ! S5TIM5TAL1 CL\DY1 & !I/IC AT BE/ & ! DANG]\SLY ANTIRATIONAL1 MY/ICAL1 & POT5TIALLY REACTION>Y AT WOR/4 ,AS A WAY ( REASON+ AB\T REALITY1 DIALECTICAL NATURALISM IS ORGANIC 5\< TO GIVE A MORE LIB]ATORY MEAN+ TO VAGUE WORDS LIKE 9T]CONNECT$NESS & HOLISM )\T SACRIFIC+ 9TELLECTUALITY4 ,IT CAN ANSW] ! QUE/IONS ,I POS$ AT ! BEG9N+ ( ?IS ESSAY3 :AT NATURE IS1 HUMAMITY'S PLACE 9 NATURE1 ! ?RU/ ( NATURAL EVOLUTION & -- SOCIETY'S RELATION%IP ) ! NATURAL WORLD4 ,EQUALLY IMPORTANT1 0DIALECTICAL NATURALISM ADDS AN EVOLUTION>Y P]SPECTIVE TO ECOLOGICAL ?9K+ -- DESPITE ,HEGEL'S REJECTION ( NATURAL EVOLUTION & ,5GELS'S REC\RSE TO ! ME*ANI/IC EVOLUTION>Y !ORIES ( A C5TURY AGO4 ,DIALECTICAL NATURALISM DISC]NS EVOLUTION>Y PH5OM5A FLUIDLY & PLA/ICALLY1 YET IT DOES NOT DIVE/ EVOLUTION ( RATIONAL 9T]PRETATION4 ,F9ALLY1 A DIALECTIC ?AT HAS ,BE5 0ECOLOGIZ$10 OR GIV5 A NATURALI/IC CORE1 & A TRULY DEVELOPM5TAL UND]/&+ ( REALITY C\LD PROVIDE ! BASIS = A LIV+ ECOLOGICAL E?ICS4 

,NO G5]AL ACC\NT ( DIALECTICAL REASON CAN BE A SUB/ITUTE = READ+ ,HEGEL'S WORKS ON LOGIC4 ,= ALL ITS =C$ ANALYZES & D\BTFUL TRANSITIONS 9 $UC+ ONE LOGICAL CATEGORY FROM ANO!R1 ,HEGEL'S ,SCI5CE ( ,LOGIC IS DIALECTICAL REASON 9 ITS MO/ ELABORATE & DYNAMIC =M4 ,?IS WORK1 9 MANY RESPECTS1 ABSORB$ ! CONV5TIONAL LOGIC ( ,>I/OTLE'S ,PO/]IOR ,ANALYTICS 9TO ! SAME ,GREEK ?9K]'S ,METAPHYSICS1 ) ITS BOLD VIEW ( ! NATURE ( REALITY4 ,I %ALL !RE=E NOT PRET5D ?AT A BROAD DESCRIPTION ( ! DIALECTIC CAN REPLACE ! DETAIL$ PRES5TATION ,HEGEL ADVANC$1 NOR TRY TO =CE ITS !ORETICAL UNFOLD+ 9TO ! BRIEF 0DEF9ITIONS & CONCLUSIONS0 ?AT ORD9>ILY PASS = ACC\NTS ( IDEAS4 ,AS ,HEGEL HIMSELF OBS]V$ 9 HIS ,PH5OM5OLOGY ( ,SPIRIT3 0,= ! REAL ISSUE IS NOT EXHAU/$ BY /AT+ IT AS AN AIM1 BUT BY C>RY+ IT \T2 NOR IS ! RESULT ! ACTUAL :OLE1 BUT RA!R ! RESULT TOGE!R ) ! PROCESS ?R\< :I* IT CAME AB\T4 ,! AIM BY ITSELF .<0DEF9ITIONS & CONCLUSIONS0.> IS A LIFELESS UNIV]SAL1 JU/ AS ! GUID+ T5D5CY IS A M]E DRIVE ?AT AS YET LACKS AN ACTUAL EXI/5CE2 & ! B>E RESULT IS ! CORPSE :I* HAS LEFT ! GUID+ T5D5CY BEH9D IT40.<#d.> ,HEGEL'S DIALECTIC1 9 EFFECT1 DEFIES ! DEM& = DICTION>Y-/YLE DEF9ITION4 ,IT CAN BE UND]/OOD ONLY 9 T]MS ( ! WORK+ \T ( DIALECTICAL REASON ITSELF1 JU/ AS AN 9SI<TFUL PSY*OLOGY DEM&S ?AT WE CAN TRULY KN[ AN 9DIVIDUAL ONLY :5 WE KN[ HIS OR H] 5TIRE BIOGRAPHY1 NOT M]ELY ! NUM]ICAL RESULTS ( PSY*OLOGICAL TE/S & PHYSICAL MEASUREM5TS4 

,M9IMALLY1 WE MU/ ASSUME ?AT !RE IS ORD] 9 ! WORLD1 AN ASSUMPTION ?AT EV5 ORD9>Y SCI5CE MU/ MAKE IF IT IS TO EXI/4 ,M9IMALLY1 TOO1 WE MU/ ASSUME ! EXI/5CE ( GR[? & PROCESSES ?AT LEAD TO DIFF]5TIATION1 NOT M]ELY ! K9D ( MOTION ?AT RESULTS FROM PU%-PULL1 GRAVITATIONAL1 ELECTROMAGNETIC1 & SIMIL> =CES4 ,F9ALLY1 M9IMALLY1 WE MU/ ASSUME ?AT !RE IS SOME K9D ( DIRECTIONALITY T[>D EV]-GREAT] DIFF]5TIATION OR :OL5ESS 9S(> AS POT5TIALITY IS REALIZ$ 9 ITS FULL ACTUALITY4 ,WE NE$ NOT RETURN TO M$IEVAL TELEOLOGICAL NOTIONS ( AN UNSW]V+ PR$ET]M9ATION 9 A HI]>*Y ( ,BE+ TO ACCEPT ?IS DIRECTIONALITY2 RA!R1 WE NE$ ONLY PO9T TO ! FACT ?AT !RE IS A G5]ALLY ORD]LY DEVELOPM5T 9 ! REAL WORLD OR1 TO USE PHILOSOPHICAL T]M9OLOGY A 0LOGICAL0 DEVELOPM5T :5 A DEVELOPM5T SUCCE$S 9 BECOM+ :AT IT IS /RUCTUR$ TO BECOME4 

,9 ,HEGEL'S LOGICAL WORKS1 AS 9 ,>I/OTLE'S ,METAPHYSICS1 DIALECTIC IS MORE ?AN A REM>KABLE 0ME?OD0 = DEAL+ ) REALITY4 ,CONCEIV$ AS ! LOGICAL EXPRESSION ( A WIDE-RANG+ =M ( DEVELOPM5TAL CAUSALITY1 LOGIC1 9 ,HEGEL'S WORK1 JO9$ H&S ) ONTOLOGY4 ,DIALECTIC IS SIMULTANE\SLY A WAY ( REASON+ & AN ACC\NT ( ! OBJECTIVE WORLD1 ) AN ONTOLOGICAL CAUSALITY4 ,AS A =M ( REASON+1 ! MO/ BASIC CATEGORIES 9 DIALECTIC -- EV5 SU* VAGUE CATEGORIES AS 0,BE+0 & 0,NO?+0 -- >E DIFF]5TIAT$ BY !IR [N 9N] LOGIC 9TO FULL]1 MORE COMPLEX CATEGORIES4 ,EA* CATEGORY1 9 TURN1 IS A POT5TIALITY ?AT BY MEANS ( $UCTIVE FLUNK+1 7DIRECT$ T[>D AN EXPLORATION ( ITS LAT5T & IMPLICIT POSSIBILITIES1 YIELDS LOGICAL EXPRESSION 9 ! =M ( SELF-REALIZATION1 OR :AT ,HEGEL CALL$ 0ACTUALITY0 7,WIRKLI*KEIT74 

,PRECISELY BECAUSE IT IS ALSO A SY/EM ( CAUSALITY1 DIALECTIC IS ONTOLOGICAL1 OBJECTIVE1 & !RE=E NATURAL/IC AS-WELL AS A =M ( REASON4 ,9 ONTOLOGICAL T]MS1 DIALECTICAL CAUSALITY4IS NOT M]ELY MOTION1 =CE1 OR *ANGES ( =M BUT ?+S & PH5OM5A 9 DEVELOPM5T4 ,9DE$1 S9CE ALL ,BE+ IS ,BECOM+1 DIALECTICAL CAUSALITY IS ! DIFF]5TIATION ( POT5TIALITY 9TO ACTUALITY1 9 ! C\RSE ( :I* EA* NEW ACTUALITY BECOMES ! POT5TIALITY = FUR!R DIFF]5TIATION & ACTUALIZATION4 ,DIALECTIC EXPLICATES H[ PROCESSES OCCUR NOT ONLY 9 ! NATURAL WORLD BUT 9 ! SOCIAL4 

,H[ ! IMPLICIT QUA A RELATIVELY-DIFF]5TIAT$ =M LAT5T ) POSSIBILITY BECOMES A MORE DIFF]5TIAT$ =M ?AT IS TRUE TO ! WAY ITS POT5TIAL =M IS-CON/ITUT$ IS CL>IFI$ AS ,HEGEL'S [N WORDS4 0,! PLANT1 = EXAMPLE1 DOES NOT LOSE ITSELF 9 M]E 9DEF9ITE *ANGE10 HE WRITES4 ,IT HAS A DI/9CT DIRECTIONALITY -- 9 ! CASE ( CONSCI\S BE+S1 PURPOSE AS WILL4 0,FROM ! G]M MU* IS PRODUC$ :5 AT FIR/ NO?+ WAS TO BE SE51 BUT ! :OLE ( :AT IS BR\<T =?1 IF NOT DEVELOP$1 IS YET HIDD5 & IDEALLY CONTA9$ )9 ITSELF40 ,IT IS WOR? NOT+1 9 ?IS PASSAGE1 ?AT :AT MAY BE 0BR\<T =?0 IS NOT NECESS>ILY DEVELOP$3 AN ACORN1 = EXAMPLE1 MAY BECOME FOOD = A SQUIRREL OR WI!R ,ON A CONCRETE SIDEWALK1 RA!R ?AN DEVELOP 9TO :AT IT IS POT5TIALLY CON/ITUT$ TO BECOME -- NOTABLY1 AN OAK TREE4 ',! PR9CIPLE ( ?IS PROJECTION 9TO EXI/5CE IS ?AT ! G]M CANNOT REMA9 M]ELY IMPLICIT'4 ,HEGEL GOES ON TO OBS]VE1 0BUT IS IMPELL$ T[>DS DEVELOPM5T1 S9CE IT PRES5TS ! CONTRADICTION ( BE+ ONLY IMPLICIT40.<#e.> 

,:AT WE VAGUELY CALL ! 0IMMAN5T0 FACTORS ?AT PRODUCE A SELF-UNFOLD+ ( A DEVELOPM5T1 ! ,HEGELIAN DIALECTIC REG>DS AS ! CONTRADICTORY NATURE ( A BE+ ?AT IS UNFULFILL$ 9 ! S5SE ?AT IT IS ONLY IMPLICIT OR 9COMPLETE4 ,AS M]E POT5TIALITY1 IT HAS NOT 0COME TO ITSELF10 SO TO SPEAK4 ,A ?+ OR PH5OM5ON 9 DIALECTICAL CAUSALITY REMA9S UNSETTL$1 UN/ABLE1 9 T5SION -- MU* AS A FETUS RIP5+ T[>D BIR? /RA9S TO BE BORN BECAUSE ( ! WAY IT IS CON/ITUT$ -- UNTIL1 IT DEVELOPS ITSELF 9TO :AT IT 0%\LD BE0 9 ALL ITS :OL5ESS OR FULLNESS4 ,IT CANNOT REMA9 9 5DLESS T5SION OR 0CONTRADICTION0 ) :AT IT IS ORGANIZE D TO BECOME )\T W>P+ OR UNDO+ ITSELF4 ,IT MU/ RIP5 9TO ! FULLNESS ( ITS BE+4 

,MOD]N SCI5CE HAS TRI$ TO DESCRIBE NE>LY ALL PH5OM5A1 9 T]MS ( EFFICI5T CAUSE OR ! K9ETIC IMPACT ( =CES-ON A ?+ -- OR PH5OM5ON1 REACT+ AGA9/ M$IEVAL CONCEPTIONS ( CAUSALITY 9 T]MS ( F9AL CAUSE -- NOTABLY1 9 T]MS ( ! EXI/5CE ( A DEITY :O IMPELS DEVELOPM5T1 IF ONLY BY VIRTUE ( 0,HIS0 [N 0P]FECTION40 ,HEGEL'S NOTION ( 0IMP]FECTION0 -- MORE APPROPRIATELY1 ( 09ADEQUACY0 OR ( CONTRADICTION -- AS AN IMPELL+ FACTOR = DEVELOPM5T P>TLY W5T BEYOND BO? 444EFFICI5T & F9AL NOTIONS ( CAUSALITY4 ,I SAY 0P>TLY0 = A SPECIFIC REASON3 ! PHILOSOPHICAL >*AISMS ?AT RIM ?R\< ,HEGEL'S DIALECTIC WEAK5 HIS POSITION FROM A NATURALI/IC VIEWPO9T4 ,FROM ,PLATO'S TIME UNIFY ! BEG9N+ ( ! MOD]N WORLD1 !OLOGICAL NOTIONS ( P]FECTION1 9F9ITY1 & ET]NALITY P]MEAT$ PHILOSOPHICAL ?\<T4 ,PLATO'S 0IDEAL =MS0 W]E ! 0P]FECT0 & ! 0ET]NAL10 ( :I* ALL EXI/5TIAL ?+S W]E COPIES4 ,>I/OTLE'S ,GOD1 P>TICUL>LY AS IT WAS ,*RI/IANIZ$ BY ! M$IEVAL ,S*OLA/ICS1 WAS ! 0P]FECT0 ,ONE T[>D :I* ALL ?+S /ROVE1 GIV5 !IR F9ITE 0IMP]FECTION0 & 9H]5T LIMITATIONS4 ,9 ?IS WAY1 A SUPRANATURAL IDEAL DEF9$ ! 0IMP]FECTION0 ( NATURAL PH5OM5A & !REBY DYNAMIZ$ !M 9 !IR /RIV+ T[>D 0P]FECTION40 ,!RE IS AN ELEM5T ( ?IS QUASI!OLOGICAL ?9K+ 9 ,HEGEL'S NOTION ( CONTRADICTION3 ! :OLE C\RSE ( ! DIALECTIC CULM9ATES 9 ! 0,ABSOLUTE10 :I* IS 0P]FECT0 9 ITS FULLNESS1 :OL5ESS1 & UNITY4 

,DIALECTICAL NATURALISM1 BY CONTRA/1 CONCEIVES F9IT5ESS & CONTRADICTION AS DI/9CTLY NATURAL 9 ! S5SE ?AT ?+S & PH5OM5A >E 9COMPLETE & UNACTUALIZ$ 9 !IR DEVELOPM5T -- NOT 0IMP]FECT0 9 ANY IDEALI/IC OR SUPRANATURAL S5SE4 ,UNTIL !Y >E :AT !Y HAVE BE5 CON/ITUT$ TO BECOME1 !Y EXI/ 9 A DYNAMIC T5SION4 ,A DIALECTICAL NATURALI/ VIEW HAS NO?+ TO DO ) ! SUPPOSITION ?AT ?+S OR PH5OM5A FAIL TO APPROXIMATE A ,PLATONIC IDEAL OR A ,S*OLA/IC ,GOD4 ,RA!R21 !Y >E /ILL 9 ! PROCESS ( BECOM+ OR1 MORE MUNDANELY1 DEVELOP+4 ,DIALECTICAL NATURALISM ?US DOES NOT T]M9ATE 9 A ,HEGELIAN ,ABSOLUTE AT ! 5D ( A COSMIC DEVELOPM5TAL PA?1 BUT RA!R ADVANCES ! VISION ( AN EV]-9CREAS+ :OL5ESS1 FULLNESS1 & RI*NESS ( DIFF]5TIATION & SUBJECTIVITY4 

,DIALECTICAL CONTRADICTION EXI/S )9 ! /RUCTURE ( A ?+ OR PH5OM5ON BY VIRTUE ( A =MAL >RANGEM5T ?AT IS 9COMPLETE1 9ADEQUATE1 IMPLICIT1 & UNFULFILL$ 9 RELATION TO :AT IT0%\LD BE40 ,A NATURALI/IC FRAMEWORK DOES NOT LIMIT US TO EFFICI5T CAUSALITY ) A ME*ANI/IC TILT4 ,NOR NE$ WE HAVE REC\RSE TO !I/IC 0P]FECTION0 TO EXPLA9 ! ALMO/ MAGNETIC ELICIT+ ( A DEVELOPM5T4 ,DIALECTICAL CAUSALITY IS UNIQUELY ORGANIC BECAUSE IT OP]ATES )9 A DEVELOPM5T -- ! DEGREE ( =M ( A ?+ OR PH5OM5ON1 ! WAY 9 :I* ?AT =M IS ORGANIZ$1 ! T5SIONS OR 0CONTRADICTIONS0 TO :I* ITS =MAL 5SEMBLE GIVES RISE1 & ITS METABOLIC SELF-MA9T5ANCE & SELF-DEVELOPM5T4 ,P]HAPS ! MO/ SUBTLE WORD = ?IS K9D ( DEVELOPM5T IS GR[? -- GR[? NOT BY M]E ACCRETION BUT BY A TRULY IMMAN5T PROCESS ( ORGANIC SELF-=MATION 9 A GRAD$ & 9CREAS+LY DIFF]5TIAT$ DIRECTION4 

,A DI/9CTIVE CONT9UUM EM]GES FROM DIALECTICAL CAUSALITY4 ,H]E1 CAUSE & EFFECT >E NOT M]ELY COEXI/+ PH5OM5A OR 0CORRELATIONS10 TO USE A COMMON POSITIVI/ T]M2 NOR >E !Y CLE>LY DI/9CT FROM EA* O!R1 SU* ?AT A CAUSE EXT]NALLY IMPACTS UPON A ?+ OR PH5OM5ON TO PRODUCE AN EFFECT ME*ANICALLY4 ,DIALECTICAL CAUSALITY IS CUMULATIVE3 ! IMPLICIT OR 09 ITSELF0 7AN SI*71 TO USE ,HEGEL'S T]M9OLOGY1 IS NOT SIMPLY REPLAC$ OR NEGAT$ BY ITS MORE DEVELOP$ EXPLICIT OR 0= ITSELF0 7FUR SI*72 RA!R1 IT IS ABSORB$ 9TO & DEVELOP$ BEYOND ! EXPLICIT 9TO A FULL]1 MORE DIFF]5TIAT$1 & MORE ADEQUATE =M -- ! ,HEGELIAN 09 & = ITSELF0 7AN UND FUR SI*74 ,9S(> AS ! IMPLICIT IS FULLY ACTUALIZ$ BY BECOM+ :AT IT IS CON/ITUT$ TO BE1 ! PROCESS IS TRULY RATIONAL1 ?AT IS TO SAY1 IT IS FULFILL$ BY VIRTUE ( ITS  
9T]NAL LOGIC4 ,! CONT9UUM ( A DEVELOPM5T IS CUMULATIVE1 CONTA9+ ! HI/ORY ( ITS DEVELOPM5T4 

,REALITY IS NOT SIMPLY :AT WE EXP]I5CE3 !RE IS A S5SE 9 :I* ! RATIONAL HAS ITS [N REALITY4 ,?US1 !RE >E EXI/+ REALITIES ?AT >E IRRATIONAL & UNREALIZ$ REALITIES ?AT >E RATIONAL4 ,A SOCIETY ?AT FAILS TO ACTUALIZE ITS POT5TIALITIES = HUMAN HAPP9ESS & PROGRESS IS 0REAL0 5\< 9 ! S5SE ?AT IT EXI/S1 BUT IT IS LESS ?AN TRULY SOCIAL4 ,IT IS 9COMPLETE & DI/ORT$ 9S(> AS IT M]ELY P]SI/S1 & H5CE IT IS IRRATIONAL4 ,IT IS LESS ?AN :AT IT %\LD BE SOCIALLY1 JU/ AS A G5]ALLY DEFECTIVE ANIMAL IS LESS ?AN :AT IT %\LD BE BIOLOGICALLY4 ,AL?\< IT IS 0REAL0 9 AN  
EXI/5TIAL S5SE1 IT IS UNFULFILL$ & H5CE 0UNREAL0 9 T]MS ( ITS POT5TIALITIES4 

,DIALECTICAL NATURALISM ASKS :I* IS TRULY REAL -- ! 9COMPLETE1 ABORT$1 IRRATIONAL 0:AT-IS10 OR ! MO/ FULLY DEVELOP$1 RATIONAL 0:AT-%\LD-BE40 ,REASON1 CA/ 9 ! =M ( DIALECTICAL CAUSALITY AS WELL AS DIALECTICAL LOGIC1 YIELDS AN UNCONV5TIONAL UND]/&+ ( REALITY4 ,A PROCESS ?AT FOLL[S ITS IMMAN5T SELF-DEVELOPM5T TO ITS LOGICAL ACTUALITY IS MORE PROP]LY 'REAL0 ?AN A GIV5 0:AT-IS0 ?AT IS ABORT$ OR DI/ORT$ & H5CE1 9 ,HEGELIAN T]MS1 0UNTRUE0 TO ITS POSSIBILITIES4 ,REASON HAS ! OBLIGATION TO EXPLORE ! POT5TIALITIES ?AT >E LAT5T 9 ANY SOCIAL DEVELOPM5T & $UCE ITS AU!NTIC ACTUALIZATION1 ITS FULFILLM5T & 0TRU?0 9 A NEW & MORE RATIONAL SOCIAL DISP5SATION4 

,IT W\LD BE PHILOSOPHICALLY FRIVOL\S TO EMBRACE ! 0:AT-IS0 ( A ?+ OR PH5OM5ON AS CON/ITUT+ ITS 0REALITY0 )\T CONSID]+ IT 9 ! LI<T ( ! 0:AT-%\LD-BE0 ?AT W\LD LOGICALLY EM]GE FROM ITS POT5TIALITIES4 ,NOR DO WE ORD9>ILY DO SO 9 PRACTICE4 ,WE RI<TLY EVALUATE AN 9DIVIDUAL 9 T]MS ( HIS OR H] KN[N POT5TIALITIES1 & WE =M UND]/&ABLE JUDGM5TS AB\T :E!R ! 9DIVIDUAL HAS TRULY 0FULFILL$0 HIMSELF OR H]SELF4 ,9DE$1 9 PRIVACY1 9DIVIDUALS MAKE SU* SELF-EVALUATIONS REPEAT$LY1 :I* MAY HAVE IMPORTANT EFFECTS UPON !IR BEHAVIOR1 CREATIVITY1 & SELF-E/EEM4 

,! :AT-IS1 CONCEIV$ AS ! /RICTLY EXI/5TIAL1 IS A SLIPP]Y 0REALITY0 ,ACCEPT$ EMPIRICALLY )\T QUALIFICATION1 IT EXCLUDES ! PA/ BECAUSE1 /RICTLY SPEAK+1 ! PA/ NO LONG] 0IS40 ,AT ! SAME TIME1 IT YIELDS A DISCONT9UITY ) ! FUTURE ?AT -- AGA91 /RICTLY SPEAK+ -- HAS YE T TO 0EXI/40 ,:AT IS MORE1 ! :AT-IS1 CONCEIV$ 9 /RICTLY EMPIRICAL T]MS1 EXCLUDES SUBJECTIVITY -- C]TA9LY CONCEPTUAL ?\<T -- FROM ANY ROLE 9 ! WORLD BUT A SPECTATORIAL ONE1 :I* MAY OR MAY NOT BE A 0=CE0 9 BEHAVIOR4 

,9 ! LOGIC ( A /RICTLY EMPIRICAL PHILOSOPHY1 M9D SIMPLY REGI/]S OR COORD9ATES EXP]I5CE4 0,REALITY0 IS A GIV5 TEMPORAL MOM5T ?AT EXI/S AS AN EXP]I5C$ SEGM5T ( AN ASSUM$ CONT9UUM4 ,! 0REAL0 IS A FROZ5 0H]E & N[0 TO :I* WE M]ELY ADD AN ADV5TITI\S PA/ & PRESUME A FUTURE 9 ORD] TO EXP]I5CE REALITY 9TELLIGIBLY4 ,! K9D ( RADICAL EMPIRICISM ADVANC$ BY ,DAVID ,HUME REPLAC$ ! NOTION ( ,BE+ AS ,BECOM+ ) ! EXP]I5CE ( A GIV5 MOM5T ?AT R5D]S ?9K+ ( ! PA/ AS 0UNREAL0 9 MAK+ 9F]5CES AB\T ! FUTURE4 ,?IS K9D ( 0REALITY10 AS ,HUME HIMSELF FULLY S5S$1 IS IMPOSSIBLE TO LIVE ) 9 EV]YDAY LIFE2 H5CE HE WAS OBLIG$ TO DEF9E CONT9UITY1 AL?\< HE DID SO 9 T]MS ( CU/OM & HABIT1 NOT 9 T]MS ( CAUSALITY4 ,CONCEIV+ IMM$IATE EMPIRICAL REALITY AS ! TOTALITY ( ! 0REAL0 ESS5TIALLY BANI%ES H9DSI<T & =ESI<T AS LITTLE MORE ?AN M]E CONV5I5CES4 ,9DE$1 A /RICTLY EMPIRICAL APPROA* DISSOLVES ! LOGICAL TISSUE ?AT 9TEGRATES ! ORGANIC1 CUMULATIVE CONT9UITY ( ! PA/ ) ! PRES5T & ?AT ( BO? ) ! FUTURE4 

,BY CONTRA/1 9 A NATURALI/IC DIALECTIC1 BO? PA/ & FUTURE >E P>T ( A CUMULATIVE1 LOGICAL1 & OBJECTIVE CONT9UUM ?AT 9CLUDES ! PRES5T4 ,REASON IS NOT ONLY A MEANS = ANALYZ+ & 9T]PRET+ REALITY2 IT EXT5DS ! B\ND>IES ( REALITY BEYOND ! IMM$IATELY EXP]I5C$ PRES5T4 ,PA/1 PRES5T1 & FUTURE >E A CUMULATIVELY GRAD$ PROCESS ?AT ?\<T CAN TRULY 9T]PRET & R5D] MEAN+FUL4 ,WE CAN LEGITIMATELY EXPLORE SU* A PROCESS 9 T]MS ( :E!R1ITS POT5TIALITIES HAVE BE5 REALIZ$1 ABORT$1 OR W>P$4 

,9 A NATURALI/IC DIALECTIC1 ! WORD REALITY ?US ACQUIRES TWO DI/9CTLY DIFF]5T MEAN+S4 ,!RE IS ! IMM$IATELY PRES5T EMPIRICAL 0REALITY0 -- OR ,REALITAT1 TO USE ,HEGEL'S LANGUAGE -- ?AT NE$ NOT BE ! FULFILLM5T ( A POT5TIALITY1 & !RE IS ! DIALECTICAL 0ACTUALITY0 -- ,WIRKLI*KEIT -- ?AT CON/ITUTES A COMPLETE FULFILLM5T ( A RATIONAL PROCESS4 ,EV5 ?\< ,WIRKLI*KEIT APPE>S AS A PROJECTION ( ?\<T 9TO A FUTURE ?AT HAS YET TO BE EXI/5TIALLY REALIZ$1 ! POT5TIALITY FROM :I* ?AT ,WIRKLI*KEIT DEVELOPS IS AS EXI/5TIAL AS ! WORLD WE S5SE 9 DIRECT & IMM$IATE ORD9>Y EXP]I5CE4 ,= EXAMPLE1 AN EGG PAT5TLY & EMPIRICALLY EXI/S1 EV5 ?\< ! BIRD :OSE POT5TIAL IT CONTA9S HAS YET TO DEVELOP & REA* MATURITY4 ,JU/ SO1 ! GIV5 POT5TIALITY ( ANY PROCESS EXI/S & CON/ITUTES ! BASIS = A PROCESS ?AT %\LD BE REALIZ$4 ,H5CE1 ! POT5TIALITY DOES EXI/ OBJECTIVELY1 EV5 9 EMPIRICAL T]MS4 ,WIRKLI*KEIT IS :AT DIALECTICAL NATURALISM 9F] %ORN AN OBJECTIVELY GIV5 POT5TIALITY2 IT IS PRES5T1 IF ONLY IMPLICITLY1 AS AN EXI/5TIAL FACT1 & DIALECTICAL REASON CAN ANALYZE & SUBJECT IT TO PROCESSUAL 9F]5CES4 ,EV5 9 ! SEEM+LY MO/ SUBJECTIVE PROJECTIONS ( SPECULATIVE REASON1 ,WIRKLI*KEIT1 ! 0:AT-%\LD-BE10 IS AN*OR$ 9 A CONT9UUM ?AT EM]GES FROM AN OBJECTIVE POT5TIALITY1 OR 0:AT-IS04 

,DIALECTICAL NATURALISM IS ?US 9TEGRALLY W$D$ TO ! OBJECTIVE WORLD -- A WORLD 9 :I* ,BE+ IS ,BECOM+4 ,LET ME EMPHASIZE ?AT DIALECTICAL NATURALISM NOT ONLY GRASPS REALITY AS AN EXI/5TIALLY UNFOLD+ CONT9UUM1 BUT IT ALSO =MS AN OBJECTIVE FRAMEWORK = MAK+ E?ICAL JUDGM5TS4 ,! 0:AT-%\LD-BE0 BECOMES AN E?ICAL CRIT]ION = JUDG+ ! TRU? OR VALIDITY ( AN OBJECTIVE 0:AT-IS40 ,?US E?ICS IS NOT M]ELY A MATT] ( P]SONAL TA/E & VALUES2 IT IS FACTUALLY AN*OR$ 9 ! WORLD ITSELF AS AN OBJECTIVE /&>D ( SELF-REALIZATION4 ,:E!R SOCIETY IS 0GOOD0 0BAD01 MORAL OR IMMORAL1 = EXAMPLE1 CAN BE OBJECTIVELY DET]M9$ BY :E!R IT HAS FULFILL$ ITS POT5TIALITIES = RATIONALITY & MORALITY4 ,POT5TIALITIES ?AT >E !MSELVES ACTUALIZATIONS ( A DIALECTICAL CONT9UUM PRES5T ! *ALL5GE ( E?ICAL SELF-FULFILLM5T -- NOT SIMPLY ! PRIVACY 7( ! M9D BUT 9 ! REALITY ( ! PROCESSUAL WORLD4 ,H]E9 LIES ! ONLY MEAN+FUL BASIS ( A TRULY E?ICAL SOCIALISM OR AN>*ISM1 ONE ?AT IS MORE ?AN A BODY ( SUBJECTIVE 0PREF]5CES0 ?AT RE/ AN OP9ION & TA/E4 

,ONE MAY WELL QUE/ION ! VALIDITY ( DIALECTICAL REASON BY *ALL5G+ ! CONCEPT ( ,WIRKLI*KEIT1 & ITS CLAIMS TO BE MORE ADEQUATE ?AN ,REALITAT4 ,9DE$1 ,I AM (T5 ASK$3 0,H[ DO Y\ KN[ ?AT :AT Y\ CALL A DI/ORT$ 'UNTRUE' OR '9ADEQUATE' REALITY IS NOT ! VAUNT$ 'ACTUALITY' ?AT CON/ITUTES ! AU!NTIC REALIZATION ( A POT5TIALITY8 ,>E Y\ NOT SIMPLY MAK+ A PRIVATE MORAL JUDGM5T AB\T :AT IS 'UNTRUE' OR '9ADEQUATE' & D5Y+ ! IMPORTANCE ( IMM$IATE FACTS ?AT DO NOT SUPPORT Y\R P]SONAL NOTION ( ! 'TRUE' & ! 'ADEQUATE'80 

,?IS QUE/ION IS BAS$ ON ! PURELY CONV5TIONAL CONCEPTS ( VALIDITY US$ BY ANALYTICAL LOGIC4 0,IMM$IATE FACTS0 -- OR MORE COLLOQUIALLY1 0BRUTE FACTS0 -- >E NO LESS SLIPP]Y ?AN ! EMPIRICAL REALITY TO :I* CONV5TIONAL REASON CONF9ES ITSELF4 ,9 ! FIR/ PLACE1 IT IS NOT RELEVANT TO DET]M9E ! VALIDITY ( A PROCESS BY 0TE/+0 IT AGA9/ 0BRUTE FACTS0 ?AT >E !MSELVES ! EPI/EMOLOGICAL PRODUCTS ( A PHILOSOPHY BAS$ ON FIXITIES4 ,A LOGIC PREMIS$ ON ! PR9CIPLE ( ID5TITY1 ,A EQUALS ,A1 CAN H>DLY BE US$ TO TE/ ! VALIDITY ( A LOGIC PREMIS$ ON ! PR9CIPLE  
,A EQUALS ,A & NOT-,A4 ,! TWO >E SIMPLY 9COMM5SURABLE4 ,= ANALYTICAL LOGIC1 ! PREMISES ( DIALECTICAL LOGIC >E NONS5SE2 = DIALECTICAL LOGIC1 ! PREMISES ( ANALYTICAL LOGIC OSSIFY FACTICITY 9TO H>D5$1 IMMUTABLE LOGICAL 0ATOMS40 ,9 DIALECTICAL REASON1 0BRUTE FACTS0 AX DI/ORTIONS ( REALITY S9CE ,BE+ IS NOT AN AGGLOM]ATION ( FIX$ 5TITIES & PH5OM5A BUT IS ALWAYS 9 FLUX1 9 A /ATE ( ,BECOM+4 ,ONE ( ! PR9CIPAL PURPOSES ( DIALECTICAL REASON IS TO EXPLA9 ! NATURE ( ,BECOM+1 NOT SIMPLY TO EXPLORE A FIX$ ,BE+4 

,ACCORD+LY1 ! VALIDITY ( A CONCEPT D]IV$ FROM A DEVELOPM5TAL PROCESS RA!R ?AN FROM 0BRUTE FACTS0 MU/ BE 0TE/$ 0 ONLY BY.-EXAM9+ ?AT DEVELOPM5TAL PROCESS1 P>TICUL>LY ! /RUCTURE ( ! POT5TIALITY FROM :I* ! PROCESS EM]GES & ! LOGIC ?AT CAN BE 9F]R$ FROM ITS POT5TIALITIES4 ,! VALIDITY ( CONCLUSIONS ?AT >E D]IV$ FROM CONV5TIONAL REASON & EXP]I5CE CAN C]TA9LY BE TE/$ BY FIX$ 0BRUTE FACTS02 H5CE ! GREAT SUCCESS (1 SAY1 /RUCTURAL 5G9E]+4 ,BUT TO TRY TO TE/ ! VALIDITY ( ACTUALITIES ?AT D]IVE FROM A DIALECTICAL EXPLORATION ( POT5TIALITIES & !IR 9T]NAL LOGIC BY US+ 0BRUTE FACTS0 W\LD BE LIKE TRY+ TO ANALYZE ! EM]G5CE ( A FETUS 9 ! SAME WAY ?AT ONE ANALYZES ! DESIGN & CON/RUCTION ( A BRIDGE4 ,REAL DEVELOPM5TAL PROCESSES MU/ BE TE/$ BY A LOGIC ( PROCESSES1 NOT BY A LOGIC ( 0BRUTE FACTS0 ?AT IS ANALYTICAL1 BAS$ ON A DATUM OR FIX$ PH5OM5ON4 

,I HAVE EMPHASIZ$ ! WORD NATURALISM 9 MY ACC\NT ( DIALECTICAL REASON NOT ONLY TO DI/+UI% DIALECTIC FROM ITS IDEALI/IC & MAT]IALI/IC 9T]PRETATIONS BUT1 MORE SIGNIFICANTLY1 TO %[ H[ IT 5RI*ES \R 9T]PRETATION ( NATURE & HUMANITY'S PLACE 9 ! NATURAL WORLD4 ,TO ATTA9 !SE 5DS1 ,I FEEL OBLIG$ TO HI<LI<T ! OV]ALL COH]5CE ( DIALECTICAL REASON AS AN ABID+ VIEW ( A DEVELOPM5TAL REALITY 9 ITS MANY GRADATIONS AS A CONT9UUM4 

,IF DIALECTICAL NATURALISM IS TO EXPLA9 ?+S OR PH5OM5A PROP]LY1 ITS ONTOLOGY & PREMISES MU/ BE UND]/OOD AS MORE ?AN M]E MOTION & 9T]CONNECTION4 ,A CONT9UUM IS A MORE RELEVANT PREMISE = DIALECTICAL REASON ?AN EI!R MOTION OR ! 9T]DEP5D5CE ( PH5OM5A4 ,IT WAS ONE ( ! FAIL+S ( 0DIALECTICAL MAT]IALISM0 ?AT IT PREMIS$ DIALECTIC ON ! N9ETE5? C5TURY'S PHYSICS ( MATT] & MOTION1 FROM :I* DEVELOPM5T SOMEH[ MANAG$ TO EM]GE4 ,IT W\LD BE JU/ AS LIMIT$ TO REPLACE ! 5TELE*IAL PROCESSES 9VOLV$ 9 DIFF]5TIATION & ! REALIZATION ( POT5TIALITY ) 09T]CONNECT$NESS40 ,A DIALECTIC BAS$ M]ELY ON A NOTION ( 09T]CONNECT$NESS0 W\LD T5D TO BE MORE DESCRIPTIVE ?AN $UCTIVE2 IT W\LD NOT CLE>LY EXPLA9 H[ 9T]DEP5D5CIES LEAD TO A GRAD$ 5TELE*IAL DEVELOPM5T --?AT IS1 TO SELF-=MATION ?R\< ! SELF-REALIZATION ( POT5TIALITY4 

,TO ASS]T ?AT BISON & WOLVES 0DEP5D0 UPON EA* O!R 79 A SEEM+ 0UNION ( OPPOSITES071 OR ?AT 0?9K+ LIKE A ROCK0 A VISION BORR[$ FROM MY/ICAL ECOLOGY -- WILL BR+ US 9TO GREAT] 0CONNECT$NESS0 ) ! 9ORGANIC M9]AL WORLD1 EXPLA9S LITTLE4 ,BUT IT EXPLA9S A GREAT DEAL TO /UDY H[ BISON & WOLVES W]E DIFF]5TIAT$ 9 ! C\RSE ( EVOLUTION FROM A COMMON MAMMALIAN ANCE/OR1 OR H[ ! ORGANIC WORLD EM]G$ FROM ! 9ORGANIC4 ,9 ! LATT] CASES1 WE CAN LE>N SOME?+ AB\T H[ DEVELOPM5T OCCURS1 H[ DIFF]5TIATION EM]GES FROM GIV5 POT5TIALITIES1 & :AT DIRECTION !SE DEVELOPM5TS FOLL[4 ,WE ALSO LE>N ?AT A DIALECTICAL DEVELOPM5T IS CUMULATIVE1 NAMELY ?AT EA* LEVEL ( DIFF]5TIATION RE/S ON PREVI\S ONES4 ,SOME DEVELOPM5TS 5T] DIRECTLY 9TO A GIV5 LEVEL1 O!RS >E PROXIMATE TO IT1 & /ILL O!RS >E FAIRLY REMOTE4 ,! OLD NEV] COMPLETELY DISAPPE>S BUT IS REWORK$ 9TO SOME?+ NEW4 ,?US1 AS ! FOSSIL RECORD TELLS US1 MAMMALIAN HAIR & AVIAN FEA!RS >E LAT] DIFF]5TIATIONS ( REPTILIAN SCALES1 :ILE ! JAWS ( ALL ANIMALS >E A LAT] DIFF]5TIATION ( GILLS4 

,! NONDIALECTICAL ?9K+ ?AT IS RIFE 9 ! ECOLOGY MOVEM5T COMMONLY PRODUCES SU* QUE/IONS AS 0,:AT IF R$WOOD TREES HAVE CONSCI\SNESS ?AT COMP>ES ) \R [N80 ,IT IS FATU\S TO *ALL5GE DIALECTICAL REASON ) PROMISCU\S 0:AT-IFS0 ?AT HAVE NO ROOTS 9 A DIALECTICAL CONT9UUM4 ,EV]Y 9TELLIGIBLE 0IF0 MU/ ITSELF BE A POT5TIALITY ?AT CAN BE ACC\NT$ = AS ! PRODUCT ( A DEVELOPM5T4 ,A HYPO!TICAL 0IF0 ?AT FLOATS 9 ISOLATION1 LACK+ ROOTS 9 A DEVELOPM5TAL CONT9UUM1 IS NONS5SICAL4 ,AS ,D5IS ,DID]OT'S DELI<TFUL *>ACT] ,JACQUES1 9 ! PIC>ESQUE DIALOGUE ,JACQUES LE ,FATALI/E1 EXCLAIM$ :5 HIS MA/] PEPP]$ HIM ) R&OM IF QUE/IONS3 0,IF1 IF1 IF 444 IF ! SEA BOIL$1 !RE W\LD BE A LOT ( COOK$ FI%60 

,! CONT9UUM ?AT DIALECTICAL REASON 9VE/IGATES IS A HI<LY GRAD$1 RI*LY 5TELE*IAL1 LOGICALLY $UCTIVE1 & SELF-DIRECTIVE PROCESS ( UNFOLD+ T[>D EV]-GREAT] DIFF]5TIATION1 :OL5ESS1 & ADEQUACY1 9S(> AS EA* POT5TIALITY IS FULLY ACTUALIZ$ GIV5 A SPECIFIC RANGE ( DEVELOPM5T ,EXT]NAL FACTORS1 9T]NAL RE>RANGEM5TS1 ACCID5TS1 EV5 GROSS IRRATIONALITIES MAY DI/ORT OR PRECLUDE A POT5TIAL DEVELOPM5T4 ,BUT 9S(> AS ORD] DOES EXI/ 9 REALITY & IS NOT SIMPLY IMPOS$ UPON IT BY M9D1 REALITY HAS A RATIONAL DIM5SION4 ,MORE COLLOQUIALLY1 !RE IS A 0LOGIC0 9 ! DEVELOPM5T ( PH5OM5A1 A  
G5]AL DIRECTIV5ESS ?AT ACC\NTS = ! FACT ?AT ! 9ORGANIC DID BECOME ORGANIC1 AS A RESULT ( ITS IMPLICIT CAPACITY = ORGANICITY2 & = ! FACT ?AT ! ORGANIC DID BECOME MORE DIFF]5TIAT$ & METABOLICALLY SELF-MA9TA9+ & SELF-AW>E1 AS A RESULT ( POT5TIALITIES ?AT MADE = HI<LY DEVELOP$ HORMONAL & N]V\S SY/EMS4 

,/EPH5 ,JAY ,G\LD MAY LUXURIATE 9 ! R&OMNESS -- ACTUALLY1 ! FECUNDITY -- ( NATURE1 & PO//RUCTURALI/S MAY TRY TO DISSOLVE BO? NATURAL & SOCIAL EVOLUTION 9TO AN AGGREGATION ( UNRELAT$ EV5TS1 BUT DIRECTIV5ESS ( ORGANIC EVOLUTION UNREMITT+LY SURFACES 9 EV5 !SE RA!R *AOTIC COLLECTIONS ( 0BRUTE FACTS40 ,LIKE IT OR NOT1 HUMAN BE+S1 PRIMATES1 MAMMALS1 V]TEBRATES1 & SO =? BACK TO ! MO/ ELEM5T>Y PROTOZOANS >E A SEQU5TIAL PRES5CE 9 ! FOSSIL RECORD ITSELF1 EA* EM]G+ \T ( ITS PREC$+1 IF EXT9CT1 LIFE-=MS4 ,AS ,G\LD ASS]TS1 ! ,BURGESS ,%ALE ( ,BRITI% ,COLUMBIA ATTE/S TO A L>GE V>IETY ( FOSSILS ?AT CANNOT BE CLASSIFI$ 9TO A UNIL9E> 0*A9 ( BE+ 0 ,BUT F> FROM *ALL5G+ ! EXI/5CE ( DIRECTIONALITY 9 EVOLUTION T[>D GREAT] SUBJECTIVITY1 ! ,BURGESS ,%ALE PROVIDES EXTRAORD9>Y EVID5CE ( ! FECUNDITY ( NATURE4 ,NATURE'S FECUNDITY RE/S ON ! EXI/5CE ( *ANCE1 9DE$ V>IETY1 AS A PRECONDITION = COMPLEXITY 9 ORGANISMS & ECOSY/EMS 7AS MY ESSAY 0,FRE$OM & ,NECESSITY 9 ,NATURE0 H]E9 >GUES7 &1 BY VIRTUE ( ?AT FECUNDITY1 = ! EM]G5CE ( HUMANITY FROM POT5TIALITIES ?AT 9VOLVE 9CREAS+ SUBJECTIVITY4 

,\R ONTOLOGICAL & $UCTIVE PREMISE = DIALECTICAL NATURALISM1 H[EV]1 REMA9S ! GRAD$ CONT9UUM ,I HAVE ALREADY DESCRIB$ -- & ! ,BURGESS ,%ALE NOT)/&+1 HUMAN BE+S >E NOT ONLY PAT5TLY H]E1 BUT \R EVOLUTION CAN BE  
EXPLA9$4 ,DIALECTICAL REASON CUTS ACROSS ! GRA9 ( CONV5TIONAL WAYS ( ?9K+ AB\T ! NATURAL WORLD & MY/ICAL 9T]PRETATIONS ( IT4 ,NATURE IS NOT SIMPLY ! L&SCAPE WE SEE FROM BEH9D A PICTURE W9D[1 9 A MOM5T DISCONNECT$ FROM ?OSE ?AT PREC$$ & WILL FOLL[ IT2 NOR IS IT A VI/A FROM A L(TY M\NTA9 PEAK 7AS ,I PO9T \T 9 MY ESSAY 0,?9K+ ,ECOLOGICALLY10 ALSO H]E974 ,NATURE IS C]TA9LY ALL ( !SE ?+S -- BUT IT IS SIGNIFICANTLY MORE4 ,BIOLOGICAL NATURE IS ABOVE ALL ! CUMULATIVE EVOLUTION ( EV]-DIFF]5TIAT+ & 9CREAS+LY COMPLEX LIFE-=MS ) A VIBRANT & 9T]ACTIVE 9ORGANIC WORLD4 ,FOLL[+ 9 A TRADITION ?AT GOES BACK AT LEA/ TO ,CIC]O1 WE CAN CALL ?IS RELATIVELY UNCONSCI\S NATURAL DEVELOPM5T 0FIR/-NATURE10 ,IT IS FIR/ NATURE 9 ! PRIMAL S5SE ( A FOSSIL RECORD ?AT CLE>LY LEADS TO MAMMALIAN1 PRIMATE1 & HUMAN LIFE -- NOT TO M5TION ITS EXTRAORD9>Y FECUNDITY ( O!R LIFE-=MS -- & IT IS FIR/ NATURE ?AT EXHIBITS A HI< DEGREE ( ORD]LY CONT9UITY 9 ! ACTUALIZATION ( POT5TIALITIES ?AT MADE = MORE COMPLEX & SELF-AW>E OR SUBJECTIVE LIFE-=MS4 ,9S(> AS ?IS CONT9UITY IS 9TELLIGIBLE1 IT HAS MEAN+ & RATIONALITY 9 T]MS ( ITS RESULTS3 ! ELABORATION ( LIFE-=MS ?AT CAN CONCEPTUALIZE1 UND]/&1 & COMMUNICATE ) EA* O!R 9 9CREAS+LY SYMBOLIC T]MS4 

,9 !IR MO/ DIFF]5TIAT$ & FULLY DEVELOP$ =MS1 !SE SELF-REFLEXIVE & COMMUNICATIVE CAPACITIES >E CONCEPTUAL ?\<T & LANGUAGE4 ,! HUMAN SPECIES HAS !SE CAPACITIES TO AN EXT5T ?AT IS UNPREC$5T$ 9 ANY O!R EXI/+ LIFE-=M4 ,HUMANITY'S AW>5ESS ( ITSELF1 ITS ABILITY TO G5]ALIZE ?IS AW>5ESS TO ! LEVEL ( A HI<LY SY/EMATIC UND]/&+ ( ITS 5VIRONM5T 9 ! =M ( PHILOSOPHY1 SCI5CE1 E?ICS1 & ES!TICS1 & F9ALLY1 ITS CAPACITY TO ALT] ITSELF & ITS 5VIRONM5T SY/EMATICALLY BY MEANS ( KN[L$GE & TE*NOLOGY PLACES IT BEYOND ! REALM ( ! SUBJECTIVITY ?AT EXI/S 9 FIR/ NATURE4 

,BY S+L+ \T HUMANITY AS A UNIQUE LIFE-=M ?AT CAN CONSCI\SLY *ANGE ! 5TIRE REALM ( FIR/ NATURE1 ,I DO NOT CLAIM ?AT FIR/ NATURE WAS 0MADE0 TO BE 0EXPLOIT$0 BY HUMANITY1 AS ?OSE ECOLOGI/S CRITICAL ( 0AN?ROPOC5TRISM0 SOMETIMES *>GE1 ! IDEA ( A MADE WORLD HAS ITS ORIG9 9 !OLOGY1 NOTABLY 9 ! BELIEF ?AT A SUP]NATURAL BE+ CREAT$ ! NATURAL WORLD & ?AT EVOLUTION IS 9FUS$ ) A !I/IC PR9CIPLE1 BO? 9 ! S]VICE ( HUMAN NE$S4 ,BY ! SAME TOK51 HUMANS CANNOT 0EXPLOIT0 NATURE1 [+ TO A 0COMM&+0 PLACE 9 A SUPPOS$ 0HI]>*Y0 ( NATURE4 ,WORDS LIKE COMM&+1 EXPLOITATION1 &  
HI]>*Y >E ACTUALLY SOCIAL T]MS ?AT DESCRIBE H[ PEOPLE RELATE TO EA* O!R2 APPLI$ TO ! NATURAL WORLD1 !Y >E M]ELY AN?ROPOMORPHIC4 

,F> MORE RELEVANT FROM ! /&PO9T ( DIALECTICAL NATURALISM IS ! FACT ?AT HUMANITY'S VA/ CAPACITY TO ALT] FIR/ NATURE IS ITSELF A PRODUCT ( NATURAL EVOLUTION -- NOT ( A DEITY OR ! EMBODIM5T ( A COSMIC ,SPIRIT4 ,FROM AN EVOLUTION>Y VIEW-PO9T1 HUMANITY HAS BE5 CON/ITUT$ TO 9T]V5E ACTIVELY1 CONSCI\SLY1 & PURPOSIVELY 9TO FIR/ NATURE ) UNP>ALLEL$ EFFECTIV5ESS & TO ALT] IT ON A PLANET>Y SCALE4 ,TO D5IGRATE ?IS CAPACITY IS TO D5Y ! ?RU/ ( NATURAL EVOLUTION ITSELF T[>D ORGANIC COMPLEXITY & SUBJECTIVITY -- ! POT5TIALITY ( FIR/ NATURE TO ACTUALIZE ITSELF 9 SELF-CONSCI\S 9TELLECTUALITY4 ,ONE MAY *OOSE TO >GUE ?AT ?IS ?RU/ WAS PR$ET]M9$ ) 9EXORABLE C]TA9TY AS A RESULT ( A DEITY1 OR ONE MAY CONT5D ?AT IT WAS /RICTLY =TUIT\S1 OR ONE MAY CLAIM -- AS ,I W\LD -- ?AT !RE IS A NATURAL T5D5CY T[>D GREAT] COMPLEXITY & SUBJECTIVITY 9 FIR/ NATURE >IS+ FROM ! V]Y 9T]ACTIVITY ( MATT]1 9DE$ A NISUS T[>D SELF-CONSCI\SNESS1 JU/ :AT IS DECISIVE H]E IS ! COMPELL+ FACT ?AT HUMANITY'S NATURAL CAPACITY TO CONSCI\SLY 9T]V5E 9TO & ACT UPON FIR/ NATURE HAS GIV5 RISE TO A 0SECOND NATURE10 A CULTURAL1 SOCIAL1 & POLITICAL 0NATURE0 ?AT TODAY HAS ALL BUT ABSORB$ FIR/ NATURE4 

,!RE IS NO P>T ( ! WORLD ?AT HAS NOT BE5 PR(\NDLY AFFECT$ BY HUMAN ACTIVITY -- NEI!R ! REMOTE FA/NESSES ( ,ANT>CTICA NOR ! CANYONS ( ! OCEAN'S DEP?S4 ,EV5 WILD]NESS >EAS REQUIRE PROTECTION FROM HUMAN 9T]V5TION2 MU* ?AT IS DESIGNAT$ AS WILD]NESS TODAY HAS ALREADY BE5 PR(\NDLY AFFECT$ BY HUMAN ACTIVITY4 ,9DE$1 WILD]NESS CAN BE SAID TO EXI/ PRIM>ILY AS A RESULT ( A HUMAN DECISION TO PRES]VE IT4 ,NE>LY ALL ! NONHUMAN LIFE-=MS ?AT EXI/ TODAY >E1 LIKE IT OR NOT1 TO SOME DEGREE 9 HUMAN CU/ODY1 & :E!R !Y >E PRES]V$ 9 !IR WILD LIFEWAYS DEP5DS L>GELY ON HUMAN ATTITUDES & BEHAVIOR4 

,?AT SECOND NATURE IS ! \TCOME ( EVOLUTION 9 FIR/ NATURE & CAN !REBY BE DESIGNAT$ AS NATURAL DOES NOT MEAN ?AT SECOND NATURE IS NECESS>ILY CREATIVE OR EV5 FULLY CONSCI\S ( ITSELF 9 ANY EVOLUTION>Y S5SE 2 ,SECOND NATURE IS SYNONYM\S ) SOCIETY & HUMAN 9T]NAL NATURE1 BO? ( :I* >E UND]GO+ EVOLUTION = BETT] OR WORSE4 ,AL?\< SOCIAL EVOLUTION IS GR\ND$ 91 9DE$ PHASES \T (1 ORGANIC EVOLUTION1 IT IS ALSO PR(\NDLY DIFF]5T FROM ORGANIC EVOLUTION4 ,CONSCI\SNESS1 WILL1 ALT]ABLE 9/ITUTIONS1 & ! OP]ATION ( ECONOMIC =CES & TE*NICS MAY BE DEPLOY$ TO 5HANCE ! ORGANIC WORLD OR C>RY IT TO ! PO9T ( DE/RUCTION4 ,SECOND NATURE AS IT EXI/S TODAY IS M>K$ BY MON/R\S ATTRIBUTES1 NOTABLY HI]>*Y1 CLASS1 ! /ATE1 PRIVATE PROP]TY1 & A COMPETITIVE M>KET ECONOMY ?AT OBLIGES ECONOMIC RIVALS TO GR[ AT ! EXP5SE ( EA* O!R OR P]I%4 ,?IS E?ICAL JUDGM5T1 ,I MAY NOTE1 HAS MEAN+ ONLY IF WE ASSUME ?AT !RE IS POT5TIALITY & SELF-DIRECTIV5ESS 9 ORGANIC EVOLUTION T[>D GREAT] SUBJECTIVITY1 CONSCI\SNESS1 SELF-REFLEXIVITY2 BY 9F]5CE1 IT IS ! RESPONSIBILITY ( ! MO/ CONSCI\S ( LIFE-=MS -- HUMANITY--TO BE ! 0VOICE0 ( A MUTE NATURE & TO ACT TO 9TELLIG5TLY FO/] ORGANIC EVOLUTION8 

,IF ?IS T5D5CY OR NISUS 9 ORGANIC EVOLUTION IS D5I$1 !RE IS NO REASON :Y ! HUMAN SPECIES1 LIKE ANY O!R SPECIES1 %\LD NOT UTILIZE ITS CAPACITIES TO S]VE ITS [N NE$S OR ATTA9 ITS [N 0SELF-REALIZATION10 TO USE ! LANGUAGE ( MY/ICAL ECOLOGY1 AT ! EXP5SE ( O!R LIFE-=MS ?AT IMP$E ITS 9T]E/S & DESIRES4 ,TO D5\NCE HUMANITY = 0EXPLOIT+0 ORGANIC NATURE1 0DEGRAD+0 IT1 0ABUS+0 IT1 & BEHAV+ 0AN?ROPOC5TRICALLY0 IS SIMPLY AN OBLIQUE WAY ( ACKN[L$G+ ?AT SECOND NATURE IS ! BE>] ( MORAL RESPONSIBILITIES ?AT DO NOT EXI/ 9 ! REALM ( FIR/ NATURE4 ,IT IS TO ACKN[L$GE ?AT IF ALL LIFE-=MS HAVE AN 09TR9SIC WOR?0 ?AT %\LD BE RESPECT$1 !Y HAVE IT ONLY BECAUSE HUMAN 9TELLECTUAL1 MORAL1 & ES!TIC ABILITIES HAVE ATTRIBUT$ IT TO !M -- ABILITIES ?AT NO O!R LIFE-=M POSSESSES4 ,ONLY HUMAN BE+S CAN EV5 =MULATE ! CONCEPT ( 09TR9SIC WOR?0 & 5D[ IT ) E?ICAL RESPONSIBILITY4 ,! 09TR9SIC WOR?0 ( HUMAN BE+S IS ?US PAT5TLY EXCEPTIONAL1 9DE$ EXTRAORD9>Y4 

,IT IS ESS5TIAL TO EMPHASIZE ?AT SECOND NATURE IS1 9 FACT1 A V]Y UNF9I%$1 9DE$ 9ADEQUATE1 DEVELOPM5T ( NATURE AS A :OLE4 ,HEGEL VIEW$ HUMAN HI/ORY AS A SLAU<T]B5*4 ,HI]>*Y1 CLASS1 ! /ATE1 & ! LIKE >E EVID5CE -- &1 BY NO MEANS1 PURELY ACCID5TAL EVID5CE -- ( ! UNFULFILL$ POT5TIALITIES ( NATURE TO ACTUALIZE ITSELF AS A NATURE ?AT IS SELF-CONSCI\SLY CREATIVE4  
,HUMANITY AS IT N[ EXI/S IS NOT NATURE R5D]$ SELF-CONSCI\S4 ,! FUTURE ( ! BIOSPH]E DEP5DS OV]:ELM+LY ON :E!R SECOND NATURE CAN BE TRANSC5D$ 9 A NEW SY/EM ( SOCIAL & ORGANIC CONCILIATION1 ONE ?AT ,I W\LD CALL 0FREE NATURE0 -- A NATURE ?AT W\LD DIM9I% ! PA9 & SUFF]+ ?AT EXI/ 9 BO? FIR/ & SECOND NATURE4 ,FREE NATURE1 9 EFFECT W\LD BE A CONSCI\S & E?ICAL NATURE1 AN ECOLOGICAL SOCIETY ?AT HAVE EXPLOR$ 9 DETAIL 9 MY BOOK ,T[>D AN ,ECOLOGICAL ,SOCIETY & 9 ! CLOS+ PORTIONS ( ,! ,ECOLOGY ( ,FRE$OM & ,REMAK+ ,SOCIETY4 

,! LA/ QU>T] ( ! TW5TIE? C5TURY HAS WITNESS$ AN APPALL+ REGRESSION ( RATIONALITY 9TO 9TUITIONISM1 ( NATURALISM 9TO SUP]NATURALISM1 ( REALISM 9TO MY/ICISM1 ( HUMANISM 9TO P>O*IALISM1 & ( SOCIAL !ORY 9TO PSY*OLOGY4 ,METAPHORS REPLACE 9TELLIGIBLE CONCEPTS & SELF-9T]E/ REPLACES A HUMANI/IC IDEALISM4 ,9 9CREAS+ NUMB]S PEOPLE >E MORE CONC]N$ ) F9D+ ! MOTIVES ?AT PRESUMABLY UND]LIE EXPRESS$ VIEWS ?AN ) ! RATIONAL CONT5T ( ! VIEWS !MSELVES4 ,>GUM5TATION1 SO NECESS>Y = ! CL>IFICATION ( IDEAS1 HAS GIV5 WAY TO 0M$IATION0 NOTABLY ! R$UCTION ( AU!NTIC 9TELLECTUAL DIFF]5CES & CLA%+ SOCIAL 9T]E/S TO ! M9IMAL1 (T5 TRITE PO9TS ?AT ALL P>TIES SUPPOS$LY HAVE 9 COMMON4 ,ACCORD+LY1 REAL DIFF]5CES >E PAP]$ OV] ) ! L[E/ LEVEL ( DIALOGUE RA!R ?AN ELEVAT$ TO A CREATIVE SYN!SIS OR A CLE>1 OP5 DIV]G5CE4 

,TO FRIVOL\SLY SPEAK ( 0BIOC5TRISM10 ( 09TR9SIC WOR?10 & EV5 METAPHORICALLY1 ( A 0BIOC5TRIC DEMOCRACY0 7TO USE ! DEPLORABLE V]BIAGE ( MY/ICAL ECOLOGY71 AS ?\<1 HUMAN BE+S W]E EQUATABLE 9 T]MS ( !IR 0WOR?0 TO1 SAY1 MOSQUITOES -- & !N ASK HUMAN BE+S TO BE> A MORAL RESPONSIBILITY TO ! WORLD ( LIFE -- IS TO DEGRADE ! 5TIRE PROJECT ( A MEAN+FUL ECOLOGICAL E?ICS4 ,9 ?IS BOOK ,I CONT5D ?AT NATURE CAN 9DE$ ACQUIRE E?ICAL MEAN+ -- AN OBJECTIVELY GR\ND$ E?ICAL MEAN+4 ,RA!R ?AN AN AMORPH\S BODY ( P]SONALIZ$1 (T5 >BITR>Y VALUES1 9VOLVES AN EXP&$ VIEW ( REALITY1A DIALECTICAL VIEW ( NATURAL EVOLUTION1 & A DI/9CTIVE -- ALLBEIT BY NO MEANS HI]>*ICAL -- PLACE = HUMANITY & SOCIETY 9 NATURAL EVOLUTION4 ,! SOCIAL CAN NO LONG] BE SEP>AT$ FROM ! ECOLOGICAL1 ANY MORE ?AN HUMANITY CAN BE SEP>AT$ FROM NATURE4 ,MY/ICAL ECOLOGI/S :O DUALIZE ! NATURAL & ! SOCIAL BY CONTRA/+ 0BIOC5TRISM0 ) 0AN?ROPOC5TRISM0 HAVE 9CREAS+LY DIM9I%$ ! IMPORTANCE ( SOCIAL !ORY 9 %AP+ ECOLOGICAL ?9K+4 ,POLITICAL ACTION & $UCATION HAVE GIV5 WAY TO VALUES ( P]SONAL R$EMPTION1 RITUALI/IC BEHAVIOR1 ! D5IGRATION ( HUMAN WILL1 & ! VIRTUES ( HUMAN IRRATIONALITY4 ,AT A TIME :5 ! HUMAN EGO1 IF NOT P]SONALITY ITSELF1 IS ?REAT5$ BY HOMOG5IZATION & AU?ORIT>IAN MANIPULATION1 MY/ICAL ECOLOGY HAS ADVANC$ A MESSAGE ( SELF-EFFACEM5T1 PASSIVITY1 & OB$I5CE TO ! 0LAWS ( NATURE10 :I* >E HELD TO BE SUPREME OV] ! CLAIMS ( HUMAN ACTIVITY & PRAXIS4 ,A PHILOSOPHY MU/ BE DEVELOP$ ?AT BREAKS ) ?IS DEAD5+ AV]SION TO REASON1 ACTION1 & SOCIAL CONC]N4 

,I HAVE CALL$ ?IS BOOK ,! ,PHILOSOPHY ( ,SOCIAL ,ECOLOGY BECAUSE ,I BELIEVE ?AT A DIALECTICAL NATURALISM =MS ! UND]P9N+ ( SOCIAL ECOLOGY'S MO/ FUNDAM5TAL MESSAGE3 ?AT \R BASIC ECOLOGICAL PROBLEMS /EM FROM SOCIAL PROBLEMS4 ,IT IS DEV\TLY TO BE HOP$ ?AT ! READ] WILL USE ?IS BOOK AS A MEANS ( 5T]+ 9TO MY WORKS ON SOCIAL ECOLOGY EQUIPP$-) AN ORGANIC WAY ( ?9K+ \T ! PROBLEMS !Y RAISE & ! SOLUTIONS !Y (F]4 ,9 FACT1 0,?9K+ ,ECOLOGICALLY0 =MS A DIRECT TRANSITION FROM ! PHILOSOPHICAL & E?ICAL TO ! SOCIAL & VISION>Y4 ,DECADES ( REFLECTION ON ECOLOGICAL ISSUES & IDEAS HAVE TAU<T ME ?AT PHILOSOPHY1 P>TICUL>LY A DIALECTICAL NATURALISM1 DOES NOT 9HIBIT \R UND]/&+ ( SOCIAL !ORY & ECOLOGICAL PROBLEMS4 ,TO ! CONTR>Y1 IT PROVIDES US ) ! RATIONAL MEANS = 9TEGRAT+ !M 9TO A COH]5T :OLE & E/ABLI%ES A FRAMEWORK = EXT5D+ ?IS :OLE 9 MORE FECUND & 9NOVATIVE DIRECTIONS4  
  

-- ,M>* #c#a1#a#i#i  

O ,*APT] #a 3 ,T[>D A ,PHILOSOPHY ( ,NATURE3 ,! ,BASES = AN ,ECOLOGICAL ,E?ICS 
,T[>D A ,PHILOSOPHY ( ,NATURE3  

 ,! ,BASES = AN ,ECOLOGICAL ,E?ICS .<#f.> 

  

,FEW PHILOSOPHICAL >EAS HAVE GA9$ ! SOCIAL RELEVANCE 9 REC5T YE>S ?AT NATURE PHILOSOPHY1 ) ALL ITS E?ICAL IMPLICATIONS1 HAS ACQUIR$4 ,A CONSID]ABLE SEGM5T ( ! LIT]ATE PUBLIC IS N[ DEEPLY OCCUPI$ ) SEEK+ A PHILOSOPHICAL 9T]PRETATION ( NATURE AS A GR\ND+ = HUMAN CONDUCT & SOCIAL POLICY4 ,! LIT]ATURE ON ! SUBJECT HAS REA*$ TRULY IMPRESSIVE PROPORTIONS & HAS COLLECT$ A SIZABLE PUBLIC READ]%IP4 ,9 FACT1 IT IS FAIR TO SAY ?AT ?IS 9T]E/ 9 NATURE PHILOSOPHY IS COMP>ABLE TO ?AT :I* ,D>W9IAN EVOLUTION>Y !ORY G5]AT$ A C5TURY AGO -- & IT IS ALMO/ EQUALLY DISPUTATI\S1 ) EQUALLY IMPORTANT SOCIAL IMPLICATIONS4 

,BUT ! CURR5T 9T]E/ 9 SOCIETY'S RELATION%IP TO NATURE DIFF]S BASICALLY FROM ! CONT9U+ DISPUTE BETWE5 CREATIONISM & ! !ORY ( EVOLUTION4 ,IT EM]GES FROM A DEEP PUBLIC CONC]N OV] ! ECOLOGICAL DISLOCATIONS ?AT UNIQUELY M>K \R ]A4 ,9ITIALLY1 9 ! E>LY & MID-SEV5TIES1 ?IS CONC]N HAD A L>GELY TE*NOCRATIC & LEGALI/IC FOCUS & C5T]$ ON PROBLEMS ( POLLUTION1 RES\RCE DEPLETION1 DEMOGRAPHY1 URBAN SPRAWL1 NUCLE> P[] PLANTS1 ! 9CREAS+ 9CID5CE ( CANC] -- 9 %ORT1 ! PROBLEMS ( CONV5TIONAL 5VIRONM5TALISM4.<#g.> ,5VIRONM5TALI/S SAW !SE PROBLEMS 9 /RICTLY PRACTICAL T]MS & CONSID]$ !M RESOLVABLE BY LEGISLATIVE ACTION1 PUBLIC $UCATION1 & P]SONAL EXAMPLE4 

,! PHILOSOPHICAL LIT]ATURE ?AT HAS EM]G$ 9 REC5T YE>S /EMS FROM A SIGNIFICANT POPUL> DISSATISFACTION ) /RICTLY ISSUE-ORI5T$ APPROA*ES TO ! CURR5T 5VIRONM5TAL CRISIS & REFLECTS ! NE$ = A NEW !ORETICAL TURN4 ,IT ADDRESSES ITSELF TO A BASICALLY NEW CONC]N3 TO DEVELOP AN ECOLOGICALLY CREATIVE S5SIBILITY T[>D ! 5VIRONM5T1 ONE ?AT CAN S]VE 9 ! HI<E/ E?ICAL S5SE AS A GUIDE = HUMAN CONDUCT & PROVIDE AN AW>5ESS ( HUMANITY'S 0PLACE 9 NATURE0.<#h.> ,!SE PHILOSOPHICAL WORKS DO NOT DEAL ) NATURE M]ELY AS AN 5VIRONM5TAL PROBLEMATIC2 RA!R1 !Y ADVANCE A VISION ( ! NATURAL WORLD & RAISE IT TO ! LEVEL ( AN 9SPIRIT$ METAPHYSICAL PR9CIPLE -- )\T D5Y+ ! SIGNIFICANCE ( ! 5VIRONM5TAL ACTIVISM !Y SEEK TO TRANSC5D4 ,IF ! (T5 N>R[ ACTIVISM ( ! E>LY & MID-SEV5TIES CAN BE CALL$ ! POLITICS ( 5VIRONM5TALISM1 ! NATURE PHILOSOPHY 7:I* IS 9 NO WAY TO BE CONFUS$ ) ! PHILOSOPHY ( SCI5CE7 ?AT IS SURFAC+ SO PROM95TLY TODAY CAN BE CALL$ ITS E?ICS1 & TO SOME DEGREE ITS SOCIAL CONSCI5CE4 ,TODAY'S NATURE PHILOSOPHIES ?AT TRY TO BR+ HUMANITY & NATURE 9TO E?ICAL COMMONALITY >E MEANT TO CORRECT IMBALANCES 9 A DISEQUILIBRAT$ COSMOS OR 9 AN IRRATIONAL SOCIETY4 

,*>ACT]I/ICALLY1 ! ACADEMY LAGS BEH9D 9 ?IS 9TELLECTUALIZATION ( ECOLOGICAL PROBLEMS4 ,?IS PROBLEM IS S]I\S BECAUSE ! ,WE/]N PHILOSOPHICAL TRADITION C\LD GREATLY 5RI* ! PRES5T NATURE-PHILOSOPHICAL TURN2 YET ! ACADEMY HAS R5D]$ IT NE$LESSLY TE*NICAL OR WORSE1 R$UC$ IT TO ! PRODUCTION ( M]E HI/ORICAL & MONOGRAPHIC MEMORABILIA4 ,MU* ( :AT PASSES = NATURE PHILOSOPHY TODAY \TSIDE ! CAMPUS1 !RE=E1 T5DS TO LACK ROOTS 9 ! ,WE/]N PHILOSOPHICAL TRADITION1 & SU* ,WE/]N TRADITIONS AS ! ECOLOGICAL MOVEM5T DOES 9VOKE HAVE A /RONGLY 9TUITIONAL ?RU/4 

,NOR DOES ! ACADEMY ALWAYS ADD CL>ITY :5 IT DOES BR+ ITS 9TELLECTUAL EQUIPM5T TO 9T]V5E 9 ! DISCUSSION4 ,TODAY1 VIRTUALLY ALL NATURE PHILOSOPHY IS BURD5$ BY A MASSIVE NUMB] ( /ULTIFY+ PREJUDICES1 BUT ! WOR/ ( !SE PREJUDICES FE/] PRECISELY 9 ! ACADEMY4 ,!RE1 ANY CONJUNCTION ( ! WORDS NATURE & PHILOSOPHY AUTOMATICALLY EVOKES FE>S ( ANTISCI5TIFIC >*AISMS & PREMOD]NI/ REGRESSIONS TO A /ATIC COSMOLOGICAL METAPHYSICS4 ,TO SPEAK FRANKLY1 ! ACADEMIC M9D HAS BE5 TRA9$ TO VIEW NATURE PHILOSOPHY AS 9IMICAL TO CRITICAL & ANALYTICAL ?\<T ,NO LESS PREJUDICIAL 9 ?IS REG>D >E ! 0NEO-,M>XI/S10 0PO/-,M>XI/S10 & EMPIRICAL AN>*I/S 7= :OM ANY PHILOSOPHY %ORT ( ,B]TR& ,RUSSELL'S LOGICAL ATOMISM IS %E] !OLOGY71 :O UNEASILY REG>D ALL ORGANICI/ !ORIES AS R$OL5T ( EI!R DIALECTICAL MAT]IALISM OR NEO-FASCI/ FOLK PHILOSOPHIES4 ,UNLESS SU* PREJUDICES >E DISPELL$ -- OR AT LEA/ EXPLOR$ 9SI<T0 FULLY & CRITICALLY -- ! T]RA9 ( A S]I\S NATURE PHILOSOPHY WILL BE LEFT OP5 TO MY/ICAL T5D5CIES & 9TUITIONS ?AT MAY WELL R5D] ANY RATIONAL DISCUSSION ( ECOLOGICAL ISSUES IMPOSSIBLE4 

,9 ANY CASE1 ! PUBLIC DESIRE = NEW NATURE PHILOSOPHIES WILL NOT DISAPPE>1 & ! WORKS ?AT >E APPE>+ TO SATISFY ?IS NE$ >E NO LESS PROBLEMATIC ?AN ! ACADEMY'S CONV5TIONAL WISDOM ON ! SUBJECT4 ,IT WILL NOT DO = ,EUROPEAN & ,AM]ICAN ACADEMICS TO DISP>AGE ?IS TR5D BY SPECKL+ IT ) LE>N$ NAME-DROPP+S LIKE 0NEO-,>I/OTELIANISM0 OR BY 9VOK+ ! DISP>ATE P$IGREES ( ,S*ELL+1 ,DRIES*1 ,B]GSON1 & ,HEIDEGG]4 

,CONTEMPOR>Y EXCURSIONS 9TO NATURE PHILOSOPHY REQUIRE A BROAD] PHILOSOPHICAL GR\ND+ ?AN !Y NORMALLY RECEIVE4 ,UN=TUNATELY1 !Y TYPICALLY DRAW !IR N\RI%M5T MORE FROM SY/EMS !ORY ?AN FROM ! ,GREEKS & ! ,G]MANS1 & !IR HUES >E T9T$ BY ,ASIAN RA!R ?AN ,WE/]N COSMOGONIES4 ,IF SU* ECLECTICISM SEEMS DISCORDANT TO ACADEMIC PHILOSOPHICAL !ORI/S1 ,I W\LD >GUE ?AT !Y MU/ DO BETT]1 RA!R ?AN SIMPLY ADD A NEW SET ( PREJUDICES TO ONES ?AT ALREADY EXI/4 ,:E!R ONE *OOSES TO REG>D REC5T NATURE-PHILOSOPHICAL WORKS AS A LOSS OR B5EFIT TO ! ECOLOGY MOVEM5T1 ?IS MU* IS CLE>3 IF \R S*OOL$ PHILOSOPHICAL !ORI/S TURN !IR BACKS ON ! RIS+ !ORETICAL 9T]E/ 9 ! MEAN+ ( NATURE & HUMANITY'S PLACE 9 IT1 !Y WILL M]ELY CUT !MSELVES (F FUR!R FROM SOME ( ! MO/ IMPORTANT DEVELOPM5TS 9 CONTEMPOR>Y SOCIETY4 

,BE=E WE TURN TO ! WIDELY DISP>ATE !ORI/S ( POPUL> NATURE PHILOSOPHIES1 WE MU/ DEAL ) A PROBLEM ?AT UNCEAS+LY NAGS ! ACADEMIC ACOLYTES ( MOD]N SCI5TISM4 ,LIKE A TR\BL+ & ]UPTIVE UNCONSCI\S1 IT PLAGUES ! PHILOSOPHICAL SUP]EGO ( ! ACADEMY & SOME ( ITS SELF-PR(ESS$ RADICAL !ORI/S4 ,?IS PHILOSOPHICAL UNCONSCI\S IS 0! ,TRADITION10 OR :AT IS MORE >ROGANTLY CALL$ ! 0>*AIC0 BACKGR\ND ?AT PR$ATES ,5LI<T5M5T -- 9DE$1 MOD]N -- PHILOSOPHY4 ,MOD]N SUBJECTIVI/IC & SCI5TI/IC ORI5TATIONS HAVE RAIS$ A B>RI] AGA9/ PRE-,5LI<T5M5T PHILOSOPHY ?AT P]MITS LITTLE ( IT TO FILT] ?R\<1 SO ?AT ITS [N ORIG9S HAVE BECOME A MY/]Y TO ,WE/]N PHILOSOPHY1 A FRI<T5+ SPECT] LIKE ! PRIMAL NI<TM>ES ( *ILDHOOD ?AT HAUNT ! >MOR$ EGO ( ! ADULT4 ,TRUE1 9T]E/ 9 ,>I/OTLE'S ,METAPHYSICS 0REMA9S P]5NIAL10 AS WE >E TOLD1 & 0DOES NOT FLAG OR FAIL ) ! PASS+ YE>S1 NO MATT] H[ F> ! FA%ION ( ?\<T CURR5T AT ! MOM5T MAY SEEM TO W&] FROM ! CONF9ES ( ,>I/OTELIAN TRADITION40.<#i.> ,BUT AP>T FROM SU* CANONICAL WORKS1 ! C5SOR ?AT ACTS LIKE A SCRE5 ON E>LI] PHILOSOPHIES SEEMS REM>KABLY SECURE4 ,HEIDEGG] CAPITALIZ$ ON ?IS FAILURE 7REGRETTABLY1 9 MY VIEW7 & DELV$ 9TO ! ORIG9AT+ ?9K]S ( ,WE/]N PHILOSOPHY1 >GU+ ?AT !Y >E WOR?Y ( S]I\S EXEGESIS 7AL?\< NOT ALL ( ,HEIDEGG]'S 0WOODPA?S0 >E TO BE FOLL[$74.<#a.> ,ONTOLOGY UND]/&ABLY BE>S A FE>SOME VISAGE :5 IT LACKS A SOCIAL & MORAL CONTEXT1 & ! CONCEPT ( ,BE+ LOSES CONTACT ) REALITY :5 IT IS SUBTLY ASSIMILAT$ TO SUBJECTIVE APPROA*ES TO REALITY LIKE ,HEIDEGG]'S4 

,LIMITATIONS ( SPACE MAKE IT IMPOSSIBLE = ME TO FULLY EXPLORE ! PROBLEMS ?AT MY REM>KS ON !SE PREJUDICES D\BTLESS RAISE4 ,BUT EV5 SOME ( ! BE/-KN[N !ORI/S ( NATURE PHILOSOPHY 9 ! ECOLOGY MOVEM5T TODAY COMMIT AN ]ROR4 ,AL?\< !Y MAY BE COGNIZANT ( ! PREJUDICES & ! C5SOR+ ME*ANISMS ?AT SEP>ATE CONTEMPOR>Y PHILOSOPHY FROM ITS [N HI/ORY1 !Y HAVE DUG !IR TR5*ES POORLY BY DEF9+ !MSELVES AGA9/ ,DESC>TES RA!R ?AN ,KANT4 

,?IS IS BY NO MEANS AN ACADEMIC ISSUE1 NOR IS IT /RICTLY A PHILOSOPHICAL ONE4 ,! EMPHASIS ON ,C>TESIAN ME*ANISM AS ! ORIG9AL S9 ?AT DI/ORT$ ! MOD]N IMAGE ( NATURE HAS BE5 OV]/AT$ = REASONS ?AT >E MORE PROGRAMMATIC ?AN !ORETICAL4 ,VILLA9\S AS ,DESC>TES MAY SEEM1 IT IS A C]TA9 REALPOLITIK1 ,I SUSPECT1 ?AT DEMONIZES HIM OV] ,KANT ,= TO S+LE \T ,KANT W\LD NECESSITATE *ALL5G+ ! DUBI\S SUBJECTIVISM -- SU* AS ! SUBJECTIVISM ?AT ,GREGORY ,BATESON GIVES TO SY/EMS !ORY -- & QUASI-RELIGI\S TRANSC5D5TALISM N[ BURGEON+ 9 SO MU* CONTEMPOR>Y 0ANTIME*ANI/IC0 ?9K+4 ,AS A RESULT1 PHILOSOPHICAL !ORIES ( NATURE & ! OBJECTIVE ECOLOGICAL E?ICS D]IV$ FROM !M >E BE+ CREAT$ 9 ! FALSE LI<T ( ! 0EPI/EMOLOGICAL TURN0 ?AT ,KANT ULTIMATELY GAVE TO ,WE/]N PHILOSOPHY4 ,! ONTOLOGICALLY ORI5T$ PRE-,KANTIAN 9T]PRETATIONS ( NATURE REMA9 AS AMBIGU\S 9 ! ECOLOGY MOVEM5T AS 9 ! ACADEMY4 

,BUT PREMOD]N & P>TICUL>LY ,PRESOCRATIC PHILOSOPHY IS NOT ! DEAD DOG ?AT CONV5TIONAL PHILOSOPHY DEPICTS IT AS BE+4 ,I AM NOT CONC]N$1 = ! PRES5T1 ) ! SPECIFIC SPECULATIONS ?AT PRE-,KANTIAN PHILOSOPHIES ADVANC$ -- P>TICUL>LY ?OSE ( ! ,PRESOCRATICS4 ,RA!R1 ,I AM CONC]N$ ) !IR 9T5TIONS & ) ! K9D ( UNITIES !Y TRI$ TO FO/]4 ,:AT IS IMPORTANT1 AS ,GREGORY ,VLA/OS HAS SO ADMIRABLY EMPHASIZ$1 IS ?AT !Y AU!NTICALLY VOIC$ AN OBJECTIVITY P]MEAT$ BY E?ICS4 ,9DE$1 9 CONTRA/ TO ! NATURALISM ?AT BECAME SO FA%IONABLE 9 ,AM]ICAN ACADEMIES DUR+ ! #a#i#cS & #a#i#dS1 ! UNIFY+ FEATURE ( ! ,IONIAN1 ,ELEATIC1 ,H]ACLITEAN & ,PY?AGOREAN TR5DS IS PRECISELY !IR CONVICTION ?AT ! UNIV]SE HAD 9 SOME S5SE A MORAL *>ACT] IRRESPECTIVE ( HUMAN PURPOSES4 ,SO ALI5 IS ?IS PROPOSITION TO ! PO/-,KANTIAN ]A ?AT IT IS DISMISS$ AS 0>*AIC0 & 0TELEOLOGICAL0 ALMO/ AS A KNEE-J]K REACTION4.<#a#a.> ,YET ONE CANNOT SIMPLY DISMISS ! FACT ?AT SU* GREAT !MES AS ,BE+1 ,=M1 ,MOTION & ,CAUSALITY W]E ONCE 9FUS$ ) MORAL MEAN+4 ,9 FACT !Y P]MEATE SPECULATIVE PHILOSOPHY TO ?IS DAY4 ,! V>I\S WAYS 9 :I* ! ,PRESOCRATICS EXPLA9$ ! >*E ( ! WORLD FOLL[$ \T ! LOGIC ( ?IS MORAL MEAN+4 

,! V]Y ABILITY TO KN[ IMPLIES ?AT ! WORLD IS ORD]LY & 9TELLIGIBLE & ?AT IT L5DS ITSELF TO RATIONAL 9T]PRETATION BECAUSE IT IS RATIONAL4 ,FROM ,?ALES TO ,HEGEL1 PHILOSOPHY CONSI/5TLY RETA9$ ?IS ESS5TIAL ORI5TATION4 ,AS ,LAWR5CE ,J4 ,H5D]SON WROTE 9 HIS IMM5SELY 9FLU5TIAL #aiab WORK  
,! ,FITNESS ( ! ,5VIRONM5T1 ! 0IDEA ( PURPOSE & ORD] >E AMONG ! FIR/ CONCEPTS REG>D+ !IR 5VIRONM5T :I* APPE>1 A VAGUE ANTICIPATION ( PHILOSOPHY & SCI5CE1 9 ! M9DS ( M540 ,= ,H5D]SON1 TO BE SURE1 IT WAS ! 0ADV5T ( MOD]N SCI5CE0 ?AT VALIDAT$ UNIV]SAL ORD] -- 9 ! =M ( NATURAL LAW2 ,D>W9'S HYPO!SIS ( NATURAL SELECTION1 9 TURN1 VALIDAT$ NATURAL LAW 0AS ! BASIS ( PURPOSE10 SPECIFICALLY ! 0NEW SCI5TIFIC CONCEPT ( FITNESS10 & !REBY RESCU$ SPECULATIVE ?\<T FROM ! 0DOGMA ( F9AL CAUSES40.<#a#b.> ,BUT :AT IS IMPORTANT 9 ,H5D]SON'S REM>KS IS ?AT HE REG>DS ! WORLD AS 9TELLIGIBLE1 NOT ! SPECIFIC CONT5T ( ?AT 9TELLIGIBILITY4 

,HELL5IC ?\<T1 BY ! SAME TOK51 WAS PO9T$LY MORAL  
9S(> AS IT SAW ! WORLD AS RATIONAL -- ?AT IS1 ITS RATIONALITY & 9TELLIGIBILITY W]E EQUIVAL5T TO ITS MORALITY4 ,H[EV] 9TUITIVELY OR CONSCI\SLY1 ! ,HELL5IC NOTION ( N\S -- M9D -- CON/ITUT$ ! WORLD OR 9H]$ 9 IT4 ,PRECISELY BECAUSE ONE C\LD EXPLA9 ! WORLD1 ! WORLD WAS MEAN+FUL4 ,NOR DID ,PRESOCRATIC ?\<T /OP AT P>TIAL EXPLANATIONS ( ORD]2 IT TRI$ TO EXPLA9 IT TO ! FULLE/4 ,ACC\NTS ( ! >*E ( ! WORLD -- ITS ACTIVE SUB/ANCE -- >E R$OL5T ) MEAN+1 SU* AS WAT] 7:I* P]HAPS ALLUDES K9%IP7 & ! 0UNB\ND$0 OR 0A]0 7:I* HI/ORIANS ( ,GREEK PHILOSOPHY N[ REG>D AS 0S\L10 ! 0BREA? ( LIFE074 

,?IS S5SE ( REALITY AS PREGNANT1 FECUND1 & IMMAN5TLY SELF-ELABORAT+ /ILL PROVIDES DIRECTION = AN ECOLOGICAL PHILOSOPHY1 H[EV] >GUABLE ! NATURE PHILOSOPHIES ( ! PRE-,KANTIAN PA/ MAY BE4 ,( P>TICUL> 9T]E/ H]E >E ! ,PRESOCRATICS4 ,EMPHASIS ON ! ,PRESOCRATICS' 0NAIVETE10 !IR 0ONTOLOGICAL NE$0 7TO USE ONE ( ,!ODOR ,ADORNO'S MANY UN=TUNATE PHRASES71 & !IR 0MONISM0 HAS ALL TOO *EAPLY OBSCUR$ ?IS POSSIBILITY4 ,?AT ,PRESOCRATIC ?\<T WAS RIDDL$ BY DEMON/RABLY FALSE >*AISMS IS BESIDE ! PO9T4 ,IT IS ITS ORI5TATION ?AT CONC]NS US1 NOT ITS ONTOLOGICAL M]ITS1 & ITS ANIMI/IC ASPECTS >E SU* AS MI<T BE EXPECT$ 9 A TRANSITION FROM ! MY?OPEIC WORLD TO ! WORLD ( ,PLATO & ,>I/OTLE4 ,& 9 CONTRA/ TO ,HEIDEGG]1 WE %\LD NOT VIEW ! ,PRESOCRATICS AS HAV+ AN 0AU!NTIC10 PRELAPS>IAN RELATION%IP ) ,BE+ BUT AS PO9TS ( DEP>TURE = ! RI*] PHILOSOPHICAL 9SI<TS ( ,PLATO1 ,>I/OTLE1 & ! O!R PHILOSOPH]S :O CON/ITUTE ! ,WE/]N PHILOSOPHICAL TRADITION4 ,MY HI< VALUATION ( ! ,PRESOCRATICS H]E IS PURELY HEURI/IC3 ,I DO NOT 9T5D TO >GUE = !IR NOTION ( 0COSMIC JU/ICE0 -- :I* WAS PAT5TLY AN EXTRAPOLATION ( ! DEMOCRATIC POLIS 9TO ! NATURAL WORLD -- OR = ADH]5CE TO !IR VIEW ?AT NATURE IS 0JU/0 9 ANY O!R S5SE4 ,RA!R1 ,I WI% TO EMPHASIZE ! IMPORTANCE ( SE>*+ = VALUES ?AT CAN BE GR\ND$ 9 NATURE -- MORE BASICALLY1 9 NATURAL EVOLUTION4 

,DESPITE !IR 0NAIVETE10 ! ,PY?AGOREAN >*E -- =M -- & IDEALS ( LIMIT1 KOSMOS 7ORD] COMB9$ ) BEAUTY71 & KRASIS 7EQUILIBRIUM7 HAVE A REM>KABLE1 9DE$ ALLUR+ RI*NESS4 ,! ,PY?AGOREAN NOTION ( =M1 = EXAMPLE1 IS ESS5TIAL = UND]/&+ HOLISM1 = IT ADDS ! =MAL CONCEPT ( >RANGEM5T TO ! NUM]ICAL NOTION ( SUM4 ,! NOTION ( =M AS ! EXPRESSION ( ! GOOD & ! BEAUTIFUL R5D]S VIRTUE COSMICALLY IMMAN5T4 

,MORE RADICALLY1 ! ,PRESOCRATICS AN*OR$ !IR 9T]PRETATION ( NATURE 9 ! NOTION ( ISONOMIA 7EQUALITY71 :I* 9CLUDES ! EQUALITY ( ! V]Y ELEM5TS ?AT MAKE UP ! WORLD4 ,PHILOSOPH]S FROM ,ANAXIM&] TO ,EMP$OCLES HAD A ?OR\<GO+ RESPECT = A UBIQUIT\S PR9CIPLE ( EQUALITY4 ,SO CONSCI\SLY DID !Y HOLD ! PR9CIPLE1 ?AT ,ALCMAEON US$ ! T]M  
MON>*Y ) OPPROBRIUM TO *>ACT]IZE ! 0MA/]Y0 OR 0SUPREMACY0 ( ONE COSMIC P[] OV] ANO!R4 ,KRASIS IS NOT ! ME*ANICAL EQUIPOISE ( CONTRA/+ P[]S BUT1 MORE ORGANICALLY1 !IR BL5D+ &1 9 ! SEQU5CE ( PH5OM5A 79ITIALLY1 94 ,GREEK M$ICAL !ORY71 !IR ROTATION4 0,AS 9 ! DEMOCRATIC POLIS ,! DEMOS RULES BY TURN1 SO ! HOT C\LD PREVAIL 9 SUMM] )\T 9JU/ICE TO ! COLD1 IF ! LATT] HAD ITS TURN 9 ! W9T]10 ,VLA/OS OBS]VES1 HI<LI<T+ ! P>ALLELS BETWE5 ! ,A!NIAN POLITICAL SY/EM & ?IS NOTION4 0,& IF A SIMIL> & CONCURR5T CYCLE ( SUCCESSIVE SUPREMACY C\LD BE ASSUM$ TO HOLD AMONG ! P[]S 9 ! HUMAN BODY1 !N ! KRASIS ( MAN & NATURE W\LD BE P]FECT40.<#a#c.> 

,EMP$OCLES ?OR\<LY NATURALIZ$ ?IS 0ELEGANT TISSUE ( ASSUMPTIONS10 AS ,VLA/OS CALLS !SE P>ALLELS BETWE5 SOCIETY & NATURE4 ,HIS CONCEPT ( 0ROOTS0 AS DI/+UI%$ FROM 0ELEM5TS10 UNDIFF]5TIAT$ 0,BE+10 & 0ATOMS0 VA/LY 5L>G$ ! IMPLICIT ,HELL5IC NOTION ( AN IMMAN5TLY G5]ATIVE NATURE TO A PO9T UNSURPASS$ EV5 BY ,>I/OTLE4 ,! 0ROOTS10 AS ,FRANCIS ,CORN=D OBS]VES1 >E 0EQUAL 9 /ATUS OR LOT02 !Y ROTATE !IR 0RULE0 ) !IR [N UNIQUE 0HONOR10 = 9 NO CASE IS ! UNIV]SE A 0MON>*Y0 & NONE ( ITS P[]S CAN CLAIM EV5 ! PRIMACY ?AT ,?ALES GAVE TO FLUIDITY & ,ANAXIM5ES TO S\L4.<#a#d.> 

,PRESOCRATIC ?\<T WAS CONSCI\SLY 9FUS$ BY A F>-REA*+ NOTION ( COSMIC JU/ICE1 OR DIKAISYNE4 ,?IS CONCEPT ( JU/ICE EXT5DS BEYOND SOCIAL & P]SONAL ISSUES TO NATURE ITSELF4 ,= ! ,PRESOCRATICS1 0JU/ICE IS NO LONG] 9SCRUTABLE MOIRA1 IMPOS$ BY >BITR>Y =CES ) 9CALCULABLE EFFECT4 ,NOR IS %E ! GODDESS ,DIKE1 MORAL & RATIONAL 5\<1 BUT FRAIL & UNRELIABLE40 ,UNLIKE ,HESIOD'S ,DIKE1 ?IS JU/ICE IS ONE ) NATURE ITSELF & 0C\LD NO MORE LEAVE ! E>? ?AN ! E>? C\LD LEAVE ITS PLACE 9 ! FIRMAM5T40.<#a#e.> ,ITS OPPOSITE1 ADIKAISYNE1 M>KS EV]Y TRANSGRESSION ( COSMIC JU/ICE -- ( ! LAW ( ! MEASURE & ! P]AS OR LIMIT ( ?+S & RELATION%IPS4 ,IT DEM&S REP>ATION & ! RE/ORATION ( H>MONY4 

,NATURE1 9 EFFECT1 APPE>$ AS A COMMONWEAL?1 A POLIS1 :OSE ISONOMIA EFFAC$ ! 0DI/9CTIONS BETWE5 TWO GRADES ( BE+ -- DIV9E & MORTAL1 LORDLY & SUBS]VI5T1 NOBLE & MEAN1 ( HI<] & L[] HONOR4 ,IT WAS ! 5D+ ( !SE DI/9CTIONS ?AT MADE NATURE AUTONOM\S & !RE=E COMPLETELY & UNEXCEPTIONALLY 'JU/' ,GIV5 A SOCIETY ( EQUALS1 IT WAS ASSUM$1 JU/ICE WAS SURE TO FOLL[1 = NONE W\LD HAVE ! P[] TO DOM9ATE ! RE/4 ,?IS ASSUMPTION 444 HAD A /RICTLY PHYSICAL S5SE4 ,IT WAS ACCEPT$ NOT AS A POLITICAL DOGMA BUT AS A !OREM 9 PHYSICAL 9QUIRY4 ,IT IS1 NONE ! LESS1 REM>KABLE EVID5CE ( ! CONFID5CE :I* ! GREAT AGE ( ,GREEK DEMOCRACY POSSESS$ 9 ! VALIDITY ( ! DEMOCRATIC IDEA -- A CONFID5CE SO ROBU/ ?AT IT SURVIV$ TRANSLATION 9TO ! FIR/ PR9CIPLES ( COSMOLOGY & M$ICAL !ORY4.<#a#f.> 

,NAIVE AS ! ,PRESOCRATIC VIEW MAY BE ) ALL ITS >*AISMS1 A NATURE PHILOSOPHY ?AT IS MORE ?AN ! SIMPLE CONTE/ BETWE5 ME*ANISM & ORGANICISM 5C\NT]$ TODAY W\LD S]VE TO CL>IFY ! WAYW>D =TUNES ( ,WE/]N PHILOSOPHY & *ALL5GE ! LIMITS IT HAS IMPOS$ ON ECOLOGICAL E?ICS4 ,IRONICALLY1 ! F\ND]S ( MOD]N SCI5CE -- ,COP]NICUS1 ,KEPL]1 & ,TY*O ,BRAHE -- W]E RAG+ ,PY?AGOREANS4 ,:AT E>LY ,R5AISSANCE ?\<T & SCI5CE RESCU$ FROM ! ANCI5TS WAS NOT ISONOMIA BUT =M1 AS WELL AS ! %>$ PREMISE ( ALL SPECULATIVE REASON ?AT NATURE IS AN 9TELLIGIBLE KOSMOS4 ,DESC>TES NEV] *ALL5G$ ?IS CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK -- HE M]ELY GAVE IT A ME*ANICAL =M1 ALLUR+ & SUBV]SIVE = ITS TIME4 

,IT WAS ,KANT -- A NE> ,JACOB9 -- :O MADE ! MO/ SIGNIFICANT TURN 9 ,WE/]N PHILOSOPHY ) HIS 0,COP]NICAN REVOLUTION10 ! 0EPI/EMOLOGICAL TURN40 ,KANT F9ALLY D5ATUR$ NATURE ( ITS ,PRESOCRATIC REMNANT BY REMOV+ ! MAT]IAL 0GRADE ( BE+0 ALTOGE!R4 ,?+S-9-!MSELVES CEAS$ TO BE ?+S AT ALL = COGNITIVE PURPOSES1 & ONE GRADE ( ,BE+ EFFECTIVELY CEAS$ TO EXI/4 ,KANT LEFT US ALONE ) \R [N SUBJECTIVITY4 0,KANT DOES NOT1 LIKE ALL E>LI] PHILOSOPH]S1 9VE/IGATE OBJECTS10 AS ,K>L ,JASP]S 9CISIVELY SUMM>IZ$ ! ISSUE2 0:AT HE 9QUIRES 9TO IS \R KN[L$GE ( OBJECTS4 ,HE PROVIDES NO DOCTR9E ( ! METAPHYSICAL WORLD1 BUT A CRITIQUE ( ! REASON ?AT ASPIRES TO KN[ IT4 ,HE GIVES NO DOCTR9E ( ,BE+ AS SOME?+ OBJECTIVELY KN[N1 BUT AN ELUCIDATION ( EXI/5CE AS ! SITUATION ( \R CONSCI\SNESS4 ,OR1 9 HIS [N WORDS1 HE PROVIDES NO 'DOCTR9E' BUT A 'PROPA$EUTICS4'0 ,ACCORD+LY1 ,KANTIAN CATEGORIES HAVE OBJECTIVE VALIDITY ONLY 9S(> AS !Y REMA9 )9 ! LIMITS ( POSSIBLE EXP]I5CE4 ,AFT] ,KANT1 0METAPHYSICS 9 ! S5SE ( OBJECTIVE KN[L$GE ( ! SUP]S5SIBLE OR AS ONTOLOGY1 :I* TEA*ES BE+ AS :OLE1 IS IMPOSSIBLE40.<#a#g.> 

,AS LIB]AT+ AS ?IS 9NOVATION WAS FROM ABSOLUTE EMPIRICISM1 :I* R5D]S ITS [N EXP]I5CE 9 A WORLD ( PURE ,BE+1 IT WAS NOT LIB]AT+ FROM ABSOLUTES G5]ALLY4 ,KANT HIMSELF MADE A SWEEP+ 9TELLECTUALIZATION ( OBJECTIVITY4 ,AL?\< HE ACKN[L$G$ A N\M5AL WORLD ?AT IS 0SUP]S5SIBLE0 OR 0UNKN[ABLE0 & ?AT CON/ITUTES ! ORIG9AT+ S\RCE ( ! P]CEPTIONS ?AT HIS CATEGORIES SYN!SIZE 9TO AU!NTIC KN[L$GE1 HE OP5$ ! WAY TO AN EPI/EMOLOGICAL FOCUS ON  
SY/EMS ( KN[L$GE RA!R ?AN A NATURALI/IC FOCUS ON  
SY/EMS ( FACTS4 ,FACTICITY ITSELF WAS ABSORB$ )9 SY/EMS ( KN[L$GE1 & ! ,GREEK ONTA1 ! 0REALLY EXI/+ ?+S10 W]E DISPLAC$ BY  
EPI/EME1 \R 0KN[L$GE0 ( ! N[ 0UNKN[ABLE0 ONTA4 ,HEGEL RIDICUL$ ! PAT5T CONTRADICTION ( KN[+ ?AT AN 0UNKN[ABLE0 WAS UNKN[ABLE -- BUT ,KANT HAD DUG A V]ITABLE TR5* >\ND PHILOSOPHY ?AT EXCLUD$ NATURE AS ONTOLOGY & ?AT R5D]$ ?\<T 9TO ,BE+4 ,) ,KANT'S AGNO/IC & ESS5TIALLY SKEPTICAL \TLOOK1 HIS EPI/EMOLOGICAL TURN BECAME ABSOLUTIZ$ 9 PHILOSOPHY4 

,LO/ 9 ?IS DEVELOPM5T W]E ! ONTA ?AT ALONE CON/ITUTE ! UND]P9N+S ( NATURE PHILOSOPHY1 :I* N[ HAD TO BE DI/+UI%$ FROM ,KANTIAN PHILOSOPHIES ( ! NATURE ( KN[+4.<#a#h.> ,HEGEL HEAP$ SCORN ON ! NOTION ( ! ?+-9-ITSELF1 :OSE V]Y ?+HOOD BY DEF9ITION REQUIRES DET]M9ATIONS & 9 FACT BE>S ! IMPR9T ( ! ,KANTIAN CATEGORIES4 ,BUT EV5 ,HEGEL 5D$ 9 ! SUBJECTIVITY ( ! ,ABSOLUTE4 ,= ,HEGEL1 AFT] ALL ! TOIL ( ,SPIRIT1 OBJECT & SUBJECT F9ALLY COME TO RE/ 9 ,M9D -- 9 KN[L$GE AS SELF-KN[+ 9 ALL ITS TOTALITY -- & IT WAS NOT = S5TIM5TAL REASONS ?AT ,HEGEL'S ,5CYCLOP$IA 5D$1 ) A QUOTATION FROM ,>I/OTLE ?AT EXULTS 0?\<T .<?AT.> ?9KS ON ITSELF BECAUSE IT %>ES ! NOTION ( ! OBJECT ( ?\<T40.<#a#i.> ,A C5TURY LAT]1 ,HUSS]L'S PROCESS ( EPO*E BRACKET$ \T ! NATURAL WORLD 9 ORD] TO E/ABLI% ! LOGICAL NECESSITY ON :I* IT ULTIMATELY HANGS2 ,HEIDEGG] REG>D$ ,DASE9 AS ! HUMAN EXI/5T & ROYAL ROAD TO ,BE+4 ,BO? DI/ILL$ REALITY 9TO 9TELLECTION1 & ! =MALIZATIONS ( ! HUMAN M9D BECAME ! EXCLUSIVE PO9T ( 5TRY 9TO ,BE+4 ,ONLY 9S(> AS !SE =MALIZATIONS BECOME ,BE+ ITSELF CAN ONE CALL ,HEIDEGG]'S OR ,HUSS]L'S PHILOSOPHICAL /RATEGY ONTOLOGICAL4 

,NOR HAS ECOLOGICAL PHILOSOPHY BREA*$ ! ,KANTIAN TR5*4 ,RA!R1 IT IS A CAPTIVE )9 IT )\T EV5 KN[+ IT4 ,GREGORY ,BATESON1 ! MO/ WIDELY READ ( ITS GURUS1 MAKES AN ALMO/ :OLLY SUBJECTIVE 9T]PRETATION ( ! NOTORI\S ,M9D-,NATURE RELATION%IP4 ,9 TRY+ TO 0BUILD ! BRIDGE0 BETWE5 0=M & SUB/ANCE10 ,BATESON EMPHASIZES ONLY TOO CORRECTLY ?AT ,WE/]N SCI5CE BEGAN ) ! 0WRONG HALF0 ( ! *ASM -- ATOMI/IC MAT]IALISM4 ,TODAY MANY ECOLOGICALLY ORI5T$ READ]S >E ATTRACT$ TO HIS SUPPLANTATION ( MATT] ) M9D & TO HIS CONJO9+ ( FACT 7:ATEV] ?AT MEANS = HIM7 ) VALUE4 ,BUT QUITE SY/EMATICALLY1 ,BATESON TURNS ANY 9T]RELATIONAL SY/EM AT ALL 9TO 0,M9D0 & H5CE MAKES IT SUBJECTIVE4 7,?IS NOTION ALSO FE$S 9TO QUASI-SUP] NATURALI/IC VISIONS ( REALITY -- G5]ALLY ,EA/]N 9 ORIG9 -- :I* CURI\SLY T5D TO TRANSC5D ! NATURAL WORLD RA!R ?AN EXPLA9 IT47 ,?AT 0,M9D IS EMPTY2 IT IS NO-?+10 = ,BATESON1 MEANS LIT]ALLY ?AT IT IS NO ?+ AT ALL4 ,H5CE1 ONLY 0IDEAS >E IMMAN5T1 EMBODI$ 9 !IR EXAMPLES4 ,& ! EXAMPLES .<! MAT]IAL EMBODIM5TS ( IDEAS.> >E1 AGA91 NO-?+S4 ,! CLAW1 AS AN EXAMPLE1 IS NOT ! ,D+ AN SI*2 IT IS PRECISELY NOT ! '?+ 9 ITSELF' ,RA!R1 IT IS :AT M9D MAKES ( IT1 NAMELY1 AN EXAMPLE ( SOME?+ OR O!R40.<#b.> 

,?IS IS NOT M]ELY A SUBJECTIVI/ V>IANT ( ,KANTIANISM2 IT IS A D5IAL ( ?+HOOD AS SU*4 ,A TRUE SON ( ! EPI/EMOLOGICAL TURN1 ,BATESON CLAIMS ?AT 0ALL EXP]I5CE IS SUBJECTIVE 444 \R BRA9S MAKE ! IMAGES ?AT WE ?9K WE 'P]CEIVE4'0 ,9DE$1 0OCCID5TAL CULTURE0 LIVES UND] ! 0ILLUSION0 ?AT ITS [N 0VISUAL IMAGE ( ! EXT]NAL WORLD0 HAS ONTOLOGICAL REALITY4 ,EV5 AS ,BATESON DISMISSES ONTOLOGICAL PROP]TIES AS SU*1 HE SMUGGLES !M BACK 9TO HIS [N WORK AS SY/EMS4 ,AL?\< HIS >GUM5T AGA9/ 0ATOMIES0 TAKES ON ! APPE>ANCE ( AN >GUM5T AGA9/ PRESUPPOSITIONS1 ,BATESON'S [N VIEW IS ACTUALLY OV]LOAD$ ) PRESUPPOSITIONS -- HIS :OLE !SIS1 HE SAYS ELSE:]E1 IS 0BAS$ ON ! PREMISE ?AT M5TAL FUNCTION IS IMMAN5T 9 ! 9T]ACTION ( DIFF]5TIAT$ 'P>TS'40 .<#b#a.> 

,BATESONIAN M5TALISM IS N\RI%$ BY ! CYB]NETIC IDEA ?AT P]CEPTIONS >E P>TS ( A SY/EM1 NOT ISOLATES1 OR AS ,BATESON CALLS !M1 0ATOMIES40 ,HE 9T5DS ?IS TO MEAN ?AT ! DIFF]5TIAE ?AT =M AN AGGREGATE ( 9T]ACT+ P>TS >E NOT SPATIAL1 TEMPORAL1 OR SUB/ANTIAL2 !Y >E RELATIONAL4 ,! 9T]ACTION BETWE5 A SUBJECT & OBJECT =MS A K9D ( UNIT SY/EM ?AT EXI/S )9 EV]-L>G] SY/EMS1 BE !Y COMMUNITIES1 SOCIETIES1 ! PLANET1 ! SOL> SY/EM1 OR ULTIMATELY ! UNIV]SE4 ,BATESON DESIGNATES !SE SY/EMS AS 0,M9DS0 -- OR MORE PRECISELY1 AS A HI]>*Y ( ,M9DS10 MU* LIKE ,>?UR ,KOE/L]'S HOL>*Y1 ) ITS SUBLEVELS ( 0HOLONS0 ?AT EXT5D FROM SUBATOMIC P>TICLES1 ?R\< ATOMS1 MOLECULES1 ORGANELLES1 CELLS1 TISSUES1 & ORGANS1 UP TO LIV+ ORGANISMS1 :I* HAVE !IR [N SCALA NATURAE4.<#b#b.> 

,BATESON'S VIEW ?AT CONTEXT FIXES MEAN+ IS NOT V]Y NEW IF ONE KN[S ANY?+ AB\T ,:ITEHEAD4 ,BUT CYB]NETICS1 TOO1 IS UNCRITICALLY PRESUPPOS$4 ,?AT CYB]NETICS C\LD SIMPLY BE ANO!R =M ( ME*ANISM -- ELECTRONIC RA!R ?AN ME*ANICAL -- ELUDES HIM1 AS IT SEEMS TO ELUDE MO/ ( ITS ACOLYTES4 ,FE$BACK LOOPS >E AS ME*ANI/IC AS FLY:EELS1 H[EV] DIFF]5T ! PHYSICS 9VOLV$ MAY BE4 ,CYB]NETICIANS 5GAGE 9 A R$UCTIONISM SIMIL> TO ?AT :I* GUID$ ME*ANICAL ?9K+ 9 ,NEWTON'S DAY1 EXCEPT ?AT ,NEWTON'S WAS BAS$ ON MATT] RA!R ?AN 5]GY4 ,! ECOLOGICAL CYB]NETICS ( ,H[>D ,ODUM1 :OSE TUNNEL VISION P]CEIVES ONLY ! FL[ ( CALORIES ?R\< AN ECOSY/EM1 IS AS %ALL[ PHILOSOPHICALLY AS IT IS USEFUL PRACTICALLY )9 ITS [N N>R[ LIMITS4 ,= ITS MORE MY/ICAL ACOLYTES1 CYB]NETICS COMB9ES ) ,EA/]N & ,NATIVE ,AM]ICAN SPIRITUALITY TO BECOME A 0SPIRITUAL ME*ANISM0 ?AT E]ILY P>ALLELS ! FAIL+S ( MAT]IALI/ ME*ANISM1 )\T ! LATT]'S CONTACT ) REALITY4 ,A DEAD5+ VOCABUL>Y ( 9=MATION1 9PUTS1 \TPUTS1 FE$BACK1 & 5]GY -- T]M9OLOGY L>GELY BORN FROM W>TIME RESE>* ON RAD> & S]VO-ME*ANISMS = MILIT>Y GUIDANCE SY/EMS.<#b#c.> -- REPLACES SU* ONCE-VIBRANT WORDS AS  
KN[L$GE1 DIALOGUE1 EXPLANATION1 WISDOM1 & VITALITY4 

,AS CRITICS ( ,BATESON'S VIEW & ( CYB]NETICS G5]ALLY HAVE BE5 QUICK TO PO9T \T1 HI]>*IES ( 0,M9D0 HAVE AU?ORIT>IAN IMPLICATIONS4.<#b#d.> ,KOE/L] WAS ACUTELY CONSCI\S ( ?IS PROBLEM 9 HIS NOTION ( 0HOL>*Y10 ) ITS HI]>*IES ( 0HOLONS02.<#b#e.> BUT ,BATESON1 IF ANY?+1 IS GIV5 TO US+ EXAMPLES ?AT ACC5TUATE ! AU?ORIT>IAN FEATURES ( HIS \TLOOK4 ,AS ,BATESON DESCRIBES 0AN ALT]NAT+ LADD] ( CALIBRATION & FE$BACK UP TO L>G] & L>G] SPH]ES ( RELEVANCE & MORE & MORE AB/RACT 9=MATION & WID] DECISION10 HE W>NS ?AT  
  

)9 ! SY/EM ( POLICE & LAW 5=CEM5T1 & 9DE$ 9 ALL HI]>*IES1 IT IS MO/ UNDESIRABLE TO HAVE DIRECT CONTACT BETWE5 LEVELS ?AT >E NONCONSECUTIVE4 ,IT IS NOT GOOD = ! TOTAL ORGANIZATION TO HAVE A PIPEL9E ( COMMUNICATION BETWE5 ! DRIV] ( ! AUTOMOBILE .<:O IS TICKET$ = VIOLAT+ A SPE$ LIMIT.> & ! /ATE POLICE *IEF4 ,SU* COMMUNICATION IS BAD = ! MORALE ( ! POLICE =CE4 ,NOR IS IT DESIRABLE = ! POLICEMAN TO HAVE DIRECT ACCESS TO ! LEGISLATURE1 :I* W\LD UND]M9E ! AU?ORITY ( ! POLICE *IEF4444 ,9 LEGAL & ADM9I/RATIVE SY/EMS1 SU* JUMP+ ( LOGICAL LEVELS IS CALL$ EX PO/ FACTO LEGISLATION4 ,9 FAMILIES1 ! ANALOG\S ]RORS >E CALL$ D\BLE B9DS4 ,9 G5ETICS1 ! ,WEISSMANNIAN B>RI] :I* PREV5TS ! 9H]ITANCE ( ACQUIR$ *>ACT]I/ICS SEEMS TO PREV5T DISA/]S ( ?IS NATURE4 ,TO P]MIT DIRECT 9FLU5CE FROM SOMATIC /ATE TO G5ETIC /RUCTURE MI<T DE/ROY ! HI]>*Y ( ORGANIZATION )9 ! CREATURE4.<#b#f.>  
  

,?IS IS SOCIOBIOLOGY ) A V5GEANCE4 ,NOR WAS ONE ( ! \T/&+ F\ND]S ( SY/EMS !ORY1 ,LUDWIG VON ,B]TALANFFY1 IMMUNE TO ?IS T5D5CY :5 HE OBS]V$ ?AT 0! BEHAVIOR ( ANIMALS SU* AS RATS1 CATS1 & MONKEYS PROVIDES ! NECESS>Y BASES = 9T]PRETATION & CONTROL ( HUMAN BEHAVIOR2 :AT APPE>S TO BE SPECIAL 9 MAN IS SECOND>Y & ULTIMATELY TO BE R$UC$ TO BIOLOGICAL DRIVES & PRIM>Y NE$S40.<#b#g.> 

,B]TALANFFY'S 0G5]AL SY/EM !ORY0 -- ) :I* HE SEEKS TO REPLACE ,C>TESIAN ME*ANISM1 0ONE-WAY CAUSALITY1 & 0UNORGANIZ$ COMPLEXITY0 -- H>DLY SOLVES ! PROBLEMS ?AT CYB]NETIC ME*ANISM RAISES4 ,ULTIMATELY1 ! ?9K+ 9 BO? CASES IS SIMIL>3 A G5]AL SY/EM !ORY BAS$ ON A WORLDVIEW ( 0ORGANIZ$ COMPLEXITY0 IS ESS5TIALLY A CYB]NETIC SY/EM ?AT IS 0OP50 RA!R ?AN 0CLOS$40 ,B]TALANFFY ADMITS ?AT G5]AL SY/EM !ORY IS /ILL ME*ANI/IC 9 ! S5SE ?AT IT PRESUPPOSES A 0ME*ANISM0 ?AT IS1 /RUCTURAL >RANGEM5TS4 ,AL?\< IT IS QUITE TRUE ?AT 09 BEHAVIORAL P>LANCE1 ! CYB]NETIC MODEL IS ! FAMILI> ,S-,R .</IMULUS-RESPONSE.> 444 S*EME0 & SIMPLY REPLACES 0L9E> CAUSALITY0 ) 0CIRCUL> CAUSALITY BY WAY ( ! FE$BACK LOOP10 ! CLAIMS ADVANC$ BY A G5]AL SY/EM !ORY TO 5COMPASS 0MULTIV>IABLE 9T]ACTION MA9T5ANCE ( :OLES 9 ! C\NT]ACTION ( COMPON5T P>TS1 MULTILEVEL ORGANIZATION 9TO SY/EMS ( EV] HI<] ORD]1 DIFF]5TIATION C5TRALIZATION1 PROGRESSIVE ME*ANIZATION /E]+ & TRIGG] CAUSALITY1 REGULATION EVOLUTION T[>D HI<] ORGANIZATION TELEOLOGY & GOAL-DIRECT$NESS 9 V>I\S =MS & WAYS1 ETC410 >E G5]ALLY MORE PROGRAMMATIC ?AN REAL & 9CORPORATE SOME ( ! MO/ AU?ORIT>IAN & ME*ANI/IC ATTRIBUTES ( CYB]NETICS4 ,?AT ! 0ELABORATION ( ?IS PROGRAM HAS ONLY JU/ BEGUN444 & IS BESET ) DIFFICULTIES0 IS AN UND]/ATEM5T4.<#b#h.> 

,! ISSUE ( DEVELOPM5T -- SPECIFICALLY EVOLUTION -- IS CRUCIAL TO NATURE PHILOSOPHY1 BUT A SOLUTION TO ! PROBLEM ( :Y DEVELOPM5T OCCURS1 :Y ORD] & COMPLEXITY EM]GE FROM LESS] DEGREES ( ORD] & SIMPLICITY1 REMA9S M>K$LY ABS5T FROM SY/EMS !ORY4 ,NONE ( ! SY/EMS !ORIES COME CLOSE TO AN EXPLANATION ( DEVELOPM5T & IT IS NOT AT ALL CLE> ?AT ! EXPLANATORY P[]S ( CYB]NETICS & SY/EMS !ORY CAN 5COMPASS IT4 ,TO MY KN[L$GE1 ! ONLY 0BREAK?R\<0 9 ?IS REG>D ?AT L5DS CR$IBILITY TO ,B]TALANFFY'S SWEEP+ CLAIMS = ! EXPLANATORY POT5TIAL ( G5]AL SY/EM !ORY HAS BE5 ,ILYA ,PRIGOG9E'S MA!MATICAL ELABORATION ( ! ORGANIZ+ ROLE ( POSITIVE FE$BACK4.<#b#i.> ,PRIGOG9ES WORK ESS5TIALLY UTILIZES ! SYMMETRY-BREAK+ EFFECTS ( POSITIVE FE$BACK 7OR MORE BLUNTLY1 DISORD]7 AS A MEANS = CREAT+ 0ORD]0 AT V>I\S LEVELS ( ORGANIZATION4 

,AS VALUABLE AS ?IS APPROA* MAY BE )9 ! REALM ( SY/EMS !ORY ITSELF1 P>TICUL>LY 9 ITS APPLICATIONS TO *EMI/RY1 ! SPONTANE\S /RUCTURATION ?AT IT DESCRIBES DOES SO AS ! RESULT ( CAUSES NO LESS ME*ANI/IC ?AN ,BATESON S LADD] ( 0,M9DS0 & ,KOE/L]'S HI]>*Y ( 0HOLONS40 ,C]TA9LY1 NO SY/EMS !ORY ,I HAVE CIT$ EXPLA9S :Y ONE 0LEVEL ( ORGANIZATION0 SUP]S$ES OR 9CORPORATES ANO!R2 AT BE/1 !Y DESCRIBE ONLY  
H[1 & EV5 !SE DESCRIPTIONS >E WOEFULLY 9COMPLETE4 ,BATESON'S /O*A/IC /RATEGY = 0EXPLA9+0 SEQU5CE1 = EXAMPLE1 M]ELY CORRELATES R&OM G5ETIC MUTATIONS 7OR WORSE1 PO9T MUTATIONS1 :I* >E PIECEMEAL AS WELL AS R&OM7 ) A 0SELECTIVE PROCESS0 ?AT IS REM>KABLY PASSIVE4 ,NATURAL SELECTION M]ELY TELLS US ?AT ! 0FITTE/0 SURVIVE 5VIRONM5TAL *ANGES4 ,IF ALL WE KN[ AB\T EVOLUTION>Y DEVELOPM5T IS ?AT AMID A FLURRY ( UTT]LY R&OM MUTATIONS1 ! ORGANISMS ?AT >E CAPABLE ( SURVIV+ >E ?OSE ?AT >E ! 0FITTE/0 TO SURVIVE -- A CIRCUL> !SIS -- !N WE KN[ V]Y LITTLE AB\T EVOLUTION 9DE$4 

,IT IS NOT CLE> :E!R CYB]NETICS & SY/EMS !ORY CAN EXT5D BEYOND M]E 9T]ACTION1 AS DI/+UI%$ FROM AU!NTIC  
DEVELOPM5T4 ,WE C]TA9LY HAVE NO 0SY/EM0 OR 0,M9D0 O!R ?AN M]E 9T]ACTION ?AT EXPLA9S IT 9 !SE !ORIES4 ,AN 09T]ACTION0 CANNOT BE CON/RU$ AS A RELATION%IP UNLESS IT IS MEAN+FUL4 ,TO CALL ! M]E PHYSICAL FACT ?AT ONE HUMAN BE+ /UMBLES OV] ANO!R 09T]SUBJECTIVITY10 = EXAMPLE1 DEGRADES ! V]Y MEAN+ ( ! WORD SUBJECTIVE4 ,! 5C\NT] ( ONE BODY ) ANO!R M]ELY PRODUCES A =M ( PHYSICAL CONTACT4 ,! 09T]ACTION0 BECOMES 09T]SUBJECTIVE0 ONLY :5 ! TWO P]SONS ADDRESS EA* O!R -- POSSIBLY ) FRI5DLY RECOGNITION1 POSSIBLY ) EXPLETIVES1 POSSIBLY EV5 ) BL[S4 ,MOREOV]1 9 VIEW ( REC5T 0=MALIZATIONS0 ( EV5 RADICAL SOCIAL !ORIES1 ,I CANNOT EMPHASIZE TOO /RONGLY ?AT ATTEMPT+ TO UND]/& ?IS 09T]ACTION0 9 ALL ITS POSSIBLE =MS & MEAN+S REQUIRES KN[+ ! SOCIAL & PSY*OLOGICAL CONTEXT 9 :I* IT OCCURR$ -- ?AT IS TO SAY1 ! HI/ORY OR DIALECTIC1 H[EV] TRIVIAL1 ?AT LIES BURI$ )9 ! 09T]SUBJECTIVITY0 ?AT RESULTS FROM ! 09T]ACTION40 

,WE CAN C]TA9LY CRITICIZE CYB]NETICS' MISUSE ( ! CONCEPT (  
HI]>*Y -- A /RICTLY SOCIAL T]M -- TO REF] TO DEGREES ( COMPLEXITY & ORGANIZATION4 ,BUT ULTIMATELY1 CYB]NETICS & SY/EMS APPROA*ES TO ECOLOGICAL ISSUES >E NOT SUBJECT TO IMMAN5T CRITIQUE4 ,LIKE ,KANTIAN & NEO-,KANTIAN PHILOSOPHIES1 !Y >E BASICALLY SELF-SUFFICI5T & SELF-5CLOS$4 ,AL?\< ,KANT'S CONCLUSIONS DO NOT FOLL[ COMPLETELY FROM HIS PREMISES1 HIS V]Y ]RORS HAVE S]V$ AS CORRECTIVES = HIS SUCCESSORS4 ,TRANSLAT$ 9TO ! LANGUAGE ( SY/EMS !ORY1 ,KANTIANISM & ITS SUBJECTIVE SEQUELAE >E SUFFICI5TLY CLOS$ ?AT !IR ]RORS BECOME ! SELF-CORRECTIVE S\RCE ( P]PETUAT+ ,KANT'S 0,COP]NICAN REVOLUTION80 

,?AT ,KANT'S EPI/EMOLOGICAL TURN GREATLY BROAD5$ PHILOSOPHICAL ?\<T IS H>DLY >GUABLE4 ,KANT'S ELABORATION ( AN EPI/EMOLOGY & ! 9TRODUCTION ( ! SUBJECT AS BO? OBS]V] & P>TICIPANT 9 COH]+ KN[L$GE & REALITY FILL$ A MAJOR LACUNA 9 ,WE/]N PHILOSOPHY4 ,DEF9ITELY >GUABLE1 H[EV]1 >E ! IMP]IAL CLAIMS ?AT ?IS SUBJECTIVISM ADVANC$1 ! TOTALIZATION ( REALITY & ! >ROGANT EXCLUSIVITY IT /AK$ \T = ITSELF4 ,HEGEL'S BRILLIANT CRITICISM ( ,KANT1 :ILE 9DUBITABLY %REWD1 DID NOT DAMAGE !SE IMP]IAL CLAIMS2 9DE$1 TO SOME DEGREE IT P]=M$ A CORRECTIVE FUNCTION = NEO-,KANTIANS ( LAT] G5]ATIONS4 

,IF SUBJECTIVI/IC APPROA*ES TO NATURE & ?OSE BAS$ ON SY/EMS !ORY MU/ BE *ALL5G$1 WE >E OBLIG$ TO =MULATE NEW PREMISES ?AT PROVIDE COH]5CE & MEAN+ TO NATURAL EVOLUTION4 ,! TRU? OR FALSITY ( A NATURE PHILOSOPHY WILL LIE 9 ! TRU? OR FALSITY ( ITS DESCRIPTION ( AN UNFOLD+ REALITY -- 9  
EVOLUTION1 AS WE >E BEG9N+ TO KN[ IT 9 NATURE TODAY1 & AS ?IS NATURAL EVOLUTION GRADES 9TO SOCIAL EVOLUTION & E?ICS4 ,WE MU/ NOT1 H[EV]1 ONCE AGA9 RE> ! HO>Y MY? ( A 0PRESUPPOSITIONLESS PHILOSOPHY0 BUT *OOSE \R PRESUPPOSITIONS C>EFULLY & ADEQUATELY SO ?AT !Y IMP>T COH]5CE & MEAN+4 

,\R FIR/ PRESUPPOSITION IS ?AT WE HAVE ! RI<T TO  
ATTRIBUTE PROP]TIES TO NATURE BAS$ ON ! BE/ ( \R KN[L$GE1 ! RI<T TO ASSUME ?AT C]TA9 ATTRIBUTES AS WELL AS CONTEXTS >E  
SELF-EVID5T 9 NATURE4 ,?IS ASSUMPTION IS IMM$IATELY PROBLEMATIC = A VA/ NUMB] ( ACADEMIC PHILOSOPH]S -- AL?\<1 IRONICALLY1 IT IS NO PROBLEM = MO/ SCI5TI/S4 ,! GREAT ,R5AISSANCE NOTION ?AT 0MATT]0 & 0MOTION0 >E BASIC ATTRIBUTES ( NATURE1 ITS MO/ UND]LY+ PROP]TIES 7JU/ AS METABOLISM IS A BASIC PROP]TY ( LIFE71 REMA9S A PREVAL5T SCI5TIFIC ASSUMPTION WELL 9TO \R [N TIME1 H[EV] MU* ! MEAN+S ( ! T]MS MATT] &  
MOTION HAVE *ANG$4 

,IT REMA9$ = ,DID]OT 9 HIS EXTRAORD9>Y ,D',ALEMB]T'S ,DREAM TO PROPOSE ! CRUCIAL TRAIT ( NATURE ?AT TRANS=MS M]E MOTION 9TO DEVELOPM5T & DIRECTIV5ESS3 ! NOTION (  
S5SIBILITE1 AN 9T]NAL NISUS1 ?AT IS COMMONLY TRANSLAT$ AS 0S5SITIVITY40 .<#c.> ,?IS IMMAN5T FECUNDITY ( 0MATT]0 -- AS DI/+UI%$ FROM MOTION AS M]E *ANGE ( PLACE -- SCOR$ A M>K$ ADVANCE OV] ! PREVAL5T ME*ANISM ( ,LA ,METTRIE &1 BY COMMON ACKN[L$GM5T1 ANTICIPAT$ N9ETE5?-C5TURY !ORIES ( EVOLUTION &1 9 MY VIEW1 REC5T DEVELOPM5TS 9 BIOLOGY4 ,YET  
,D',ALEMB]T'S ,DREAM'S V]Y TITLE =EW>NS READ]S ( ,DID]OT'S C&ID S5SE ( D\BT ( HIS [N 0LIKELY /ORY10 GIV5 ! LIMIT$ SCI5TIFIC KN[L$GE ( ! TIME4 

,S5SIBILITE IMPLIES AN ACTIVE CONCEPT ( MATT] ?AT YIELDS 9CREAS+ COMPLEXITY1 FROM ! ATOMIC LEVEL TO ! BRA94 ,CONT9UITY IS PRES]V$ ?R\< ?IS DEVELOPM5T )\T ANY R$UCTIONISM2 9DE$1 9 ! SCALA NATURAE DYNAMIZ$ BY ,DID]OT'S AV[$ ,H]ACLITEAN BIAS = FLUX1 !RE IS A NISUS = COMPLEXITY1 AN 5TELE*IA ?AT EM]GES FROM ! V]Y NATURE1 /RUCTURE1 & =M ( POT5TIALITY ITSELF1 GIV5 V>Y+ DEGREES ( ! ORGANIZATION ( 0MATT]40 ,FROM ?IS POT5TIALITY & ! ACTUALIZATION ( ! POT5TIALITIES ( V>I\S ORGANISMS1 S5SIBILITE 9ITIATES ITS J\RNEY ( SELF-ACTUALIZATION & EM]G5T =M4 ,DID]OT'S HOLISM1 9 TURN1 IS ONE ( ! MO/ CONSPICU\S FEATURES ( "9,D',ALEMB]T'S ,DREA"9M4 ,AN ORGANISM A*IEVES ITS UNITY & S5SE ( DIRECTION FROM ! CONTEXTUAL :OL5ESS ( :I* IT IS P>T1 A :OL5ESS ?AT IMP>TS DIRECTIV5ESS TO ! ORGANISM & RECIPROCALLY RECEIVES DIRECTIV5ESS FROM IT4 

,AP>T FROM !IR SY/EMATIC & MA!MATICAL TREATM5T ( FE$BACK1 CYB]NETICS & SY/EMS !ORY CAN ADD LITTLE TO ?IS IDEA1 ADVANC$ BY AN AU!NTIC & L>GELY UNACKN[L$G$ G5IUS :O DI$ ALMO/ TWO C5TURIES AGO4 ,NOT ONLY DID ! ACTIVE & DIRECTIVE 0MATT]0 ?AT ,DID]OT ADVANC$ ) HIS NOTION ( S5SIBILITE M>K A RADICAL BREA* ) ,R5AISSANCE & ,5LI<T5M5T ME*ANISM1 BUT ITS RELEVANCE AS 0S5SITIVITY10 H[EV] METAPHORIC ! T]M9OLOGY1 IS RADICALLY IMPORTANT = UND]/&+ CURR5T DEVELOPM5TS 9 NATURAL SCI5CE4 

,A SECOND PRESUPPOSITION IS ! ALT]NATIVE PA?WAY TO ,KANTIANISM ?AT ,HEGEL OP5$ UP ) HIS [N PH5OM5OLOGICAL /RATEGY 9 ! RI*LY DIALECTICAL APPROA* ( !  
,PH5OM5OLOGY ( ,SPIRIT "9 ,9 ,HEGEL'S [N DESCRIPTION ( ?IS /RATEGY3 9S(> AS !  
,PH5OM5OLOGY 0HAS ONLY PH5OM5AL KN[L$GE = ITS OBJECT1 ?IS EXPOSITION SEEMS NOT TO BE ,SCI5CE1 FREE & SELF-MOV+ 9 ITS [N PECULI> %APE2 YET FROM ?IS /&PO9T IT CAN BE REG>D$ AS ! PA? ( ! NATURAL CONSCI\SNESS :I* PRESSES =W>D TO TRUE KN[L$GE2 OR AS ! WAY ( ! ,S\L :I* J\RNEYS ?R\< ! S]IES ( ITS [N CONFIGURATIONS AS ?\< !Y W]E ! /ATIONS APPO9T$ = IT BY ITS [N NATURE1 SO ?AT IT MAY PURIFY ITSELF = ! LIFE ( ! ,SPIRIT1 & A*IEVE F9ALLY1 ?R\< A COMPLET$ EXP]I5CE ( ITSELF1 ! AW>5ESS ( :AT IT REALLY IS 9 ITSELF40 ,?IS 0PRESS+ =W>D0 IS IMMAN5T TO TRUE KN[L$GE1 = %ORT ( F9D+ ITS GOAL1 0NO SATISFACTION IS TO BE F\ND AT ANY ( ! /ATIONS ALONG ! WAY40.<#c#a.> 

,LIKE ,LUKACS1 & UNLIKE ! ACADEMIC FLUFF :O HAVE VITIAT$ ,HEGEL'S /RONG REALITY PR9CIPLE1 ,I %>E ,5GELS'S VIEW ?AT ! ,PH5OM5OLOGY MAY BE REG>D$ AS 0A P>ALLEL ( ! EMBRYOLOGY & ! PALEONTOLOGY ( ! M9D1 A DEVELOPM5T ( 9DIVIDUAL CONSCI\SNESS ?R\< ITS DIFF]5T /AGES1 SET 9 ! =M ( AN ABBREVIAT$ REPRODUCTION ( ! /AGES ?R\< :I* ! CONSCI\SNESS ( MAN HAS PASS$ 9 ! C\RSE ( HI/ORY40.<#c#b.> ,TO A REM>KABLE EXT5T1 AL?\< BY NO MEANS CONSI/5TLY1 ! SELF-MOVEM5T ( CONSCI\SNESS 9 ! ,PH5OM5OLOGY P>ALLELS ! SELF-MOVEM5T ( CONSCI\SNESS 9 HI/ORICAL REALITY1 AL?\< ! /RATEGY IS CAPTIVE TO RATIONAL REALITY & ! E?ICAL UNIV]SE IT OP5S = ECOLOGY4 

,TAK+ AS \R PRESUPPOSITIONS ,DID]OT'S CONCEPT (  
S5SIBILITE 9 0MATT]0 & ,HEGEL'S PH5OM5OLOGICAL /RATEGY1 WE EM]GE ) A FASC9AT+ POSSIBILITY4 ,SPEAK+ METAPHORICALLY1 IT IS NATURE ITSELF ?AT SEEMS TO 0WRITE0 NATURAL PHILOSOPHY & E?ICS1 NOT LOGICIANS1 POSITIVI/S1 NEO-,KANTIANS1 & HEIRS ( ,GALILEAN SCI5TISM4 ,ACCORD+ TO A FAIRLY REC5T REVOLUTION 9 A/ROPHYSICS 7POSSIBLY COMP>ABLE TO ! A*IEVEM5TS ( ,COP]NICUS & ,KEPL]71 ! COSMOS IS OP5+ ITSELF UP TO US 9 NEW WAYS ?AT DEM& AN EXHIL>AT+LY SPECULATIVE TURN ( M9D & A MORE QUALITATIVE APPROA* TO NATURAL PH5OM5A ?AN 9 ! PA/4 ,IT IS BECOM+ 9CREAS+LY T5ABLE TO HOLD ?AT ! 5TIRE UNIV]SE IS ! CRADLE ( LIFE -- NOT M]ELY \R [N PLANET OR POSSIBLY PLANETS LIKE IT4 ,! =MATION ( ALL ! ELEM5TS FROM HYDROG5 & HELIUM1 !IR COMB9ATION 9TO SMALL MOLECULES & LAT] 9TO SELF-=M+ MACROMOLECULES1 & F9ALLY ! ORGANIZATION ( !SE MACROMOLECULES 9TO ! CON/ITU5TS ( LIFE & POSSIBLY M9D FOLL[ A SEQU5CE ?AT *ALL5GES ,B]TR& ,RUSSELL'S IMAGE ( HUMANITY AS AN ACCID5TAL SP>K 9 A MEAN+LESS VOID4 ,! PRES5CE ( COMPLEX ORGANIC MOLECULES 9 ! VA/ REA*ES ( ! UNIV]SE IS REPLAC+ ! CLASSICAL IMAGE ( SPACE AS A VOID ) AN UND]/&+ ( SPACE AS A RE/LESSLY ACTIVE *EMOG5IC GR\ND = AN A/ONI%+ SEQU5CE ( 9CREAS+LY COMPLEX *EMICAL COMP\NDS4 ,REC5T !ORIES AB\T ! =MATION ( ,D,N,A ?AT >E MODEL$ ON ! ACTIVITY ( CRY/ALL9E REPLICATION 7A NOTION ADVANC$ AS E>LY AS #aidd BY ,]W9 ,S*ROD+]7 SUGGE/ H[ G5ETIC GUIDANCE & EVOLUTION ITSELF MI<T HAVE EM]G$ TO =M AN ,9T]FACE BETWE5 ! 9ORGANIC & ORGANIC4.<#c#c.> 

,! PO9T IS ?AT WE CAN NO LONG] BE SATISFI$ ) ! !ORY ( AN 9]T 0MATT]0 ?AT =TUIT\SLY AGGREGATES 9TO LIFE4 ,! UNIV]SE BE>S WITNESS TO A DEVELOP+ -- NOT M]ELY MOV+ -- SUB/ANCE1 :OSE MO/ DYNAMIC & CREATIVE ATTRIBUTE IS ITS UNCEAS+ CAPACITY = SELF-ORGANIZATION 9TO 9CREAS+LY COMPLEX =MS4 ,=M PLAYS A C5TRAL ROLE 9 ?IS DEVELOPM5TAL & GR[? PROCESS1 :ILE FUNCTION IS AN 9DISP5SABLE CORRELATE4 ,! ORD]LY UNIV]SE ?AT MAKES SCI5CE POSSIBLE & ITS HI<LY CONCISE LOGIC -- MA!MATICS -- MEAN+FUL PRESUPPOSES ! CORRELATION ( =M ) FUNCTION4 

,9 LIFE -- A GRAD$ DEVELOPM5T BEYOND ! *EMOG5IC CRUCIBLE ?AT WE CALL ! UNIV]SE -- METABOLISM & DEVELOPM5T E/ABLI% ANO!R ELABORATION ( S5SIBILITE3 SYMBIOSIS4 ,REC5T DATA SUPPORT ! APPLICABILITY ( ,PET] ,KROPOTK9'S MUTUALI/IC NATURALISM NOT ONLY TO RELATION%IPS BETWE5 SPECIES BUT AMONG COMPLEX CELLUL> =MS4 ,AS BIOLOGI/ ,WILLIAM ,TRAG] IRONICALLY REM>K$ A DECADE AGO AB\T ! 0/RUGGLE = EXI/5CE0 & ! 0SURVIVAL ( ! FITTE/03 0FEW PEOPLE REALIZE ?AT MUTUAL COOP]ATION BETWE5 DIFF]5T K9DS ( ORGANISMS -- SYMBIOSIS -- IS JU/ AS IMPORTANT1 & ?AT ! 'FITTE/ MAY BE ! ONE ?AT MO/ HELPS ANO!R TO SURVIVE40.<#c#d.> 

,9DE$1 ! CELLUL> /RUCTURE ( ALL MULTICELLUL> ORGANISMS IS ITSELF TE/IMONY TO A SYMBIOTIC >RANGEM5T ?AT R5D]S COMPLEX LIFE-=MS POSSIBLE4 ,! EUK>YOTIC CELL -- A CELL ?AT MAKES UP AN ORGANISM -- IS A HI<LY FUNCTIONAL SYMBIOTIC >RANGEM5T ( ! LESS COMPLEX & MORE PRIMAL PROK>YOTES1 OR S+LE-CELL$ ORGANISMS1 & EVOLV$ 9 AN ANA]OBIC WORLD LONG BE=E \R HI<LY OXYG5AT$ ATMOSPH]E WAS =M$4 ,! WORK ( ,LYNN ,M>GULIS GIVES US REASON TO BELIEVE ?AT EUK>YOTIC FLAGELLA D]IV$ FROM ANA]OBIC SPIRO*ETES2 ?AT MITO*ONDRIA D]IV$ FROM PROK>YOTIC BACT]IA ?AT W]E CAPABLE ( RESPIRATION AS WELL AS F]M5TATION2 & ?AT PLANT *LOROPLA/S D]IV$ FROM BLUE-GRE5 ALGAE 7CYANOBACT]IA74.<#c#e.> 

,IF ,MANFR$ ,EIG5 IS CORRECT ?AT EVOLUTION 0APPE>S TO BE AN 9EVITABLE EV5T1 GIV5 ! PRES5CE ( C]TA9 MATT] ) SPECIFI$ AUTOCATALYTIC PROP]TIES & UND] ! MA9T5ANCE ( ! F9ITE 7FREE7 5]GY FL[ .<SOL> 5]GY.> NECESS>Y TO COMP5SATE = ! /EADY PRODUCTION ( 5]GY10 !N \R V]Y CONCEPT ( MATT] HAS TO BE RADICALLY REVIS$4.<#c#f.> ,! PROSPECT ?AT LIFE & ALL ITS ATTRIBUTES >E LAT5T 9 MATT] AS SU*1 ?AT BIOLOGICAL EVOLUTION IS DEEPLY ROOT$ 9 SYMBIOSIS OR MUTUALISM1 SUGGE/S ?AT :AT WE CALL MATT] IS ACTUALLY ACTIVE SUB/ANCE4 

,! TRADITIONAL DUALISM BETWE5 ! LIV+ & NONLIV+ WORLDS1 BETWE5 ORGANISMS & !IR ABIOTIC ECOSY/EMS1 IS BE+ REPLAC$ ) ! MORE *ALL5G+ NOTION ?AT LIFE 0MAKES MU* ( ITS [N 5VIRONM5T10 TO USE ,M>GULIS'S WORDS4 ,FROM AN ECOLOGICAL VIEWPO9T1 9 :I* LIFE IS 9 ITS 5VIRONM5T & NOT ISOLAT$ FROM1 IT1 ! ,WEISSMANNIAN B>RI] ?AT CONV5I5TLY SEP>ATES G5ETIC FROM SOMATIC *ANGES CEASES TO BE MEAN+FUL4 0,C]TA9 PROP]TIES ( ! ATMOSPH]E1 S$IM5TS1 & HYDROSPH]E >E CONTROLL$ BY & = ! BIOSPH]E02 BY COMP>+ LIFELESS PLANETS SU* AS ,M>S & ,V5US ) ! ,E>?1 ,M>GULIS NOTES ?AT ! HI< CONC5TRATION ( OXYG5 9 \R ATMOSPH]E IS ANOMAL\S 9 CONTRA/ ) ! C>BON DIOXIDE ATMOSPH]ES ( O!R PLANETS4 ,MOREOV]1 0! CONC5TRATION ( OXYG5 9 ! ,E>?'S ATMOSPH]E REMA9S CON/ANT 9 ! PRES5CE ( NITROG51 ME?ANE1 HYDROG51 & O!R POT5TIAL REACTANTS40 ,LIFE-=MS1 9 EFFECT1 PLAY AN ACTIVE ROLE 9 MA9TA9+ A RELATIVELY CON/ANT SUPPLY ( FREE OXYG5 MOLECULES 9 ! ,E>?'S ATMOSPH]E4 ,IF ! ANOMALIES ( ! ,E>?'S ATMOSPH]E 0>E F> FROM R&OM10 MU* ! SAME CAN BE SAID = ! TEMP]ATURE ( ! ,E>?'S SURFACE & ! SAL9ITY ( ITS OCEANS1 :OSE /ABILITY SEEMS TO BE A FUNCTION ( LIFE ON ! PLANET4 ,! 0NATURAL SELECTION0 ( ,D>W9IAN EVOLUTION MAY ITSELF BE ! PRODUCT ( LIFE-=MS1 :I* PRESUMABLY FILT] \T SOME G5ETIC *ANGES4.<#c#g.> 

,EV5 ! ,MOD]N ,SYN!SIS1 ! NEO-,D>W9IAN MODEL ( ORGANIC EVOLUTION ?AT HAS BE5 9 =CE S9CE ! E>LY #a#i#dS1 HAS BE5 *ALL5G$ AS TOO N>R[ & P]HAPS TOO ME*ANI/IC 9 ITS \TLOOK4 ,ITS !SIS ( SL[-PAC$ EVOLUTION>Y *ANGE EM]G+ FROM ! 9T]PLAY ( SMALL V>IATIONS1 :I* >E 0SELECT$0 = !IR ADAPTABILITY TO ! 5VIRONM5T1 IS NO LONG] AS T5ABLE AS IT ONCE SEEM$ BAS$ ON ! FOSSIL RECORD4 ,EVOLUTION SEEMS 9/EAD TO HAVE BE5 RA!R MORE SPORADIC1 M>K$ BY OCCASIONAL *ANGES ( CONSID]ABLE RAPIDITY1 !N LONG P]IODS ( /ASIS4 ,! 0,EFFECT ,HYPO!SIS10 ADVANC$ BY ,ELIZABE? ,VRBA1 SUGGE/S ?AT EVOLUTION 9CLUDES AN IMMAN5T /RIV+1 NOT M]ELY R&OM MUTATIONAL *ANGES FILT]$ BY EXT]NAL SELECTIVE FACTORS4 ,AS ONE OBS]V] NOTES1 0,:]EAS SPECIES SELECTION PUTS ! =CES ( *ANGE ON 5VIRONM5TAL CONDITIONS1 ! ,EFFECT ,HYPO!SIS LOOKS TO 9T]NAL P>AMET]S ?AT AFFECT ! RATES ( SPECIATION & EXT9CTION40.<#c#h.> 

,9DE$1 ! !ORY ( SMALL1 GRADUAL PO9T MUTATIONS 7A !ORY ?AT ACCORDS ) ! ,VICTORIAN NOTION ( /RICTLY =TUIT\S EVOLUTION>Y *ANGE1 MU* LIKE ! ,VICTORIAN IMAGE ( ! ECONOMIC M>KETPLACE7 CAN BE *ALL5G$ ON G5ETIC GR\NDS ALONE4 ,NOT ONLY G5ES BUT *ROMOSOMES1 TOO1 MAY BE ALT]$ *EMICALLY & ME*ANICALLY44 ,G5ETIC *ANGES MAY RANGE FROM 0SIMPLE0 PO9T MUTATIONS1 ?R\< JUMP+ G5ES & TRANSPOSABLE ELEM5TS1 TO MAJOR *ROMOSOMAL RE>RANGEM5TS4 ,MAJOR MORPHOLOGICAL *ANGES MAY ?US RESULT FROM MOSAICS ( G5ETIC *ANGE4 ,?IS DYNAMIC RAISES ! 9TRIGU+ POSSIBILITY ( A DIRECTIV5ESS TO G5ETIC *ANGE ITSELF1 NOT SIMPLY A PROMISCU\S & PURELY =TUIT\S R&OMNESS1 & AN 5VIRONM5T L>GELY CREAT$ BY LIFE ITSELF1 NOT BY =CES EXCLUSIVELY EXT]NAL TO IT4 

,NEI!R MY/ICISM NOR AN?ROPOC5TRISM IS 9VOLV$ 9 AN ECOLOGICAL VIEW ?AT ONTOLOGICALLY GRAIDES NATURAL HI/ORY 9TO SOCIAL HI/ORY )\T SACRIFIC+ ! UNITY ( EI!R4 ,NOR IS IT A SUP]NATURAL FALLACY TO ULTIMATELY D]IVE ! HUMAN BRA9 FROM AN ACTIVELY *EMOG5IC UNIV]SE ?AT IS SELF-=M+ & IMMAN5TLY 5TELE*IAL4 ,AL?\< ,HANS ,DRIES* GAVE 5TELE*Y A BAD NAME1 ! CONCEPT D]IVES FROM ,>I/OTLE1 NOT FROM ,DRIES*'S CONFUS$ NEO VITALISM4 

,! FALLACIES ( CLASSICAL ,GREEK COSMOLOGY G5]ALLY LIE LESS 9 ITS E?ICAL ORI5TATION ?AN 9 ITS DUALI/IC VIEW ( NATURE4 ,= ALL ITS EMPHASIS ON SPECULATION AT ! EXP5SE ( EXP]IM5TATION1 ANCI5T COSMOLOGY ]R$ MO/ :5 IT TRI$ TO JO9 ! SELF-ORGANIZ+1 FECUND NATURE IT HAD 9H]IT$ FROM ! ,IONIANS ) A VITALIZ+ =CE ALI5 TO ! NATURAL WORLD ITSELF4 ,! SELF-ORGANIZ+ PROP]TIES ( NATURE W]E REPLAC$ ) ,P>M5IDES' ,DIKE -- LIKE ,B]GSON'S ELAN VITAL1 A LAT5TLY DUALI/IC COSMOLOGY ?AT C\LD NOT TRU/ NATURE TO DEVELOP ON ITS [N SPONTANE\S GR\NDS1 ANY MORE ?AN RUL+ SOCIAL & POLITICAL /RATA TRU/ ! BODY POLITIC TO MANAGE ITS [N AFFAIRS4 

,!SE >*AISMS1 ) !IR !OLOGICAL NUANCES & !IR TI<TLY =MULAT$ TELEOLOGIES1 HAVE BE5 JU/LY VIEW$ AS SOCIALLY REACTION>Y TRAPS4 ,!Y TA9T$ ! WORKS ( ,>I/OTLE & ,HEGEL AS SURELY AS !Y MESM]IZ$ ! M$IEVAL ,S*OOLM54 ,CLASSICAL NATURE PHILOSOPHY ]R$ NOT 9 ITS PROJECT ( TRY+ TO ELICIT AN E?ICS FROM NATURE1 BUT 9 ! SPIRIT ( DOM9ATION ?AT POISON$ IT FROM ! />T ) AN (T5 AU?ORIT>IAN1 SUP]NATURAL >BIT] :O WEI<$ & CORRECT$ ! IMBALANCES OR 09JU/ICES0 ?AT ]UPT$ 9 NATURE4 ,! ANCI5T GODS W]E /ILL WOR%IP$ 9 ! CLASSICAL ]A1 EV5 AFT] ,H]ACLITUS2 !Y HAD TO BE EXORCIZ$ BY ! ,5LI<T5M5T BE=E AN E?ICAL CONT9UUM BETWE5 NATURE & HUMANITY C\LD BE R5D]$ MORE MEAN+FUL & 0DEMOCRATIC40 ,LATE ,R5AISSANCE ?\<T 9ITIAT$ A NEW1 MORE RATIONAL CONNECTION BETWE5 NATURE & HUMANITY4 ,BEG9N+ ) ,GALILEO & ! NEW SCI5TIFIC SOCIETIES ?AT W]E EM]G+1 ! WAY WAS OP5$ TO ! 9CREAS+LY DEMOCRATIC P>TICIPATION ( EV]YONE 9 ! DISCOV]Y ( TRU?4 ,ALL M5 -- & LAT] WOM5 -- C\LD N[ P>TICIPATE 9 UNE>?+ KN[L$GE1 & ! V]ACITY ( ! FACTS !Y DISCOV]$ C\LD BE JUDG$ FREELY BY ! M]ITS ( !IR WORK1 NOT BY !IR SOCIAL /ATUS4 

,TODAY1 WE MAY WELL BE ABLE TO P]MIT NATURE -- NOT ,DIKE1 ,GOD1 ,SPIRIT1 OR AN ELAN VITAL -- TO OP5 ITSELF UP TO US AS ! GR\ND = AN E?ICS ON ITS [N T]MS4 ,CONTEMPOR>Y SCI5CE'S GREATE/ A*IEVEM5T IS ! GR[+ EVID5CE IT PROVIDES ?AT R&OMNESS IS SUBJECT TO A DIRECTIVE ORD]+ PR9CIPLE4 ,MUTUALISM IS A GOOD BY VIRTUE ( ITS FUNCTION 9 FO/]+ ! EVOLUTION ( NATURAL V>IETY & COMPLEXITY4 ,WE REQUIRE NO ,DIKE TO AFFIRM COMMUNITY AS A DESID]ATUM 9 NATURE & SOCIETY4 ,SIMIL>LY1 ! CLAIMS ( FRE$OM >E VALIDAT$ BY :AT ,HANS ,JONAS SO P]CEPTIVELY CALL$ ! 09W>DNESS0 ( LIFE-=MS1 !IR 0ORGANIC ID5TITY0 & 0ADV5TURE ( =M40 ,! EF=T1 V5TURE1 9DE$ SELF-RECOGNITION ?AT EV]Y LIV+ BE+ EX]CISES 9 ! C\RSE ( 0ITS PREC>I\S METABOLIC CONT9UITY0 TO PRES]VE ITSELF REVEALS -- EV5 9 ! MO/ RUDIM5T>Y ( ORGANISMS -- A S5SE ( ID5TITY & SELECTIVE ACTIVITY ?AT ,JONAS APPROPRIATELY CALL$ EVID5CE ( 0G]M9AL FRE$OM40.<#c#i.> 

0,OP5 SY/EMS10 0M9DS10 & 0HOLONS0 MAY EXPLA9 ! DISEQUILIBRIA ?AT *ANGE CYB]NETIC & G5]AL SY/EMS1 BUT WE MU/ 9V>IABLY FALL BACK ON 9H]5T ATTRIBUTES ( SUB/ANCE -- NOTABLY1 ! MOTION1 =M1 & S5SIBILITE ( 0MATT]0 -- TO ACC\NT = !  
DEVELOPM5T ( NATURE T[>D COMPLEXITY1 SPECIALIZATION1 & CONSCI\SNESS4 ,?IS NECESSITY RUNS C\NT] TO EV]Y BIAS ON CURR5T PHILOSOPHY1 :I* W\LD IGNORE ! FACT ( DIRECTIV5ESS OR 5D[ IT ) HUMAN TRAITS LIKE PURPOSIV5ESS :5 IT IS SIMPLY A T5D5CY ?AT 9H]ES 9 ! ORGANIZATION ( SUB/ANCE AS POT5TIALITY4 

,! PRESUPPOSITIONS ,I HAVE MADE H]E >E NOT >BITR>Y4 ,! VALIDITY ( A PRESUPPOSITION MU/ BE TE/$ AGA9/ ! REAL DIALECTIC ( NATURAL DEVELOPM5T -- SUB/ANCE 0FREE & SELF-MOV+ 9 ITS [N PECULI> %APE0 -- & NOT AGA9/ ! 0ATOMIES0 ( DATA & /ATI/ICAL PROBABILITIES ADDUC$ BY EMPIRICAL OBS]VATION4 ,ON ?IS SCORE AT LEA/1 CONTEXTUALI/S LIKE ,:ITEHEAD & ,BATESON >E QUITE S\ND 9 !IR CLAIM ?AT FACTS DO NOT EXI/ ON !IR [N BUT >E ALWAYS RELATIONAL OR 9T]ACTIVE1 TO USE ,DID]OT'S MORE G]M9AL WORD4 

,ADMITT$LY1 ?IS APPROA* TO A NATURE PHILOSOPHY MAY SEEM AS SELF-5CLOS$ AS ! ,KANTIAN APPROA*4 ,BUT ,I HAVE NOT FAULT$ ,KANTIAN1 NEO-,KANTIAN1 OR = ?AT MATT]1 CYB]NETIC & POSITIVI/IC !ORIES = !IR 9T]NAL UNITY OR !IR IMPREGNABILITY TO IMMAN5T CRITICISM4 ,MY OBJECTION TO !M IS !IR CLAIM TO UNIV]SALITY1 S9CE !IR PRESUPPOSITIONS PROVIDE AN 9ADEQUATE FRAMEWORK = UND]/&+ NATURAL HI/ORY & APPREH5D+ ITS E?ICAL IMPLICATIONS4 

,F9ALLY1 ! /UDY ( NATURE EXHIBITS A SELF-EVOLV+ NISUS SO TO SPEAK1 ?AT IS IMPLICITLY E?ICAL4 ,MUTUALISM1 FRE$OM1 & SUBJECTIVITY >E NOT SOLELY HUMAN VALUES OR CONC]NS4 ,!Y APPE>1  
H[EV] G]M9ALLY1 9 L>G] COSMIC OR ORGANIC PROCESSES1 BUT !Y REQUIRE NO ,>I/OTELIAN ,GOD TO MOTIVATE !M1 NO ,HEGELIAN ,SPIRIT TO VITALIZE !M4 ,IF SOCIAL ECOLOGY CAN PROVIDE A COH]5T FOCUS ON ! UNITY ( MUTUALISM1 FRE$OM1 & SUBJECTIVITY AS ASPECTS ( A COOP]ATIVE SOCIETY ?AT IS FREE ( DOM9ATION & GUID$ BY REFLECTION & REASON1 IT WILL HAVE REMOV$ ! DIFFICULTIES ?AT HAVE PLAGU$ NATURALI/IC E?ICS = SO LONG4 ,NO LONG] W\LD A ,C>TESIAN & ,KANTIAN DUALISM LEAVE NATURE 9]T & M9D ISOLAT$ FROM ! WORLD >\ND IT4 ,WE W\LD SEE ?AT M9D1 F> FROM BE+ SUI G5]IS 9 A WORLD ?AT IS :OLLY EXT]NAL TO IT1 HAS A NATURAL HI/ORY ?AT SPANS ! S5SIBILITE ( ! 9ORGANIC & ! CONCEPTUAL CAPACITIES ( ! HUMAN BRA94 ,TO WEAK5 COMMUNITY1 TO >RE/ ! SPONTANEITY ( A SELF-ORGANIZ+ REALITY T[>D EV]-GREAT] COMPLEXITY & RATIONALITY AS NATURE R5D]$ SELF-CONSCI\S1 W\LD BE TO D5Y \R H]ITAGE 9 ITS EVOLUTION>Y PROCESSES & DISSOLVE \R UNIQU5ESS 9 ! WORLD ( LIFE4 

,MUTUALISM1 SELF-ORGANIZATION1 FRE$OM1 & SUBJECTIVITY1 COH]$ BY SOCIAL ECOLOGY'S PR9CIPLES ( UNITY 9 DIV]SITY1 SPONTANEITY1 & NONHI]>*ICAL RELATION%IPS1 >E CON/ITUTIVE ( EVOLUTION'S POT5TIALITIES4 ,ASIDE FROM ! ECOLOGICAL RESPONSIBILITIES !Y CONF] ON \R SPECIES AS ! SELF-REFLEXIVE VOICE ( NATURE1 !Y LIT]ALLY DEF9E US4 ,NATURE DOES NOT 0EXI/0 = US TO USE1 BUT IT MAKES POSSIBLE \R UNIQU5ESS4 ,LIKE ! CONCEPT ( ,BE+1 !SE PR9CIPLES ( SOCIAL ECOLOGY REQUIRE NOT ANALYSIS BUT M]ELY V]IFICATION4 ,!Y >E ! ELEM5TS ( AN E?ICAL ONTOLOGY1 NOT RULES ( A GAME ?AT CAN BE *ANG$ TO SUIT P]SONAL NE$S & 9T]E/S4 

O ,*APT] #b 3 ,T[>D A ,PHILOSOPHY ( ,NATURE3 ,! ,BASES = AN ,ECOLOGICAL ,E?ICS 
,FRE$OM & ,NECESSITY 9 ,NATURE3  

 ,A ,PROBLEM 9 ,ECOLOGICAL ,E?ICS.<#d.> 

  

,ONE ( ! MO/ 5TR5*$ IDEAS 9 ,WE/]N ?\<T IS ! NOTION ?AT NATURE IS A H>% REALM ( NECESSITY1 A DOMA9 ( UNREL5T+ LAWFULNESS & COMPULSION4 ,FROM ?IS UND]LY+ IDEA1 TWO EXTREME ATTITUDES HAVE EM]G$4 ,EI!R HUMANITY MU/ YIELD ) RELIGI\S OR 0ECOLOGICAL0 HUMILITY TO ! DICTA ( 0NATURAL LAW0 & TAKE ITS ABJECT PLACE SIDE BY SIDE ) ! L[LY ANTS ON :I* IT 0>ROGANTLY0 TREADS1 OR IT MU/ 0CONQU]0 NATURE BY MEANS ( ITS TE*NOLOGICAL & RATIONAL A/UT5ESS1 9 A %>$ PROJECT ULTIMATELY TO 0LIB]ATE0 ALL ( HUMANITY FROM ! COMPULSION ( NATURAL 0NECESSITY0 -- AN 5T]PRISE ?AT MAY WELL 5TAIL ! SUBJUGATION ( HUMAN BY HUMAN4 

,! FIR/ ATTITUDE1 A QUASI-RELIGI\S QUIETISM1 IS TYPIFI$ BY 0DEEP ECOLOGY10 ANTIHUMANISM1 & SOCIOBIOLOGY1 :ILE ! SECOND1 AN ACTIVI/ APPROA*1 IS TYPIFI$ BY ! LIB]AL & ,M>XIAN IMAGE ( AN OMNISCI5T HUMANITY CA/ 9 A COMM&E]+ PO/URE T[>D ! NATURAL WORLD4 ,MOD]N SCI5CE -- DESPITE ITS CLAIMS TO VALUE-FREE OBJECTIVITY -- UNWITT+LY TAKES ON AN E?ICAL MANTLE :5 IT COMMITS ITSELF TO A CONCEPT ( NATURE AS COMPREH5SIBLE1 AS ORD]LY 9 ! S5SE ?AT NATURE'S 0LAWS0 >E RATIONALLY EXPLICABLE & BASICALLY NECESSIT>IAN4 

,! ANCI5T ,GREEKS VIEW$ ?IS ORD]LY /RUCTURE ( ! NATURAL WORLD AS EVID5CE ( A COSMIC N\S OR LOGOS ?AT PRODUC$ A SUBJECTIVE PRES5CE 9 NATURAL PH5OM5A AS A :OLE4 ,YET ) ONLY A M9IMAL %IFT 9 EMPHASIS1 ?IS SAME NOTION ( AN ORD]LY NATURE CAN YIELD ! DISMAL CONCLUSION ?AT 0FRE$OM IS ! RECOGNITION ( NECESSITY0 7TO USE ,FRI$RI* ,5GELS'S REPHRAS+ ( ,HEGEL'S DEF9ITION74 ,9 ?IS LATT] CASE1 FRE$OM IS SUBTLY TURN$ 9TO ITS OPPOSITE3 ! M]E CONSCI\SNESS ( :AT WE CAN OR CANNOT DO4 

,SU* AN 9T]NALIZ$ VIEW ( FRE$OM AS SUBJECT TO HI<] DICTA1 ( 0,SPIRIT0 7,HEGEL7 OR 0,HI/ORY0 7,M>X71 NOT ONLY S]V$ ,LU!R 9 HIS BREAK ) ! ,*UR*'S HI]>*Y2 IT PROVID$ AN IDEOLOGICAL JU/IFICATION = ,/AL9'S WOR/ EXCESSES 9 ! NAME ( DIALECTICAL MAT]IALISM & HIS BRUTAL 9DU/RIALIZATION ( ,RUSSIA UND] ! EGIS ( SOCIETY'S 0NATURAL LAWS ( DEVELOPM5T40 ,IT MAY ALSO YIELD AN \TRI<T ,SK9N]IAN NOTION ( AN OV]LY DET]M9$ WORLD 9 :I* HUMAN BEHAVIOR IS R$UC$ TO M]E RESPONSES TO EXT]NAL OR 9T]NAL /IMULI4 

,!SE EXTREMES ASIDE1 ! CONV5TIONAL WISDOM ( \R TIME /ILL SEES NATURE AS A H>% 0REALM ( NECESSITY0 -- MORALLY1 AS WELL AS MAT]IALLY -- ?AT CON/ITUTES A *ALL5GE TO HUMANITY'S SURVIVAL & WELL-BE+1 NOT TO SPEAK ( ITS FRE$OM4 ,) ! 'CONSID]ABLE 9TELLECTUAL H]ITAGE ( DY/OPIAN ?9K]S LIKE ,HOBBES & UTOPIAN ONES LIKE ,M>X1 ! SELF-DEF9ITION ( MAJOR ACADEMIC DISCIPL9ES EMBODIES ?IS T5SION1 9DE$1 ?IS CONFLICT4 ,ECONOMICS WAS =G$ 9 ! CRUCIBLE ( A NECESSIT>IAN1 EV5 0/+Y0 NATURE :OSE 0SC>CE RES\RCES0 W]E ?\<T TO BE 9SUFFICI5T TO MEET HUMANITY'S 0UNLIMIT$ NE$S40 ,PSY*OLOGY1 C]TA9LY 9KS.-PSY*OANALYTIC =MS1 /RESSES ! IMPORTANCE ( CONTROLL+ HUMAN 9T]NAL NATURE1 ) ! BONUS ?AT ! 9DIVIDUAL'S SUBLIMAT$ 5]GY WILL F9D ITS EXPRESSION 9 ! SUBJUGATION ( EXT]NAL NATURE4 ,!ORIES ( WORK11 SOCIETY1 BEHAVIOR1 & EV5 SEXUALITY TURN ON AN IMAGE ( A NECESSIT>IAN NATURE1 ?AT MU/ 9 SOME S5SE BE 0DOM9AT$0 TO S]VE HUMAN 5DS -- PRESUMABLY ON ! OLD BELIEF ?AT :AT IS NATURAL DISALL[S ALL ELEM5TS ( *OICE & FRE$OM4 ,NOR IS NATURE PHILOSOPHY ITSELF UNTA9T$ BY ?IS H>%LY NECESSIT>IAN IMAGE4 ,9DE$1 MORE (T5 ?AN NOT1 IT HAS S]V$ AS AN IDEOLOGICAL JU/IFICATION = A HI]>*ICAL SOCIETY1 MODEL$ ON A HI]>*ICALLY /RUCTUR$ 0NATURAL ORD]40 

,?IS IMAGE & ITS SOCIAL IMPLICATIONS1 G5]ALLY ASSOCIAT$ ) ,>I/OTLE1 /ILL LIVE 9 \R MID/ AS A COSMIC JU/IFICATION = DOM9ATION 9 G5]AL -- 9 ITS MORE NOXI\S CASES1 = RACIAL & SEXUAL DISCRIM9ATION1 & 9 ITS MO/ NI<TM>I% =M1 = ! \TRI<T EXT]M9ATION ( 5TIRE PEOPLES4 ,RAIS$ TO A MORAL CALL+1 0MAN0 EM]GES FROM ?IS MASSIVE IDEOLOGICAL APP>ATUS AS A CREATURE TO :OM 0,SPIRIT0 OR 0,GOD0 HAS IMP>T$ A SUPRANATURAL QUALITY ( A TRANSC5D5TAL K9D & A MISSION TO GOV]N AN ORD]$ UNIV]SE ?AT 0,HE0 OR 0,IT0 CREAT$4 

,AT FIR/ GLANCE1 RESOLV+ ! CONFLICT BETWE5 NECESSITY & FRE$OM -- PRESUMABLY BETWE5 NATURE & SOCIETY -- SEEMS TO REQUIRE BUILD+ A BRIDGE BETWE5 ! TWO1 AS 9 VALUE SY/EMS ?AT >E BAS$ ON PURELY UTILIT>IAN ATTITUDES T[>D ! NATURAL WORLD4 ,! >GUM5T ?AT HUMANITY'S ABUSE ( NATURE SUBV]TS ! MAT]IAL CONDITIONS = \R [N SURVIVAL1 AL?\< SURELY TRUE1 IS NONE!LESS CRASSLY 9/RUM5TAL4 ,IT ASSUMES ?AT HUMAN CONC]N = NATURE RE/S ON SELF-9T]E/ RA!R ?AN ON A FEEL+ = ! LIV+ WORLD ( :I* HUMAN BE+S >E P>T1 ALBEIT 9 A V]Y DI/9CTIVE WAY4 ,9 SU* A VALUE SY/EM \R RELATION%IP ) NATURE IS NEI!R BETT] NOR WORSE ?AN ! SUCCESS ) :I* WE PLUND] IT )\T H>M+ \RSELVES4 ,IT IS ANO!R W>RANT = UND]M9+ ! NATURAL WORLD1 PROVID$ ONLY ?AT WE CAN F9D ADEQUATE SUB/ITUTES1 H[EV] SYN!TIC1 SIMPLE1 OR ME*ANICAL1 = EXI/+ LIFE-=MS & ECOLOGICAL RELATION%IPS4 ,IT IS PRECISELY ?IS APPROA* ?AT HAS EXAC]BAT$ ! PRES5T ECOLOGICAL CRISIS08 

,MOREOV]1 ATTEMPTS TO BRIDGE ! GULF BETWE5 ! NATURAL & SOCIAL WORLDS ?AT >E PREMIS$ ON A ME*ANICAL DUALISM BETWE5 NATURE & SOCIETY CAN 9DIRECTLY PRES]VE ?IS DUALISM EV5 AS !Y SEEK TO OV]COME IT4 ,?IS K9D ( PURELY /RUCTURAL APPROA* HAS GIV5 RISE TO SPLITS BETWE5 BODY & M9D1 REALITY & ?\<T1 OBJECT & SUBJECT1 C\NTRY & T[N1 & ULTIMATELY1 SOCIETY & ! 9DIVIDUAL4 ,IT IS NOT F>-FET*$ TO SAY ?AT ! PRIM>Y S*ISM BETWE5 NATURE & HUMANITY HAS N\RI%$ A WIDE V>IETY ( SPLITS 9 EV]YDAY LIFE AS WELL AS 9 \R !ORETICAL S5SIBILITIES4 

,NO LESS S]I\S A FALLACY IS TO ATTEMPT TO OV]COME !SE DUALISMS SIMPLY BY R$UC+ ONE ELEM5T ( ! DUALITY TO ! O!R OR1 S]I\SLY1 TO ATTEMPT TO DISSOLVE HUMANITY 9TO NATURE4 ,! UNIV]SAL 0NI<T 9 :I* ALL C[S >E BLACK10 AS ,HEGEL PHRAS$ IT 9 HIS ,PH5OM5OLOGY ( ,SPIRIT1 ATTA9S UNITY BY SACRIFIC+ ! V>IETY & ! UNIQU5ESS ( HUMANITY AS A REM>KABLE PRODUCT ( NATURAL EVOLUTION4 ,SU* R$UCTIONISM YIELDS A CRUDE ME*ANI/IC SPIRITUALISM ?AT IS M]ELY ! C\NT]P>T ( ! PREVAIL+ ME*ANI/IC MAT]IALISM4 ,9 EI!R CASE1 A NUANC$ 9T]PRETATION ( EVOLUTION>Y PH5OM5A ?AT TAKES 9TO ACC\NT DI/9CTIONS & GRADATIONS AS WELL AS CONT9UITIES IS REPLAC$ BY A SIMPLI/IC DUALISM ?AT DISMISSES ! PHASES ?AT 5T] 9TO ANY PROCESS4 ,IT EMBRACES A SIMPLI/IC & MY/ICAL 0,ON5ESS0 ?AT OV]RIDES ! IMM5SE WEAL? ( DIFF]5TIAE TO :I* ! PRES5T BIOSPH]E IS HEIR -- ! RI*1 FECUND CON/ITU5TS ?AT MAKE UP \R EVOLUTION & ?AT >E PRES]V$ 9 NE>LY ALL EXI/+ PH5OM5A4 

,IT IS SURPRIS+ ?AT ECOLOGY1 ONE ( ! MO/ ORGANIC ( CONTEMPOR>Y DISCIPL9ES1 IS ITSELF SO LACK+ 9 ORGANIC WAYS ( ?9K+ -- ?AT IS1 9 =MS ( REASON ?AT 9W>DLY D]IVE1 OR $UCE1 DIFF]5TIAE FROM ONE ANO!R1 ! FULL FROM ! G]M9AL1 ! COMPLEX FROM ! SIMPLE -- 9 %ORT1 9 ?9K+ ORGANICALLY & $UCTIVELY1 NOT M]ELY D$UC+ CONCLUSIONS FROM HYPO!SES 9 TYPICAL MA!MATICAL FA%ION1 OR SIMPLY TABULAT+ & CLASSIFY+ FACTS4 ,ECOLOGI/S TOO (T5 %>E ) ACC\NTANTS ! MODE ( REASON+ SO PREVAL5T TODAY1 ONE ?AT IS L>GELY ANALYTICAL & CLASSIFICATORY RA!R ?AN PROCESSUAL & DEVELOPM5TAL4 ,APPROPRIATE AS ANALYTICAL1 CLASSIFICATORY1 & D$UCTIVE MODES ( REASON+ >E = ASSEMBL+ AUTOMOBILE 5G9ES OR CON/RUCT+ BUILD+S1 !Y >E WOEFULLY 9ADEQUATE = ASC]TA9+ ! PHASES ?AT MAKE UP A PROCESS1 EA* ) ITS [N 9TEGRITY YET AS P>T ( AN EV]-DEVELOP+ CONT9UUM4 ,WE MAY WELL FAIL TO UND]/& LIFE ITSELF IF WE SEE LIFE-=MS AS LITTLE MORE ?AN FACTORS 9 PRODUCTION1 AS 0NATURAL RES\RCES0 TO BE PLAC$ 9 ! S]VICE ( WEAL?1 RA!R ?AN AS P>T ( ! CREATIVE PH5OM5ON ( LIFE4 ,AGA91 ?IS ME*ANI/IC S5SIBILITY & ITS ANALYTIC MODE ( ?\<T IS ALI5 TO PROCESSUAL ?\<T1 TO APPREH5D+ DEVELOPM5T & ITS PHASES -- BO? !IR DIFF]5CES & !IR CONT9UITIES4 

,IT IS BECOM+ A CLI*E TO FAULT HUMANITY'S 0SEP>ATION0 FROM NATURE AS ! S\RCE ( 0ALI5ATION0 9 \R HI<LY FRAGM5T$ WORLD4 ,WE MU/ SEE ?AT EV]Y PROCESS IS ALSO A =M ( ALI5ATION1 9 ! S5SE ?AT DIFF]5TIATION 9VOLVES SEP>ATION FROM OLD] =MS ( BE+ AS WELL AS ! ABSORPTION ( :AT IS NEGAT$ 9TO ! NEW1 SU* ?AT ! :OLE IS ! RI*LY V>I$ FULFILLM5T ( ITS LAT5T POT5TIALITIES4 ,/&+ 9 M>K$ CONTRA/ TO ?IS VIEW ( ALI5ATION AS SELF-EXPRESSION OR SELF->TICULATION AS WELL AS OPPOSITION IS AN ALL-P]VASIVE EPI/EMOLOGY ( RULE ?AT SORTS DIFF]5CE AS SU* 79DE$1 ! 0O!R0 9 ALL ITS =MS7 9TO AN 5SEMBLE ( ANTAGONI/IC RELATION%IPS /RUCTUR$ >\ND COMM& & OB$I5CE4 ,?AT ! 0O!R0 IS AT LEA/ P>T ( A :OLE1 H[EV] DIFF]5TIAT$ IT IS1 ELUDES ! MOD]N M9D 9 A FLUX ( EXP]I5CE ?AT KN[S DIVISION EXCLUSIVELY AS CONFLICT OR BREAKD[N4.<#d#a.> 

,! REAL WORLD IS 9DE$ DIVID$ ANTAGONI/ICALLY1 TO BE REM$I$ BY /RUGGLE1 RECONCILIATION -- & TRANSC5D5CE4 ,BUT IF ! ?RU/ ( EVOLUTION HAS ANY MEAN+1 IT IS ?AT A CONT9UUM IS PROCESSUAL PRECISELY 9 ?AT IT IS GRAD$ AS WELL AS UNIT$1 A FL[ ( D]IV$ PHASES AS WELL AS A %>$ DEVELOPM5T FROM ! SIMPL] TO ! MORE COMPLEX4 ,NEI!R CONFLICT NOR DIFF]5TIATION %\LD BE P]MITT$ TO OV]RIDE ! O!R AS ! LONG-RANGE *>ACT] ( DEVELOPM5T 9 NATURE & SOCIETY4 

,:AT !N DOES IT MEAN TO SPEAK ( COMPLEXITY1 V>IETY1 & UNITY-9-DIV]SITY 9 DEVELOPM5TAL PROCESSES8 ,ECOLOGI/S G5]ALLY TREAT DIV]SITY AS A S\RCE ( ECOLOGICAL /ABILITY1 9 ! BELIEF ?AT :ILE ! VULN]ABILITY TO PE/S ( A S+LE CROP TREAT$ ) PE/ICIDES CAN REA* AL>M+ PROPORTIONS1 A MORE DIV]SIFI$ CROP1 9 :I* A NUMB] ( PLANT & ANIMAL SPECIES 9T]ACT1 PRODUCES NATURAL *ECKS ON PE/ POPULATIONS4.<#d#b.> 

,BUT ! FACT ?AT BIOTIC -- & SOCIAL -- EVOLUTION HAS BE5 M>K$ UNTIL REC5TLY BY ! DEVELOPM5T ( EV] MORE COMPLEX SPECIES & ECOCOMMUNITIES RAISES AN EV5 MORE *ALL5G+ ISSUE4 ,! DIV]SITY ( AN ECOCOMMUNITY MAY BE A S\RCE ( GREAT] /ABILITY FROM AN AGRICULTURAL /&PO9T2 BUT FROM AN EVOLUTION>Y /&PO9T1 IT MAY BE AN EV]-EXP&+1 ALBEIT NASC5T S\RCE ( FRE$OM )9 NATURE1 A M$IUM = PROVID+ V>Y+ DEGREES ( *OICE1 SELF-DIRECTIV5ESS1 & P>TICIPATION BY LIFE-=MS 9 !IR [N DEVELOPM5T4 

,I WI% TO PROPOSE ?AT ! EVOLUTION ( LIV+ BE+S IS NO M]E PASSIVE PROCESS1 ! PRODUCT ( EXCLUSIVELY *ANCE CONJUNCTIONS BETWE5 R&OM G5ETIC *ANGES & 0SELECTIVE0 5VIRONM5TAL 0=CES10 & ?AT ! 0ORIG9 ( SPECIES0 IS NO M]E RESULT ( EXT]NAL 9FLU5CES ?AT DET]M9E ! 0FITNESS0 ( A LIFE-=M TO 0SURVIVE0 AS A RESULT ( R&OM FACTORS 9 :I* LIFE IS SIMPLY AN 0OBJECT0 ( AN 9DET]M9ABLE 0SELECTIVE0 PROCESS4 ,! 9CREASE 9 DIV]SITY 9 ! BIOSPH]E OP5S NEW EVOLUTION>Y PA?WAYS1 9DE$1 ALT]NATIVE EVOLUTION>Y DIRECTIONS1 9 :I* SPECIES PLAY AN ACTIVE ROLE 9 !IR [N SURVIVAL & *ANGE4 ,H[EV] NASC5T1 *OICE IS NOT TOTALLY ABS5T FROM BIOTIC EVOLUTION2 9DE$1 IT 9CREASES AS SPECIES BECOME /RUCTURALLY1 PHYSIOLOGICALLY1 & ABOVE ALL NEUROLOGICALLY MORE COMPLEX4 ,AS ! ECOLOGICAL CONTEXTS )9 :I* SPECIES EVOLVE -- ! COMMUNITIES & 9T]ACTIONS !Y =M -- BECOME MORE COMPLEX1 !Y OP5 NEW AV5UES = EVOLUTION & A GREAT] ABILITY ( LIFE-=MS TO ACT SELF-SELECTIVELY1 =M+ ! BASES = SOME K9D ( *OICE1 FAVOR+ PRECISELY ?OSE SPECIES ?AT CAN P>TICIPATE 9 EV]-GREAT] DEGREES 9 !IR [N EVOLUTION1 BASICALLY 9 ! DIRECTION ( GREAT] COMPLEXITY4 ,9DE$1 SPECIES & ! ECOCOMMUNITIES 9 :I* !Y 9T]ACT TO CREATE MORE COMPLEX =MS ( EVOLUTION>Y DEVELOPM5T >E 9CREAS+LY ! V]Y 0=CES0 ?AT ACC\NT = EVOLUTION AS A :OLE4 

0,P>TICIPATORY EVOLUTION10 AS ,I CALL ?IS VIEW1 IS SOME:AT AT ODDS ) ! PREVAL5T ,D>W9IAN OR NEO-,D>W9IAN SYN!SES1 9 :I* NONHUMAN LIFE-=MS >E PRIM>ILY 0OBJECTS0 ( SELECTIVE =CES EXOG5\S TO !M4 ,NO LESS IS IT AT ODDS ) ,H5RI ,B]GSON'S 0CREATIVE EVOLUTION10 ) ITS SEMIMY/ICAL ELAN VITAL4 ,ECOLOGI/S1 LIKE BIOLOGI/S1 HAVE YET TO COME TO T]MS ) ! NOTION ?AT SYMBIOSIS 7NOT ONLY 0/RUGGLE07 & P>TICIPATION 7NOT ONLY 0COMPETITION07 FACTOR 9 ! EVOLUTION ( SPECIES4 ,! PREVAL5T VIEW ( NATURE /ILL /RESSES ! EXCLUSIVELY 0NECESSIT>IAN0 *>ACT] ( ! NATURAL WORLD4 ,AN IMM5SE LIT]ATURE1 BO?1 >TI/IC & SCI5TIFIC1 /RESSES ! 0CRUELTY0 ( A NATURE ?AT BE>S NO WITNESS TO ! SUFF]+ ( LIFE & ?AT IS 09DIFF]5T0 TO CRIES ( PA9 9 ! 0/RUGGLE = EXI/5CE40 0,CRUEL0 NATURE1 9 ?IS IMAG]Y1 (F]S NO SOLACE = EXT9CTION -- M]ELY AN ALL-EMBRAC+ D>KNESS ( MEAN+LESS MOTION TO :I* HUMANITY CAN OPPOSE ONLY ! LI<T ( ITS CULTURE & M9D4 ,SU* =MULATIONS IMP>T A SOPHI/ICAT$ E?ICAL DIM5SION TO ! NATURAL WORLD ?AT IS MORE AN?ROPOMORPHIC ?AN MEAN+FUL4 

,BUT EV5 IF ! =MULATION IS AN?ROPPMORPHIC1 IT BESPEAKS A PRES5CE 9 NATURAL EVOLUTION -- SUBJECTIVITY & SPECIFICALLY HUMAN CONSCI\SNESS -- ?AT CANNOT BE IGNOR$ 9 =MULAT+ AN EVOLUTION>Y !ORY4 ,WE MAY REASONABLY CLAIM ?AT HUMAN WILL & FRE$OM1 AT LEA/ AS SELF-CONSCI\SNESS & SELFREFLECTION1 HAVE !IR [N NATURAL HI/ORY 9 POT5TIALITIES ( ! NATURAL WORLD -- 9 CONTRA/ TO ! VIEW ?AT !Y >E SUI G5]IS1 ! PRODUCT ( A RUPTURE ) ! :OLE ( DEVELOPM5T SO UNPREC$5T$ & UNIQUE ?AT IT CONTRADICTS ! GRAD$NESS ( ALL PH5OM5A FROM ! ANTEC$5T POT5TIALITIES ?AT LIE BEH9D & )9 EV]Y PROCESSUAL 0PRODUCT40 ,SU* CLAIMS >E 9T5D$ TO UND]WRITE \R EF=TS TO DEAL ) ! NATURAL WORLD AS WE *OOSE -- 9DE$1 AS ,M>X PUT IT 9 ! ,GRUNDRISSE1 TO REG>D NATURE M]ELY AS 0AN OBJECT = MANK9D1 PURELY A MATT] ( UTILITY40 

,! DIM *OICES ?AT ANIMALS EX]CISE 9 !IR [N EVOLUTION %\LD NOT BE CONFUS$ ) ! WILL & DEGREE ( 9T5TIONALITY ?AT HUMAN BE+S EXHIBIT 9 !IR SOCIAL LIVES4 ,NOR IS ! NASC5T FRE$OM ?AT IS R5D]$ POSSIBLE BY NATURAL COMPLEXITY CQMP>ABLE TO ! ABILITY ( HUMANS TO MAKE RATIONAL DECISIONS4 ,! DIFF]5CES BETWE5 ! TWO >E QUALITATIVE1 H[EV] MU* !Y CAN BE TRAC$ BACK TO ! EVOLUTION ( ALL ANIMALS4 

,\R T5D5CY TO IGNORE ! CLOSE 9T]ACTION BETWE5 EVOLV+ LIFE-=MS & ! 5VIRONM5TAL =CES ?AT 0SELECT0 !M = SURVIVAL IS A ME*ANI/IC PREJUDICE ?AT /ILL CL+S TO EVOLUTION>Y !ORY4 ,ALL ANTI-,C>TESIAN PROTE/ATIONS TO ! CONTR>Y1 WE /ILL VIEW NONHUMAN LIFE-=MS AS LITTLE MORE ?AN MA*9ES OR 9]T BE+S4 ,/RUCTURALLY1 WE MAY FILL !M \T ) PROTOPLASM1 BUT OP]ATIONALLY WE IMPUTE NO MORE MEAN+ TO !M ?AN TO ME*ANICAL DEVICES -- A JUDGM5T1 IT IS WOR? NOT+1 ?AT IS NOT )\T ECONOMIC UTILITY 9 DEAL+ ) WORK+ PEOPLE AS 0H&S0 OR 0OP]ATIVES40 

,DESPITE ! MONUM5TAL NATURE ( HIS WORK1 ,D>W9 DID NOT FULLY ORGANICIZE EVOLUTION>Y !ORY4 ,HE BR\<T A PR(\ND EVOLUTION>Y S5SIBILITY TO ! 0ORIG9 ( SPECIES10 BUT 9 ! M9DS ( HIS ACOLYTES SPECIES /ILL /OOD SOME:]E BETWE5 9ORGANIC MA*9ES & ME*ANICALLY FUNCTION+ ORGANISMS4 ,NO LESS SIGNIFICANT >E ! EMPIRICAL ORIG9S ( ,D>W9'S [N WORK1 :I* >E DEEPLY ROOT$ 9 ! ,LOCKEAN ATOMISM ?AT N\RI%$ N9ETE5?-C5TURY ,BRITI% SCI5CE AS A :OLE4 ,ALL[+ = ! NUANCES ?AT APPE> 9 ALL GREAT BOOKS1 ,! ,ORIG9 ( ,SPECIES ACC\NTS = ! WAY 9 :I* 9DIVIDUAL SPECIES ORIG9ATE1 EVOLVE1 ADAPT1 SURVIVE1 *ANGE1 OR PAY ! P5ALTY ( EXT9CTION AS IF !Y W]E FAIRLY ISOLAT$ FROM !IR 5VIRONM5T4 ,9 ?AT ACC\NT1 ANY ONE SPECIES /&S = ! WORLD ( LIFE AS A :OLE1 9 ISOLATION FROM ! LIFE-=MS ?AT NORMALLY 9T]ACT ) IT & ) :I* IT IS 9T]DEP5D5T4 ,AL?\< PR$ATORS DEP5D UPON !IR PREY1 TO BE SURE1 ,D>W9 PORTRAYS ! /R& FROM ANCE/OR TO DESC5DANT 9 L(TY ISOLATION1 SU* ?AT E>LY EOHIPPUS RISES1 /EP BY /EP1 FROM ITS PLEBEIAN E/ATE TO ATTA9 ! >I/OCRATIC GR&EUR ( A SLEEK RACE HORSE4 ,! PALEONTOLOGICAL DIAGRAM+ ( BONES FROM =M] 0MISS+ L9KS0 TO ! CULM9AT+ BEAUTY ( ,EQUUS CABALLUS MORE CLOSELY RESEMBLES ! ADAPTATION ( ,ROB9SON ,CRUSOE FROM AN ,5GLI% SEAF>] TO A SELF-SUFFICI5T ISL& DWELL] ?AN ! REALITY ( A TRULY EM]G+ BE+4 

,?IS REALITY IS CONTEXTUAL 9 AN ECOLOGICAL S5SE4 ,! HORSE LIV$ NOT ONLY AMONG ITS PR$ATORS & FOOD BUT 9 CREATIVELY 9T]ACTIVE RELATION%IPS ) A GREAT V>IETY ( PLANTS & ANIMALS4 ,IT EVOLV$ NOT ALONE BUT 9 EV]-*ANG+ ECOCOMMUNITIES1 SU* ?AT ! 0RISE0 ( ,EQUUS CABALLUS OCCURR$ CONJO9TLY )1 ?AT ( O!R H]BIVORES ?AT %>$ & MA9TA9$ !IR GRASSL&S & EV5 PLAY$ A MAJOR ROLE 9 CREAT+ !M4 ,! /R+ ( BONES ?AT TRACES EOHIPPUS TO ,EQUUS IS EVID5CE ( ! SUCCESSION ( ECOCOMMUNITIES 9 :I* ! ANCE/RAL ANIMAL & ITS DESC5DANTS 9T]ACT$ ) O!R LIFE-=MS4 

,ONE C\LD MORE PROP]LY MODIFY ,! ,ORIG9 ( ,SPECIES TO READ AS ! EVOLUTION ( ECOCOMMUNITIES AS WELL AS ! EVOLUTION ( SPECIES4.<#d#c.> ,9DE$1 PLAC+ ! COMMUNITY 9 ! =EGR\ND ( EVOLUTION DOES NOT D5Y ! 9TEGRITY ( SPECIES1 !IR CAPACITY = V>IATION1 OR !IR UNIQUE L9ES ( DEVELOPM5T4 ,SPECIES BECOME VITAL P>TICIPANTS 9 !IR [N EVOLUTION -- ACTIVE BE+S1 NOT M]ELY PASSIVE COMPON5TS -- TAK+ FULL ACC\NT ( !IR NASC5T FRE$OM 9 ! NATURAL PROCESS4 

,NOR >E WILL & REASON SUI G5]IS4 ,!Y HAVE !IR ORIG9S 9 ! GR[+ *OICES CONF]R$ BY COMPLEXITY & 9 ! ALT]NATIVE PA?WAYS OP5$ UP BY ! GR[? ( COMPLEX ECOCOMMUNITIES & ! DEVELOPM5T ( 9CREAS+LY COMPLEX NEUROLOGICAL SY/EMS -- 9 %ORT1 PROCESSES ?AT >E BO? 9T]NAL & EXT]NAL TO LIFE-=MS4 ,TO SPEAK ( EVOLUTION 9 V]Y BROAD T]MS T5DS TO CONCEAL ! SPECIFIC EVOLUTION>Y PROCESSES ?AT MAKE UP ! OV]ALL PROCESS4 ,MANY ANATOMICAL L9ES ( EVOLUTION HAVE OCCURR$3 ! EVOLUTION ( ! V>I\S ORGANS ?AT FRE$ LIFE-=MS FROM !IR AQUATIC MILIEU2 ( EYES & E>S1 :I* SOPHI/ICAT$ !IR AW>5ESS ( ! SURR\ND+ 5VIRONM5T2 & ( ! N]V\S SY/EM1 FROM N]VE NETWORKS TO BRA9S4 ,?US1 M9D TOO HAS ITS EVOLUTION>Y HI/ORY 9 ! NATURAL WORLD1 & AS ! NEUROLOGICAL CAPABILITY ( LIFE-=MS TO FUNCTION MORE ACTIVELY & FLEXIBLY 9CREASES1 SO TOO DOES LIFE ITSELF HELP CREATE NEW EVOLUTION>Y DIRECTIONS ?AT LEAD TO 5HANC$ SELF-AW>5ESS & SELFACTIVITY4 ,SELFHOOD APPE>S G]M9ALLY 9 ! COMMUNITIES ?AT LIFE-=MS E/ABLI% AS ACTIVE AG5TS 9 !IR [N EVOLUTION1 CONTR>Y TO CONV5TIONAL EVOLUTION>Y !ORY4 

,DOES ! NATURE ( EVOLUTION W>RANT 9TRODUC+ A PRESID+ AG5T 9TO EVOLUTION>Y & ECOLOGICAL !ORY1 ONE ?AT PR$ET]M9ES ! DEVELOPM5T ( LIFE-=MS ALONG ! L9ES ,I HAVE DESCRIB$1 A 0,SPIRIT10 0,GOD10 0,M9D10 OR P]HAPS A SEMIMY/ICAL ,B]GSONIAN ELAN VITAL8 ,I ?9K NOT1 IF ONLY BECAUSE ! CONCEPT ( SU* A HIDD5 H& PRES]VES ! NATURE-SOCIETY DUALISM ITSELF4 ,SO PR(\NDLY DOES DUALISM 9H]E 9 \R M5TAL OP]ATIONS ?AT :5 WE CONSID] ! IMMAN5T /RIV+ ( LIFE-=MS T[>D V>I\S DEGREES ( FRE$OM & SELF-AW>5ESS1 WE (T5 SLIP 9TO EXPLANATIONS 9VOLV+ SUP]NATURE RA!R ?AN NATURE ITSELF1 R$UCTIONISM RA!R ?AN DIFF]5TIATION1 & SUCCESSION RA!R ?AN CULM9ATION4 ,H5CE ! PRES5T REVIVAL ( ! 0REV]5CE = NATURE0 ?AT ! N9ETE5?-C5TURY ,ROMANTIC TRADITION SO POETICALLY CULTIVAT$1 A 0REV]$0 NATURAL WORLD DISSOLV$ 9TO A MY/ICAL 0ON5ESS40 

,NOT ONLY DOES ?IS 0REV]5CE0 PRES]VE & EV5 FO/] A NATURE-SOCIETY DUALISM2 IT RE/ORES TO EVOLUTION>Y !ORY ! V]Y DUALISM ?AT UND]P9S HI]>*Y & ! VIEW ( ALL DIFF]5TIATION AS DEGREES ( DOM9ATION & SUBORD9ATION4 ,A 0REV]$0 NATURE IS A SEP>AT$ NATURE 9 ! BAD S5SE ( ! T]M -- ?AT IS TO SAY1 A MY/IFI$ NATURE4 ,LIKE ! DEITIES ?AT HUMAN BE+S CREATE 9 !IR IMAG9ATION & WOR%IP 9 TEMPLES1 M$IAT$ BY PRIE/S & GURUS ) !IR 9CANTATIONS & RITUALS1 ?IS SEP>AT$ NATURE BECOMES A REIFI$ & CONTRIV$ PH5OM5ON ?AT IS SET AP>T FROM ! HUMAN WORLD1 EV5 AS HUMAN BE+S G5UFLECT BE=E A MY/IFI$ 0,IT0 0,REV]5CE0 = NATURE1 ! MY?OLOGIZ+ ( ! NATURAL WORLD1 DEGRADES IT BY D5Y+ NATURE ITS UNIV]SALITY AS ?AT :I* EXI/S EV]Y:]E1 FREE ( DUALITIES LIKE 0,SPIRIT0 & 0,GOD40 

,IF LIB]AL & ,M>XI/ !ORI/S PREP>$ ! IDEOLOGICAL BASES = PLUND]+ ! NATURAL WORLD1 0BIOC5TRICALLY0 ORI5T$ ANTIHUMANI/S & 0NATURAL LAW0 DEVOTEES MAY BE PREP>+ ! IDEOLOGICAL BASES = PLUND]+ ! HUMAN SPIRIT4 ,9 ! C\RSE ( 0REV]+ NATURE10 !Y HAVE CREAT$ AN 9SIDI\S IMAGE ( A HUMANITY :OSE 09TR9SIC WOR?0 IS NO MORE OR LESS ?AN ?AT ( O!R SPECIES4 0,BIOC5TRISM0 D5IES HUMANITY ITS REAL PLACE 9 NATURAL EVOLUTION BY COMPLETELY SUBORD9AT+ HUMANITY TO ! NATURAL WORLD4 ,P>ADOXICALLY1 0BIOC5TRISM0 & ANTIHUMANISM ALSO CONTRIBUTE TO ! ALI5ATION & REIFICATION ( NATURE SU* ?AT A 0REV]5CE0 = NATURE CAN EASILY BE US$ TO NEGATE ANY EXI/5TIAL RESPECT = ! DIV]SITY ( LIFE4 ,AGA9/ ! BACKGR\ND ( A COSMIC 0,NATURE10 HUMAN LIFE & 9DIVIDUALITY >E COMPLETELY TRIVIALIZ$1 AS WITNESS ,JAMES ,LOVELOCK'S DESCRIPTION ( PEOPLE AS M]ELY 09TELLIG5T FLEAS0 FE$+ ON ! BODY ( ,GAIA4 ,NOR CAN WE IGNORE A GR[+ NUMB] ( 0NATURAL LAW0 ACOLYTES :O ADVOCATE AU?ORIT>IAN MEASURES TO CONTROL POPULATION GR[? & =CIBLY EXPEL URBAN DWELL]S FROM L>GE CONGE/$ CITIES1 AS ?\< A SOCIETY ?AT IS /RUCTUR$ >\ND ! DOM9ATION ( HUMAN BY HUMAN C\LD BE EXPECT$ TO LEAVE ! NATURAL WORLD 9TACT4 

,IT IS GROSSLY MISLEAD+ TO 9VOKE 0BIOC5TRISM10 0NATURAL LAW10 & ANTIHUMANISM = 5DS ?AT D5Y ! MO/ DI/9CTIVE ( HUMAN NATURAL ATTRIBUTES3 ! ABILITY TO REASON1 TO =ESEE1 TO WILL1 & TO ACT 9SI<TFULLY TO 5HANCE NATURE'S [N DEVELOPM5T4 ,9 A S5SE1 IT DEPRECATES NATURE TO SEP>ATE !SE SUBJECTIVE ATTRIBUTES FROM IT1 AS ?\< !Y DID NOT EM]GE \T ( EVOLUTION>Y DEVELOPM5T & W]E NOT IMPLICITLY P>T ( ANIMAL DEVELOPM5T4 ,A HUMANITY ?AT HAS BE5 R5D]$ OBLIVI\S TO ITS [N RESPONSIBILITY TO EVOLUTION -- A RESPONSIBILITY TO BR+ REASON & ! HUMAN SPIRIT TO EVOLUTION>Y DEVELOPM5T1 TO FO/] DIV]SITY1 & TO PROVIDE ECOLOGICAL GUIDANCE SU* ?AT ! H>MFUL & ! =TUIT\S 9 ! NATURAL WORLD >E DIM9I%$ -- IS A HUMANITY ?AT BETRAYS ITS [N EVOLUTION>Y H]ITAGE & ?AT IGNORES ITS SPECIES-DI/9CTIV5ESS & UNIQU5ESS4 

,IRONICALLY1 !N1 A NATURE ?AT IS REV]5TIALLY HYPO/ATIZ$ IS A NATURE SET AP>T FROM HUMANITY -- & 9 ! V]Y PROCESS ( BE+ HYPO/ATIZ$ OV] HUMANITY1 IT IS DEFAM$4 ,A NATURE RECON/RUCT$ 9TO =MS AP>T FROM ITSELF1 H[EV] 0REV]5TIALLY10 EASILY BECOMES A M]E OBJECT ( UTILITY4 ,9DE$1 A REV]$ NATURE IS ! CONV]SE ( ! OLD LIB]AL & ,M>XIAN IMAGE ( NATURE 0DOM9AT$0 BY MAN4 ,BO? ATTITUDES RE9/ATE ! !ME ( DOM9ATION 9 ECOLOGICAL DISCUSSION4 

,H]E ! LIMIT$ =M ( REASON+ BAS$ ON D$UCTION1 SO COMMONPLACE 9 CONV5TIONAL LOGIC1 SUPPLANTS AN ORGANISMIC =M ( REASON+ BAS$ ON $UCTION -- ?AT IS1 ON D]IVATION1 SO DEEPLY ROOT$ 9 ! DIALECTICAL \TLOOK4 ,POT5TIALLY1 HUMAN REASON IS AN EXPRESSION ( NATURE R5D]$ SELF-CONSCI\S1 A NATURE ?AT F9DS ITS VOICE 9 BE+ ( ITS [N CREATION4 ,IT IS NOT ONLY WE :O MU/ HAVE \R [N PLACE 9 NATURE BUT NATURE ?AT MU/ HAVE ITS PLACE 9 US -- 9 AN ECOLOGICAL SOCIETY & 9 AN ECOLOGICAL E?ICS BAS$1 ON HUMANITY'S CATALYTIC ROLE 9 NATURAL EVOLUTION4 

,ALONG ) ! ANTIHUMANI/IC IDEOLOGIES ?AT FO/] MISAN?ROPIC ATTITUDES & ACTIONS1 ! R$UCTION ( HUMAN BE+S TO COMMODITIES IS /EADILY D5ATUR+ & DEGRAD+ HUMANITY4 ,! COMMODIFICATION ( HUMANITY TAKES ITS MO/ P]NICI\S =M 9 ! MANIPULATION ( ! 9DIVIDUAL AS A MEANS ( PRODUCTION & CONSUMPTION4 ,H]E1 HUMAN BE+S >E EMPLOY$ 79 ! LIT]AL S5SE ( ! T]M7 AS TE*NIQUES EI!R 9 PRODUCTION OR 9 CONSUMPTION1 AS M]E DEVICES :OSE CREATIVE P[]S & AU!NTIC NE$S >E EQUALLY P]V]T$ 9TO OBJECTIFI$ PH5OM5A4 ,AS A RESULT1 WE >E WITNESS+ TODAY NOT ONLY ! 0FETI%IZATION ( COMMODITIES0 7TO USE ,M>X'S FAM\S =MULATION7 BUT ! FETI%IZATION ( NE$S4.<#d#d.> ,HUMAN BE+S >E BECOM+ SEP>AT$ FROM !IR [N NATURE AS WELL AS FROM ! NATURAL WORLD 9 AN EXI/5TIAL SPLIT ?AT ?REAT5S TO GIVE DRAMATIC REALITY TO ,DESC>TES'S !ORETICAL SPLIT BETWE5 ! S\L & ! BODY4 ,9 ?IS S5SE1 ! CLAIM ?AT CAPITALISM IS A TOTALLY 0UNNATURAL ORD]0 IS ONLY TOO ACCURATE4 

,! T]RIBLE TRAG$Y ( ! PRES5T SOCIAL ]A IS NOT ONLY ?AT IT IS POLLUT+ ! 5VIRONM5T2 IT IS ALSO SIMPLIFY+ NATURAL ECOCOMMUNITIES1 SOCIAL RELATION%IPS1 & EV5 ! HUMAN PSY*E4 ,! PULV]IZATION ( ! NATURAL WORLD IS BE+ ACCOMPANI$ BY ! PULV]IZATION ( ! SOCIAL & PSY*OLOGICAL WORLDS4 ,9 ?IS S5SE1 ! CONV]SION ( SOIL 9TO S& 9 AGRICULTURE CAN BE SAID1 9 A METAPHORICAL S5SE1 TO APPLY TO SOCIETY & ! HUMAN SPIRIT4 ,! GREATE/ DANG] WE FACE -- AP>T FROM NUCLE> IMMOLATION -- IS ! HOMOG5IZATION ( ! WORLD BY A M>KET SOCIETY & ITS OBJECTIFICATION ( ALL HUMAN RELATION%IPS & EXP]I5CES 9TO COMMODITIES4 

,TO RECOV] HUMAN NATURE IS NOT ONLY TO RECOV] ITS CONT9UITY ) ! CREATIVE PROCESS ( NATURAL EVOLUTION BUT TO RECOGNIZE ITS DI/9CTIV5ESS4 ,TO CONCEIVE ( ! P>TICIPATION ( LIFE-=MS 9 EVOLUTION IS TO UND]/& ?AT NATURE IS A REALM ( 9CIPI5T FRE$OM4 ,IT IS FRE$OM & P>TICIPATION -- NOT SIMPLY NECESSITY -- ?AT WE MU/ EMPHASIZE1 AN EMPHASIS ?AT 9VOLVES A RADICAL BREAK ) ! CONV5TIONAL IMAGE ( NATURE4 

,SOCIAL ECOLOGY1 9 EFFECT1 /&S AT ODDS ) ! NOTION ?AT CULTURE HAS NO ROOTS :ATEV] 9 NATURAL EVOLUTION4 ,9DE$1 IT EXPLORES ! ROOTS ( ! CULTURAL 9 ! NATURAL & SEEKS TO ASC]TA9 ! GRADATIONS ( BIOLOGICAL DEVELOPM5T ?AT PHASE ! NATURAL 9TO ! SOCIAL4 ,BY ! SAME TOK51 IT ALSO TRIES TO EXPLORE ! IMPORTANT DIFF]5CES ?AT DI/+UI% ! SOCIETAL FROM ! NATURAL & TO ASC]TA9 ! GRADATIONS ( SOCIAL DEVELOPM5T ?AT1 HOPEFULLY1 WILL YIELD A NEW1 HUMANI/IC ECOLOGICAL SOCIETY4 ,! TWO L9ES ( EXPLORATION GO TOGE!R 9 PRODUC+ A L>G] :OLE1 9DE$1 ONE ?AT MU/ TRANSC5D EV5 ! PRES5T CAPITALI/ SOCIETY BAS$ ON P]PETUAL GR[? & PR(IT4 ,TO ID5TIFY SOCIETY AS SU* ) ! PRES5T SOCIETY1 TO SEE 9 CAPITALISM AN 0EMANCIPATORY0 MOVEM5T PRECISELY BECAUSE IT FREES US FROM NATURE1 IS NOT ONLY TO IGNORE ! ROOTS ( SOCIETY 9 NATURE BUT TO ID5TIFY A P]V]T$ SOCIETY ) HUMANISM & !REBY TO GIVE CR$5CE TO ! ANTIHUMANI/ TR5DS 9 ECOLOGICAL ?9K+4 

,?IS MU* IS CLE>3 ! WAY WE VIEW \R POSITION 9 ! NATURAL WORLD IS DEEPLY 5TANGL$ ) ! WAY WE ORGANIZE ! SOCIAL WORLD4 ,9 L>GE P>T1 ! =M] D]IVES FROM ! LATT] & S]VES1 9 TURN1 TO RE9=CE SOCIAL IDEOLOGY4 ,EV]Y SOCIETY PROJECTS ITS [N P]CEPTION ( ITSELF ONTO NATURE1 :E!R AS A TRIBAL COSMOS ?AT IS ROOT$ 9 K9%IP COMMUNITIES1 A FEUDAL COSMOS ?AT ORIG9ATES 9 & UND]P9S A /RICT HI]>*Y ( RI<TS & DUTIES1 A B\RGEOIS COSMOS /RUCTUR$ >\ND A M>KET SOCIETY ?AT FO/]S HUMAN RIVALRY & COMPETITION1 OR A CORPORATE COSMOS DIAGRAM$ 9 FL[ *>TS1 FE$BACK SY/EMS1 & HI]>*IES ?AT MIRROR ! OP]ATIONAL SY/EMS ( MOD]N CORPORATE SOCIETY4 ,?AT SOME ( !SE IMAGES REVEAL A TRU?FUL ASPECT ( NATURE1 :E!R AS A COMMUNITY OR A CYB]NETIC FL[ ( 5]GY1 DOES NOT JU/IFY ! UNIV]SAL1 ALMO/ IMP]IALI/IC CLAIMS ?AT !IR PROPON5TS /AKE \T = !M OV] ! WORLD AS A :OLE4 ,ULTIMATELY1 ONLY A SOCIETY ?AT HAS COME 9TO ITS 0TRU?0 TO USE ,HEGELIAN LANGUAGE -- A RATIONAL & ECOLOGICAL SOCIETY -- CAN FREE US FROM ! LIMITS ?AT OPPRESSIVE & HI]>*ICAL SOCIETIES IMPOSE ON \R UND]/&+ ( NATURE4 

,! P[] ( SOCIAL ECOLOGY LIES 9 ! ASSOCIATION IT E/ABLI%ES BETWE5 SOCIETY & ECOLOGY1 9 UND]/&+ ?AT ! SOCIAL IS1 POT5TIALLY AT LEA/1 A FULFILLM5T ( ! LAT5T DIM5SION ( FRE$OM 9 NATURE1 & ?AT ! ECOLOGICAL IS A MAJOR ORGANIZ+ PR9CIPLE ( SOCIAL DEVELOPM5T4 ,9 %ORT1 SOCIAL ECOLOGY ADVANCES ! GUIDEL9ES = AN ECOLOGICAL SOCIETY4 ,! GREAT DIVORCE BETWE5 NATURE & SOCIETY -- OR BETWE5 ! 0BIOLOGICAL0 & ! 0CULTURAL0 -- IS OV]COME BY %>$ DEVELOPM5TAL CONCEPTS SU* AS GREAT] DIV]SITY 9 EVOLUTION2 ! WID] & MORE COMPLETE P>TICIPATION ( ALL COMPON5TS 9 A :OLE2 & ! EV] MORE FECUND POT5TIALITIES ?AT EXP& ! HORIZON ( FRE$OM & SELF-REFLEXIVITY4 ,SOCIETY1 LIKE M9D1 CEASES TO BE SUI G5]IS4 ,LIKE M9D1 ) ITS NATURAL HI/ORY1 SOCIAL LIFE EM]GES FROM ! LOOSELY B&$ ANIMAL COMMUNITY TO =M ! HI<LY 9/ITUTIONALIZ$ HUMAN COMMUNITY4.<#d#e.> 

,SOCIAL ECOLOGY *ALL5GES ! IMAGE ( AN UNM$IAT$ NATURAL EVOLUTION1 9 :I* ! HUMAN M9D1 SOCIETY1 & EV5 CULTURE >E SUI G5]IS1 9 :I* NONHUMAN NATURE IS IRRETRIEVABLY SEP>AT$ FROM HUMAN NATURE1 & 9 :I* AN E?ICALLY DEFAM$ NATURE F9DS NO EXPRESSION :ATEV] 9 SOCIETY1 M9D1 & HUMAN WILL4 ,IT SEEKS TO ?R[ A CRITICAL & MEAN+FUL LI<T ON ! PHAS$1 GRAD$1 & CUMULATIVE DEVELOPM5T ( NATURE 9TO SOCIETY1 RI*LY M$IAT$ BY ! PROLONG$ DEP5D5CE ( ! HUMAN Y\NG ON P>5TAL C>E1 BY ! BLOOD TIE AS ! E>LIE/ SOCIAL & CULTURAL BOND BEYOND IMM$IATE P>5TAL C>E1 BY ! SO-CALL$ 0SEXUAL DIVISION ( LABOR10 & BY AGE-BAS$ /ATUS GR\PS & !IR ROLE 9 ! ORIG9 ( HI]>*Y4 

,ULTIMATELY1 IT IS ! 9/ITUTIONALIZATION ( ! HUMAN COMMUNITY ?AT DI/+UI%ES SOCIETY FROM ! NONHUMAN COMMUNITY -- :E!R = ! WORSE1 AS 9 ! CASE ( PRE-#a#g#h#i ,FRANCE OR CZ>I/ ,RUSSIA1 :]E WEAK1 UNFEEL+ TYRANTS LIKE ,L\IS ,X,V,I & ,NI*OLAS ,H W]E RAIS$ TO COMM&+ POSITIONS BY BUREAUCRACIES1 >MIES1 & SOCIAL CLASSES2 OR = ! BETT]1 AS 9 =MS ( SELF-GOV]NANCE & MANAGEM5T ?AT EMP[] ! PEOPLE AS A :OLE1 LIKE ! ,P>ISIAN SECTIONS DUR+ ! ,FR5* ,REVOLUTION & ! AN>*OSYNDICALI/ COLLECTIVES DUR+ ! ,SPANI% ,CIVIL ,W>1 ,WE SEE NO SU* CONTRIV$ 9/ITUTIONAL 9FRA/RUCTURES 9 NONHUMAN COMMUNITIES1 AL?\< ! RUDIM5TS ( A SOCIAL BOND DO EXI/ 9 ! MO!R-(FSPR+ RELATION%IP & 9 COMMON =MS ( MUTUAL AID4 

,) A GR[+ KN[L$GE ?AT %>+1 COOP]ATION1 & CONC]N FO/] HEAL?Y HUMAN CONSOCIATION1 ) ! TE*NICAL DISCIPL9ES ?AT OP5 ! WAY = A CREATIVE 0METABOLISM0 BETWE5 HUMANITY & NATURE1 & ) A HO/ ( NEW 9SI<TS 9TO ! PRES5CE ( NATURE 9 SO MU* ( \R [N CIVILIZATION1 IT CAN NO LONG] BE D5I$ ?AT NATURE IS /ILL ) US4 ,9DE$1 IT HAS RETURN$ TO US IDEOLOGICALLY AS A *ALL5GE TO ! DEV\R+ ( 0NATURAL RES\RCES0 = PR(IT & ! M9DLESS SIMPLIFICATION ( ! BIOSPH]E4 ,WE CAN NO LONG] SPEAK MEAN+FULLY ( A 0NEW0 OR 0RATIONAL0 SOCIETY )\T ALSO TAILOR+ \R SOCIAL RELATION%IPS & 9/ITUTIONS TO ! ECOCOMMUNITIES 9 :I* \R SOCIAL COMMUNITIES >E LOCAT$4 ,9 %ORT1 ANY RATIONAL FUTURE SOCIETY MU/ BE AN ECOLOGICAL SOCIETY1 CONJO9+ HUMANITY'S CAPACITY = 9NOVATION1 TE*NOLOGICAL DEVELOPM5T1 & 9TELLECTUALITY ) ! NONHUMAN NATURAL WORLD ON :I* CIVILIZATION ITSELF RE/S & HUMAN WELL-BE+ DEP5DS4 

,! ECOLOGICAL PR9CIPLES ?AT 5T] 9TO BIOTIC EVOLUTION DO NOT DISAPPE> FROM SOCIAL EVOLUTION1 ANY MORE ?AN ! NATURAL HI/ORY ( M9D CAN BE DISSOLV$ 9TO ,KANT'S AHI/ORICAL EPI/EMOLOGY4 ,QUITE ! CONTR>Y3 ! SOCIETAL & CULTURAL >E ECOLOGICALLY D]IVATIVE1 AS ! M5'S & WOM5'S H\SES 9 TRIBAL COMMUNITIES SO CLE>LY ILLU/RATE4 ,! RELATION%IP BETWE5 NATURE & SOCIETY IS A CUMULATIVE ONE1 :ILE EA* REMA9S DI/9CTIVE & CREATIVE 9 ITS [N RI<T4 ,P]HAPS MO/ SIGNIFICANT1 ! NATURE ( :I* ! SOCIETAL & CULTURAL >E D]IVATIVE -- & CUMULATIVE -- IS A NATURE ?AT IS A POT5TIAL REALM ( FRE$OM & SUBJECTIVITY1 & HUMANITY IS POT5TIALLY ! MO/ SELF-CONSCI\S & SELF-REFLEXIVE EXPRESSION ( ?AT NATURAL DEVELOPM5T4 

,SOCIAL ECOLOGY1 BY DEF9ITION1 TAKES ON ! RESPONSIBILITY ( EVOK+1 ELABORAT+1 & GIV+ AN E?ICAL CONT5T TO ! NATURAL CORE ( SOCIETY & HUMANITY4.<#d#f.> ,GRANT+ ! LIMITATIONS ?AT SOCIETY IMPOSES ON \R ?9K+1 ! DEVELOPM5T ( M9D \T ( 0FIR/ NATURE0 PRODUCES AN OBJECTIVE GR\ND = AN E?ICS1 9DE$1 = =MULAT+ A VISION ( A RATIONAL SOCIETY ?AT IS NEI!R HI]>*ICAL NOR RELATIVI/IC3 AN E?ICS ?AT IS BAS$ NEI!R ON ATAVI/IC APPEALS TO 0BLOOD & SOIL0 & 9EXORABLE 0SOCIAL LAWS0 70DIALECTICAL0 OR 0SCI5TIFIC07 ON ! ONE H&1 NOR ON ! WAYW>D CONS5SUS ( PUBLIC OP9ION POLLS1 :I* WILL SUPPORT CAPITAL PUNI%M5T ONE YE> & LIFE IMPRISONM5T ! NEXT4 ,FRE$OM BECOMES A DESID]ATUM AS SELF-REFLEXIVITY1 AS SELF-MANAGEM5T1 & MO/ EXCIT+LY1 AS A CREATIVE & ACTIVE PROCESS ?AT1 ) ITS EV]-EXP&+ HORIZON1 RESI/S ! MORAL IMP]ATIVES ( A RIGID DEF9ITION & ! J>GON ( TEMPORALLY CONDITION$ BIASES4.<#d#g.> 

,AN ECOLOGICAL E?ICS ( FRE$OM W\LD PROVIDE AN OBJECTIVE DIRECTIV5ESS TO ! HUMAN 5T]PRISE4 ,WE HAVE NO NE$ TO DEGRADE NATURE OR SOCIETY 9TO A CRUDE BIOLOGISM AT ONE EXTREME OR A CRUDE DUALISM AT ! O!R4 ,A DIV]SITY ?AT NURTURES FRE$OM1 AN 9T]ACTIVITY ?AT 5HANCES COMPLEM5T>ITY1 A :OL5ESS ?AT FO/]S CREATIVITY1 A COMMUNITY ?AT /R5G!NS 9DIVIDUALITY1 A GR[+ SUBJECTIVITY ?AT YIELDS GREAT] RATIONALITY -- ALL >E DESID]ATA ?AT PROVIDE ! GR\ND = AN OBJECTIVE E?ICS4 ,!Y >E ALSO ! REAL PR9CIPLES ( ANY GRAD$ EVOLUTION1 ONE ?AT R5D]S NOT ONLY ! PA/ EXPLICABLE BUT ! FUTURE MEAN+FUL4 

,AN ECOLOGICAL E?ICS ( FRE$OM CANNOT BE DIVORC$ FROM A TE*NICS ?AT 5HANCES \R RELATION%IP ) NATURE -- A CREATIVE1 NOT DE/RUCTIVE1 0METABOLISM0 ) NATURE4 ,HUMAN BE+S MU/ BE ACTIVE AG5TS 9 ! BIOSPH]E -- VIVIDLY1 EXPRESSIVELY1 & RATIONALLY -- NOT RETREAT 9TO ! PASSIVE ANIMISM ( PAGAN1 ,TAOI/1 & ,BUDDHI/ MY/ICS :O RECYCLE ,ASIAN PHILOSOPHIES & S5SIBILITIES ?R\< ! A%RAMS & RELIGI\S TEMPLES ( ! ,PACIFIC RIM ( ! ,UNIT$ ,/ATES4 ,BUT IT MAKES ALL ! DIFF]5CE 9 ! WORLD IF WE CULTIVATE FOOD NOT ONLY ON BEHALF ( \R PHYSICAL WELLBE+ BUT ) REG>D = ! WELL-BE+ ( ! SOIL AS WELL4 ,9ASMU* AS AGRICULTURE IS ALWAYS A CULTURE1 ! DIFF]5CES 9 ! ME?ODS & 9T5TIONS 9VOLV$ >E NO LESS CULTURAL ?AN A BOOK ON 5G9E]+4 ,YET 9 ! FIR/ CASE1 \R 9T5TIONS >E 9=M$ BY ECONOMIC CONSID]ATIONS AT BE/ & GRE$ AT WOR/2 9 ! SECOND1 BY AN ECOLOGICAL S5SIBILITY4 ,SOCIETY MU/ RECOV] ! PLA/ICITY ( ! ORGANIC 9 ! S5SE ?AT EV]Y DIM5SION ( EXP]I5CE MU/ BE 9FUS$ ) AN ECOLOGICAL1 A DIALECTICAL S5SIBILITY4 ,!RE IS A PR(\NDLY E?ICAL DIM5SION TO ! ATTEMPT TO BR+ SOIL1 FLORA1 & FAUNA 7OR :AT WE NEATLY CALL ! FOOD *A97 9TO \R LIVES1 NOT ONLY AS 0:OLESOME0 S\RCES ( FOOD BUT AS P>T ( A BROAD MOVEM5T 9 :I* CONSUMPTION IS NO LESS A CREATIVE PROCESS ?AN PRODUCTION -- ORIG9AT+ 9 ! SOIL & RETURN+ TO IT 9 A RI*] =M ALL ! COMPON5TS ?AT MAKE UP ! FOOD CYCLE4 

,SO1 TOO1 9 ! PRODUCTION ( OBJECTS IT MAKES ALL ! DIFF]5CE 9 ! WORLD IF CRAFTSPEOPLE WORK ) A RESPECT = !IR MAT]IALS1 EMPHASIZ+ QUALITY & >TI/RY 9 PRODUCTION RA!R ?AN MASS-PRODUC+ COMMODITIES ) NO CONC]N = H&L+ MAT]IALS SP>+LY1 LET ALONE = HUMAN NE$S4 ,9 ! =M]1 PRODUCTION & CONSUMPTION GO BEYOND ! PURE ECONOMIC DOMA9 ( ! BUY]-SELL] RELATION%IP1 9DE$1 BEYOND ! DOMA9 ( M]E MAT]IAL SU/5ANCE1 & 5T] 9TO ! ECOLOGICAL DOMA9 AS A MODE ( 5HANC+ ! FECUNDITY ( AN ECO-COMMUNITY4 ,AN ECOTE*NOLOGY -- = CONSUMPTION NO LESS ?AN PRODUCTION -- S]VES TO 5RI* AN ECOSY/EM JU/ AS COMPO/ 9 FOOD CULTIVATION 5RI*ES ! SOIL1 RA!R ?AN DEGRAD+ & SIMPLIFY+ ! NATURAL FUNDAM5T ( LIFE4 ,AN ECOTE*NOLOGY IS ?US A MORAL TE*NOLOGY1 A TE*NOLOGY ?AT /&S AT ODDS ) GIGANTISM1 WA/E1 & ! MASS DE/RUCTION WR\<T ON ! 5VIRONM5T BY CAPITALI/IC =MS ( TE*NOLOGY DESIGN$ PURELY = PR(IT4 

,! *OICES WE MAKE 9 !SE RESPECTS -- 9 ! FOOD WE GR[ & EAT1 9 ! OBJECTS WE PRODUCE & CONSUME -- >E BETWE5 AN ECOLOGICAL ALT]NATIVE & A PURELY ECONOMIC ONE4 ,WE >E PR(\NDLY 9FLU5C$ BY SOCIAL 9/ITUTIONS1 :I*EV] ALT]NATIVE WE *OOSE4 ,9 ! 5D1 \R *OICE WILL BE BETWE5 AN ECOCOMMUNITY OR A M>KET COMMUNITY1 BETWE5 A SOCIETY 9FUS$ BY LIFE OR A SOCIETY 9FUS$ BY GA94 ,YET NO RATIONAL SOCIETY CAN HOPE TO EXI/1 /ILL LESS /ABILIZE ITSELF1 )\T AMPLY MEET+ HUMAN NE$S & PROVID+ ! FREE TIME TO CREATE A FULLY DEMOCRATIC POLITY4 ,! ADVANCES 9 TE*NOLOGY ?AT M>K ! PA/ FEW C5TURIES CANNOT BE DISMISS$ EXCLUSIVELY BECAUSE ( ! DAMAGE !Y HAVE 9FLICT$ BO? ON ! NATURAL WORLD & ON ! HUMAN CONDITION4 ,= N[ WE CAN AT LEA/ *OOSE ! K9D ( WORLD 9 :I* WE WANT TO LIVE -- WE CAN *OOSE TO BR+ SCI5CE & TE*NOLOGICAL KN[L$GE TO ! S]VICE ( HUMANITY & ! BIOSPH]E ALIKE4 

,TO SAY ?AT NATURE BELONGS 9 HUMANITY JU/ AS HUMANITY BELONGS 9 NATURE IS TO EXPRESS A HI<LY RECIPROCAL & COMPLEM5T>Y RELATION%IP BETWE5 ! TWO 9/EAD ( ONE /RUCTUR$ >\ND SUBORD9ATION & DOM9ATION4 ,NEI!R SOCIETY NOR NATURE DISSOLVES 9TO ! O!R4 ,RA!R1 SOCIAL ECOLOGY TRIES TO RECOV] ! DI/9CTIVE ATTRIBUTES ( BO? 9 A CONT9UUM ?AT GIVES RISE TO A SUB/ANTIVE E?ICS1 W$D+ ! SOCIAL TO ! ECOLOGICAL )\T D5Y+ ! 9TEGRITY ( EA*4 

,! FECUNDITY & POT5TIALITY = FRE$OM ?AT V>IETY & COMPLEXITY BR+ TO NATURAL EVOLUTION1 9DE$1 ?AT EM]GE FROM NATURAL EVOLUTION1 CAN ALSO BE SAID 9 A QUALITATIVELY ADVANC$ =M TO APPLY TO SOCIAL EVOLUTION & PSY*IC DEVELOPM5T4 ,! MORE DIV]SIFI$ A SOCIETY & ITS PSY*IC LIFE1 ! MORE CREATIVE IT IS1 & ! GREAT] ! OPPORTUNITY = FRE$OM IT IS LIKELY TO (F] -- NOT ONLY 9 T]MS ( NEW *OICES ?AT OP5 UP TO HUMAN BE+S BUT ALSO 9 T]MS ( ! RI*] SOCIAL BACKGR\ND ?AT DIV]SITY & COMPLEXITY CREATE4 ,AS 9 NATURAL EVOLUTION1 SO TOO 9 SOCIAL EVOLUTION WE MU/ GO BEYOND ! IMAGE ?AT DIV]SITY & COMPLEXITY YIELD GREAT] /ABILITY -- ! USUAL CLAIM ?AT ECOLOGI/S MAKE = ! TWO -- & EMPHASIZE ?AT !Y YIELD GREAT] CREATIVITY1 *OICES1 & FRE$OM4 

,AT ! SAME TIME !RE CAN BE NO RETURN TO ! PA/ -- TO ! DOME/IC REALM1 TO ! AGE-RANKS1 OR TO ! K9%IP RELATION%IPS ( TRIBALISM4 ,NOR CAN !RE BE A RETURN TO ! MY?S1 AMULETS1 MAGICAL PRACTICES1 & IDOLS -- FEMALE OR MALE -- ( ! PA/4 ,:ILE WE R$EEM :AT IS VALUABLE 9 PREMOD]N SOCIETIES = 5HANC+ HUMAN SOLID>ITY & AN ECOLOGICAL S5SIBILITY1 WE MU/ ALSO TRANSC5D ALL ! P>O*IAL & DIVISIVE FEATURES ( ! PA/ & PRES5T4 ,IF WE >E TO CREATE A TRULY RATIONAL & ECOLOGICAL SOCIETY1 WE MU/ N\RI% ! 9SI<TS PROVID$ BY REASON TO CREATE A S5SE ( A %>$ HUMANITY ?AT IS B\ND NEI!R BY G5D]$ \TLOOKS NOR BY BELIEFS 9 DEITIES -- ALL ( :I*1 IRONICALLY1 >E M]ELY AN?ROPOMORPHIC PROJECTIONS ( \R [N BE+S & S5SIBILITIES 7AS ,LUDWIG ,FEU]BA* SO CLE>LY SAW7 -- & WE MU/ COMMIT \RSELVES TO A BELIEF 9 ! POT5TIALITIES ( HUMANITY TO =ESEE & UND]/&1 TO BE ! EMBODIM5T ( M9D4 

,NO ECOLOGICAL E?ICS ( FRE$OM CAN BE DIVORC$ FROM A POLITICS ( P>TICIPATION1 A POLITICS ?AT FO/]S SELF-EMP[]M5T RA!R ?AN /ATE EMP[]M5T4 ,SU* A POLITICS MU/ BECOME A TRULY PEOPL$ POLITICS 9 ! S5SE ?AT POLITICAL P>TICIPATION IS LIT]ALLY PEOPL$ BY ASSEMBLIES & BY FACE-TO-FACE DISCUSSION4 ,! POLITICAL E?ICS ?AT FOLL[S FROM ?IS GR\ND IS MEANT TO CREATE AN E?ICAL COMMUNITY1 NOT SIMPLY AN 0EFFICI5T0 ONE2 AN ECOLOGICAL COMMUNITY1 NOT SIMPLY AN 5VIRONM5TALLY 0HYGI5IC0 ONE2 A SOCIAL & POLITICAL PRAXIS ?AT YIELDS FRE$OM1 NOT A /ATI/ CULTURE ?AT M]ELY ALL[S A MEASURE ( PUBLIC ASS5T4 

,IF HI/ORY IS A BLOODY 0SLAU<T]B5*10 ! BLOOD ?AT COV]S IT IS NOT ONLY ?AT ( CIVILIZATION'S 9NOC5T VICTIMS BUT ?AT ( ! ANGRY M5 & WOM5 :O HAVE LEFT US A LEGACY ( FRE$OM4 ,! LEGACY ( FRE$OM & ! LEGACY ( DOM9ATION HAVE (T5 BE5 TRAGICALLY 9T]M+L$4 ,IF WE >E TO RESCUE \RSELVES FROM ! HOMOG5IZ+ EFFECTS ( A M>KET SOCIETY1 IT IS NECESS>Y ?AT HUMANITY'S WAN+ MEMORY ( H]OIC /RUGGLES TO A*IEVE FRE$OM BE RESCU$ FROM ?IS SOCIETY'S POLLUTION -- A PROCESS ?AT HAS ALREADY GONE F> 9 CONTEMPOR>Y CULTURE4 

O ,*APT] #c 3 ,?9K+ ,ECOLOGICALLY3 ,A ,DIALECTICAL ,APPROA* 
,?9K+ ,ECOLOGICALLY3  

 ,A ,DIALECTICAL ,APPROA* .<#d#h.> 

  

,9 A TIME ( SWEEP+ SOCIAL BREAKD[N & 9TELLECTUAL FRAGM5TATION1 IT IS NOT SURPRIS+ TO F9D ?AT PAT*WORK ECLECTICISM & IDEOLOGICAL FADDISM >E S]I\SLY CORROD+ ! V]Y NOTION ( COH]5T ?9K+4 ,AL?\< SU* IDEOLOGICAL DET]IORATION HAS OCCURR$ 9 E>LI] P]IODS ( SOCIAL DECAY1 ONE MI<T HAVE HOP$ ?AT ECOLOGICAL ?9K+ -- ) ITS EMPHASIS ON ! ORGANIC1 ! HOLI/IC1 & ! DEVELOPM5TAL -- W\LD HAVE PROVID$ AN IDEOLOGICAL T]RA9 FROM :I* WE C\LD RESI/ ! G5]AL FRAGM5TATION ( \R TIMES4 ,TRAGICALLY1 ?IS HOPE HAS NOT BE5 FULFILL$4 ,MANY CONTEMPOR>Y ECOPHILOSOPHIES1 9 FACT1 F> FROM C\NT]+ ! TR5D T[>D ECLECTICISM & FADDISM1 SEEM TO BE RE9=C+ IT ,9DE$1 WE >E BE+ OV]:ELM$ BY AN EFFLUVIUM ( FADS PREFIX$ BY ECO- ?AT P&] TO ,NEW ,AGE POP /YLES4 ,TOO (T51 !SE 0ECO0-FADDI/S EI!R IGNORE MUSCUL>ITY ( ?\<T AS TOO 0HEAVY10 OR ELSE !Y CONDEMN IT AS 9TELLECTUALLY 0L9E>0 & 0DIVISIVE40 ,AS A RESULT1 A M5TALLY LAZY READ]%IP IS EM]G+ ?AT IS />TL$ BY S]I\S ?\<T ?AT IS 9 ANY WAY DEM&+ -- & EV5 0TURN$ (F0 BY IT 7TO USE 0C\NT]CULTURE0 J>GON74 

,MORE SPECIFICALLY1 ,TAOI/ MOODS1 ,BUDDHI/ HOMILIES1 & ,NEW ,AGE PLATITUDES SEEM TO BE REPLAC+ EV5 G5U9E ?9K+1 LET ALONE ! POSSIBILITY ( ORGANIC REASON+ ?AT SOCIAL ECOLOGY RAIS$ A DECADE OR SO AGO4 ,AS SIMPLIFI$ 9T]PRETATIONS ( ,EA/]N ?\<T -- LI<T-M9D$LY MIX$ ) ,HEIDEGG]IAN 0WOODPA?S0 & ,JUNGIAN >*ETYPES -- OBSCURE ! MANY GNAW+ PHILOSOPHICAL PROBLEMS ?AT >E 5DEMIC TO ECOLOGICAL ?\<T1 SURPRIS+LY FEW ECOLOGICALLY ORI5T$ PEOPLE SEEM TO FEEL ?AT ,WE/]N PHILOSOPHY & SOCIAL !ORY HAVE MU* TO CONTRIBUTE4 ,9/EAD1 ! ,WE/]N TRADITION IS REVIL$ AS ! MONOLI?IC S\RCE ( ECOLOGICAL PROBLEMS4 ,9DE$1 IT IS /YLI% TO HEAP EPI!TS ON ,DESC>TES AS ! 0S\RCE0 ( DUALISM & ON ,FRANCIS ,BACON AS ! 0S\RCE0 ( SCI5TISM -- ) OR )\T READ+ !IR WORKS4 ,BUT RI* TRADITIONS ( IDEAS ?AT ORIG9AT$ 9 ANCI5T ,A!NS1 ?AT REA*$ !IR HI< PO9T 9 ?9K]S LIKE ,D5IS ,DID]OT & P>TICUL>LY ,HEGEL1 & ?AT /ILL HAUNT US 9 ! WORKS ( ,R4 ,G4 ,COLL+WOOD & ,HANS ,JONAS1 >E IGNOR$4 7,NE$ ,I ADD ?AT SOCIAL !ORY SUFF]S EV5 MORE1 ESPECIALLY FROM A LACK ( 9-DEP? /UDY ( ,R\SSEAU1 ,M>X1 & ,KROPOTK947 ,NOR IS ,WE/]N ?\<T MADE >TIFICIALLY RELEVANT TO ECOLOGICAL ?9K+ BY TURN+ ,SP9OZA 9TO A ,BUDDHI/ -- A K9D ( 0WOODPA?0 ?AT WAS FIR/ CLE>$ YE>S AGO1 :5 ,]I* ,FROMM TRI$ TO TURN ,M>X 9TO A ,Z5 MA/]4 ,TO ORI5TALIZE -- ,CALI=NIA /YLE -- ?9K]S :OSE WORK EM]G$ FROM DI/9CTLY ,WE/]N PROBLEMATICS & TRADITIONS NOT ONLY VIOLATES ,WE/]N TRADITIONS & !IR 9TEGRITY BUT S]VES TO OBSCURE BO? ! CONTRIBUTIONS & ! FAIL+S ( !SE ?9K]S1 !REBY DI/ORT+ !M4 

,:AT IS ESPECIALLY IMPORTANT IS ?AT ! ,WE/]N ORGANISMIC TRADITION IS MU* /URDI] 9 ITS ?RU/ ?AN ! ,EA/]N4 ,ALL TOO (T51 :AT 0ECO0-FADDI/S UNKN[+LY TAKE FROM ! ,WE/ IS NOT ITS ORGANISMIC TRADITION BUT1 IRONICALLY1 ITS /ATIC ANALYTICAL POSITIVI/IC LOGIC1 A WAY ( REASON+ ?AT /&S AT ODDS ) ORGANISMIC T5D5CIES -- EV5 AS !Y TURN TO ! ,EA/ = POETRY TO SATISFY !IR MORE SPIRITUALI/IC PROCLIVITIES4 ,?IS ODDLY S*IZOPHR5IC IDEOLOGICAL MUTATION HAS PRODUC$ A /RANGE TWI/ 9 PHILOSOPHICAL ?9K+ )9 TODAY'S ECOLOGY MOVEM5T3 EV5 AS ITS M9D IS ,WE/]N 9 ITS H>% 9/RUM5TAL ME?ODOLOGY1 ITS HE>T IS UNCRITICALLY ,EA/]N 9 ITS S5TIM5TALITY4 ,! /RANGE COMB9ATION ( A ,WE/]N 0M9D10 9 ITS MO/ 9/RUM5TAL & ANALYTICAL POSITIVI/IC =M1 ) AN ,EA/]N 0HE>T10 AT ITS MO/ VAPOR\S & SQUAM\S1 CANNOT BE RESOLV$ BY A GOSPEL ( PEACEABLE COEXI/5CE BUT MU/ ULTIMATELY YIELD A TOTAL CONTRADICTION4 ,ECOLOGY'S 0POP0 CULTURE IS AT W> ) ITS [N LOGICAL UND]P9N+S4 

,TODAY'S ECLECTICISM JUMBLES TOGE!R ?9K]S :OSE IDEAS >E1 TO SAY ! LEA/1 UNRELAT$4 ,9 ! ACADEMY1 AN 9COH]5T BODY ( 0ECOPHILOSOPHY0 HAS EM]G$ -- A CAT*ALL 0RECEPTACLE0 7TO BORR[ A METAPHOR FROM ,PLATO'S ,TIMAEUS7 ?AT WILDLY MIXES T5D5CIES ?AT >E %>PLY AT V>IANCE ) EA* O!R LOGICALLY BUT ?AT COEXI/ 9 A BLISSFUL /ATE ( IGNORANCE EMOTIONALLY4 ,TO ROLL TOGE!R ,HEIDEGG]'S 9EFFABLE 0OP5NESS TO ,BE+0 & ,B>RY ,COMMON]'S TRITE CAFET]IA 0ECOLOGY10 ) ITS MAXIM ?AT !RE IS 0NO SU* ?+ AS A FREE LUN*0 9 NATURE1 IS ADOLESC5T AT BE/ & 9SIDI\S AT WOR/ ,IT ASKS US TO DESC5D FROM ! ,BAV>IAN ,ALPS TO A ,NEW ,J]SEY %OPP+ MALL )\T EV5 POPP+ AN E>DRUM4 

,TYPICAL ( ?IS ECLECTICISM IS 0DEEP ECOLOGY0 -- WIDELY DISCUSS$ AT ECOLOGICAL CONF]5CES !SE DAYS1 EV5 AS P>TICIPANTS CONTEMPLATE :AT IS 0DEEP]0 ?AN 0DEEP ECOLOGY40 ,YET ITS V]Y NAME TYPIFIES A CONFUSION 9 SEMANTICS4 ,LEAV+ ASIDE ! PROBLEMS ( US+ ! DIM5SIONAL WORD DEEP1 0%ALL[ ECOLOGY0 -- 9T5D$ AS ! TE*NOCRATIC C\NT]P>T ( 0DEEP ECOLOGY0 -- IS H>DLY TO BE GRAC$ ) ! WORD ECOLOGY :5 IT IS 9 FACT NO?+ MORE ?AN  
5VIRONM5TALISM4 ,MOREOV]1 ONE CAN BE V]Y 0DEEP0 BUT PR(\NDLY WRONG1 AS ,C>TESIAN PHILOSOPHY & POSITIVI/ !ORY REVEAL TODAY ,IT DOES NOT HELP ONE'S ECOLOGY -- :E!R DEEP1 %ALL[1 OR SOCIAL -- TO FILL 9 ITS GAPS ) SOME PLA/] BORR[$ FROM ,TAOISM1 MORT> FROM ,BUDDHISM1 CONCRETE FROM ,HEIDEGG]1 & BRICKS FROM ,SP9OZA1 NOT TO SPEAK ( MUD FROM ,COMMON]1 ,PAUL ,EHRLI*1 & ! LIKE4 ,ATTEMPTS TO COMPO/ A GREAT V>IETY ( VIEWS UND] A COMMON RUBRIC LIKE 0DEEP ECOLOGY0 OR 0BIOREGIONALISM0 >E GRAVELY MISLEAD+3 !RE >E DIFF]5CES )9 ! ECOLOGY MOVEM5T ?AT >E UTT]LY AT ODDS ) EA* O!R1 & !IR DIV]G5CES >E MORE IMPORTANT ?AN !IR SO-CALL$ 0COMMON GOAL04 

,!RE IS1 9 FACT1 AN ORGANISMIC TRADITION 9 ,WE/]N ?\<T ?AT IS AT LEA/ AS RI* AS ?AT ( ! ,EA/4 ,MOREOV]1 LONG/&+ DEBATES 9 ! ,WE/]N TRADITION HAVE 5GAG$ PHILOSOPH]S ) HI<LY IMPORTANT PROBLEMS ?AT ! ,EA/ HAS NOT CONFRONT$ AS FULLY2 9DE$1 ! ,WE/]N ORGANISMIC TRADITION IS MU* /URDI] 9 ITS ?RU/ ?AN ! ,EA/]N4 ,ONE DOES NOT HAVE TO TRAVEL F> 9TO ,EA/]N ?\<T TO F9D DUALISMS ?AT >E NO LESS 9TRACTABLE ?AN ,DESC>TES'S & NOTIONS ( DOM9AT+ NATURE ?AT >E NO LESS /RID5T ?AN ,BACON'S4 ,ISSUES ( MONISM & DUALISM1 R$UCTIONISM & DIALECTIC1 & ! SOMETIMES ADV]S>IAL RELATION%IPS BETWE5 !M W]E >TICULAT$1 EXAC]BAT$1 & CONFRONT$ MORE CLE>LY 9 ! ,WE/ -- P>TICUL>LY 9 ! WORKS ( ,>I/OTLE1 ,SP9OZA1 & ,HEGEL -- ?AN 9 ! ,EA/1 :]E !SE NOTIONS T5D$ TO TAKE A VAPOR\S & MY/ICAL =M4 

,IF MY APPROA* SEEMS TOO 0,EUROC5TRIC10 LET ME W>N ! READ] ?AT ,ASIAN 0C5TRICITY0 IS A GREAT] AFFLICTION4 ,IT IS ! ISSUES ?AT ECOLOGICAL ?9K+ RAISES1 RA!R ?AN GEOPOLITICAL & DEMOGRAPHIC CONSID]ATIONS1 ?AT %\LD GUIDE US H]E4 ,ULTIMATELY1 ! REAL QUE/IONS ?AT CONFRONT US >E NOT ONLY H[ TO FEEL ECOLOGICALLY BUT H[ TO ?9K ECOLOGICALLY4 ,! *ASM BETWE5 ?\<T & FEEL+ IS GR[+ WID] TODAY1 NOT N>R[+1 DESPITE ! DELUGE ( ORI5TALIZ$ ,WE/]NISMS ?AT HAVE DESC5D$ UPON US ME?ODOLOGICALLY & ! ,WE/]NIZ$ ORI5TALISMS ?AT HAVE DESC5D$ UPON US ONTOLOGICALLY4 ,IT W\LD BE WELL1 = A MOM5T1 TO WORK ) ONE TRADITION ON ITS [N GR\ND & SEE :AT PROBLEMS IT RAISES & :AT SOLUTIONS IT ADVANCES4 

,NATURE PHILOSOPHY--,EA/ & ,WE/ 

  

,TO ?9K ECOLOGICALLY IS TO 5T] ! DOMA9 ( NATURE PHILOSOPHY4 ,?IS CAN BE A V]Y P]IL\S /EP4 ,S]I\S POLITICAL AMBIGUITIES P]SI/ 9 NATURE PHILOSOPHY ITSELF3 NAMELY1 ITS POT5TIAL TO N\RI% REACTION AS WELL AS REVOLUTION4 ,CONTEMPOR>Y SOCIETY IS /ILL SE>$ BY IMAGES ( NATURE ?AT HAVE FO/]$ HI<LY REACTION>Y POLITICAL VIEWS4 ,VAPOR\S SLOGANS AB\T 0COMMUNITY0 & HUMANITY'S 0ON5ESS ) NATURE0 EASILY 9T]PLAY ) ! LEGACY ( 0NATURALI/IC0 NATIONALISM ?AT REA*$ ITS G5OCIDAL APOGEE 9 ,NAZISM1 ) ITS MY?S ( RACE & 0BLOOD & SOIL40 ,IT REQUIRES ONLY A M9OR IDEOLOGICAL %IFT FROM ! IDEAS ( ! N9ETE5?-C5TURY ,ROMANTIC MOVEM5T & ,WILLIAM ,BLAKE'S MY/ICAL AN>*ISM TO >RIVE AT ,RI*>D ,WAGN]'S MY/ICAL NATIONALISM4 

,NOR DOES SCI5CE1 = ALL ITS CLAIMS TO OBJECTIVITY1 RESCUE US FROM ! WAYW>DNESS ( A NATURE PHILOSOPHY T+$ ) ROMANTICISM & MY/ICISM4 ,! 0NATURALI/IC 9JUNCTIONS ) :I* ,HITL] 9ITIAT$ HIS BLOOD-DR5*$ M>* ?R\< ,EUROPE HAVE !IR C\NT]P>T 9 ! COSMIC 0LAWS0 ( NATURAL HI/ORY ) :I* ,/AL9 IDEOLOGICALLY JU/IFI$ HIS BLOOD-DR5*$ 9DU/RIALIZATION ( ,RUSSIA4 0,DIALECTICAL MAT]IALISM10 OR 0DIAMAT0 -- :I* ,FRI$RI* ,5GELS RE/AT$ AS 0LAWS0 LIKE ! 0UNITY ( OPPOSITES10 ! TRANS=MATION ( 0QUANTITY 9TO QUALITY10 & ! 0NEGATION ( ! NEGATION0 -- AN*OR$ SOCIAL DEVELOPM5T 9 AN ALMO/ ME*ANI/IC CAUSALITY ?AT WAS AS DAMN+ TO MOD]N CLAIMS ( 9DIVIDUALITY & FRE$OM AS IT WAS TO ! COMPLEX RELATION%IPS ( SOCIETY TO NATURE4 

,IT IS WOR? NOT+ ?AT ! MAJOR !ORI/S ( ! ,FRANKFURT ,S*OOL1 :OSE IDEAS >E SO FA%IONABLE !SE DAYS1 F\ND]$ ON ! HORNS ( DILEMMAS ?AT NATURE PHILOSOPHY POSES4 ,!ODOR ,ADORNO & ,MAX ,HORKHEIM]'S D>K PESSIMISM AB\T ! HUMAN CONDITION /EMM$ 9 L>GE P>T FROM !IR 9ABILITY TO AN*OR AN EMANCIPATORY E?ICS 9 A RADICALLY CONCEIV$ ECOLOGICAL PHILOSOPHY4 ,9DE$1 REASON1 9 !IR VIEW1 WAS HOPELESSLY TA9T$ BY ITS ORIG9 7AS !Y UND]/OOD IT7 AS A MEANS = DOM9AT+ NATURE -- A VA/1 PRESUMABLY CIVILIZATORY 5T]PRISE ?AT ALSO REQUIR$ ! DOM9ATION ( HUMAN BY HUMAN AS M]E 9/RUM5TS ( PRODUCTION4 ,M>XI/ !ORY JU/IFI$ HUMAN S]VITUDE & ! DEVELOPM5T ( CLASSES AS UNAVOIDABLE /EPS 9 HUMANITY'S 0TORTUR$0 M>* T[>D FRE$OM FROM MAT]IAL WANT & HOPEFULLY FROM SOCIAL DOM9ATION ITSELF4.<#d#i.> ,SU* IDEAS1 :I* TRADITIONAL ,M>XISM & LIB]ALISM CELEBRAT$ & OV] :I* ! ,FRANKFURT ,S*OOL BROOD$1 W]E ! RECEIV$ WISDOM ( ! LA/ C5TURY4 ,H5CE ! 9ABILITY ( SO MANY RADICAL !ORI/S TODAY TO GRAPPLE ) NATURE PHILOSOPHY1 DIALECTIC1 OR 9DE$1 ANY ORGANIC APPROA* ?AT SEEKS TO RE9T]PRET !SE \TLOOKS ECOLOGICALLY4 ,! DOMA9 ( NATURE AS A GR\ND = FRE$OM HAS BE5 R5D]$ TABOO BY ! POLITICAL CONSEQU5CES ( E>LI] 9T]PRETATIONS1 MANY ( :I* HAVE MY/IFI$1 ROMANTICIZ$1 OR UNIFI$ NATURE & ITS RELATION%IP TO SOCIETY BY MEANS ( A COSMIC MY/ICISM ?AT PREEMPTS REASON BY 9TUITION4 

,ON ! O!R H&1 ! FACT ?AT ,EA/]N SAGES ?\<T & FELT PR(\NDLY DOES NOT IMMUNIZE !IR WORK TO ! CRITICISM ?AT AMBIGUITY CL\DS MU* ( IT4 ,! ,TAO ,TE ,*+1 IMPUT$ TO ,LAO-TZU1 CAN BE READ NOT ONLY AS ! PEASANTRY'S 0WAY0 = MOV+ ) ! 0GRA90 ( NATURE BUT AS A H&BOOK = ELITI/ CONTROL ( ! PEASANTRY -- AN AMBIGUITY ?AT IS NO LESS TR\BL+ ?AN ! FACT ?AT ,PLATO'S ,REPUBLIC CAN BE READ NOT ONLY AS A F>-SEE+ DISQUISITION ON JU/ICE BUT AS A ,HELL5IC GUIDE = A GU>DIAN ELITE 9 ! MANIPULATION ( ! PEOPLE4 ,WE/]N ACOLYTES ( ,EA/]N ?\<T (T5 USE SU* AMBIGUITY TO !IR ADVANTAGE1 EXPLOIT+ METAPHORS ( ,EA/]N SAGES TO R5D] COMPLETELY SELF-CONTRADICTORY >GUM5TS 9TELLIGIBLE1 IF NOT EXACTLY COH]5T4 ,AMBIGUITY IS NO VIRTUE 9 ITSELF2 RA!R1 IT DEM&S CL>IFICATION & ELUCIDATION4 

,:5 MANY QUASI-RELIGI\S ,ASIAN TRACT S >E VIEW$ FROM A  
SOCIAL /&PO9T -- :I* SOCIAL ECOLOGY ALWAYS REQUIRES -- SOME ( !IR AMBIGUITY SEEMS TO DISAPPE>4 ,9 TRADITIONAL ,*9A1 A FATALI/IC PEASANTRY WAS AN EASILY MANIPULABLE PEASANTRY1 H[EV] 0S(TLY0 IT DEALT ) NATURE -- :I* WAS NOT QUITE AS 0S(T0 AS ! ,WE/]N IMAG9ATION T5DS TO PICTURE IT4 ,9 ?IS RESPECT1 ,LEON ,E4 ,/OV]'S  
,! ,CULTURAL ,ECOLOGY ( ,*9ESE ,CIVILIZATION IS A MU*-NE$$ COMPANION READ] TO ,TAOI/ & ,BUDDHI/ LIT]ATURE4.<#e.> ,! PEASANT VILLAGE OR ,GRE5 ,CIRCLE 7*'+ *UAN7 ( ! NOR? -- A SOBRIQUET ?AT ,/OV] APPLIES TO ,*9ESE VILLAGES G5]ALLY -- WAS TRADITIONALLY ! OBJECT ( SY/EMATIC PLUND] BY AN ELITE4 ,?IS ELITE FO/]$ A PRIVILEG$ 0HI< CULTURE0 ?AT PAT5TLY JU/IFI$ !IR EXPLOITATION ( ! PEASANTRY 9 ! NAME ( A 0,GREAT ,CONNECT$ ,:OLE40 ,:AT WAS 0GREAT10 ALAS1 WAS (T5 :AT LAY 9 ! BE/ 9T]E/S ( ?OSE :O CONSID]$ !MSELVES 0GREAT10 NOT NECESS>ILY ( ! PEASANTRY1 :O ALSO =M$ P>T ( ! 0:OLE40 ,ECOLOGICALLY1 ! LANGUAGE ( 0CONNECT$NESS0 9 ! ,TAO ,TE ,*+ IS 5*ANT+LY 0NATURALI/IC40 ,SOCIALLY1 H[EV]1 IT PROVID$ A RHETORICAL PAT9A = UN*ALL5G$ DESPOTISM 9 :I* PEASANT & ELITE W]E 0CONNECT$0 NOT BY A MUTUALI/IC SYMBIOSIS BUT BY A P>ASITISM 9 :I* ! PEASANT WAS ! HO/ & ! G5TLEMAN ! P>ASITE4 

,FOLK CULTURE WAS SEP>AT$ FROM HI< CULTURE BY ! ILLIT]ACY & CONTRACTION ( ! PEASANT VILLAGE TO AN 9TROV]T$1 P>O*IAL1 & SELF-5CLOS$ UNIV]SE -- ONE ?AT KEPT ,*9ESE SOCIETY FRAGM5T$1 HI]>*ICAL1 & SOCIALLY IMMOBILE4 ,VILLAG]S' CONCEPTIONS ( NATURE W]E DISCONC]T+3 HUMAN LIFE WAS SE5 9 ! MO/ PASSIVE & RESIGN$ P]SPECTIVE1 AS A /EADY DEMOGRAPHIC FL[ 9TO ! 0,S9K ( ,DEA?40 ,EV5 DIVE/$ ( ITS 9/ITUTIONAL & IDEOLOGICAL TRAPP+S1 ,TAOISM HI/ORICALLY ALMO/ C]TA9LY %AP$ ! PEASANTRY 9TO A SOCIAL BODY )\T *OICE1 MOTIVATION1 RESPITE FROM POV]TY1 OR HOPE ( ESCAP+ BE+ DRA9$ 9TO ! 0,S9K40 ,9 A 0NATURALI/IC0 CR$O LESS ( NURTURE ?AN ( UNREL5T+ DE/9Y1 PIETY WAS 9T]M+L$ ) ACQUIESC5CE T[>D ONE'S FATE1 & TOIL WAS 9T]M+L$ ) 0SANCTIMONI\S HUSB&RY10 AS ,/OV] CALLS IT4 ,FROM ! VIEWPO9T ( ! ELITE1 ! PEASANTS' PRIDE 9 !IR HUSB&RY WAS LESS IMPORTANT ?AN !IR VULN]ABILITY TO EXPLOITATION4.<#e#a.> 

,IT IS NOT MY PURPOSE TO DWELL AT ANY GREAT L5G? ON ! ,ASIAN HE>T ?AT SO (T5 DAZZLES ! ,WE/]N HEAD4 ,:AT IS MORE IMPORTANT H]E IS ?AT ?IS HEAD IS MORE ME*ANI/IC1 9/RUM5TAL1 & 9ORGANIC ?AN IT C>ES TO ADMIT4 ,MU* ?AT PASSES = ECOLOGICAL ?9K+ TODAY IS AS DIM ME?ODOLOGICALLY AS IT IS />RY-EY$ IDEOLOGICALLY4 ,BEH9D ! 0,?IRD ,WAVE0 ?AT IS ROLL+ OV] US1 ! 0NEW P>ADIGM0 ?AT IS %IFT+ US1 ! 0FE$BACK0 ?AT IS ELECTRIFY+ US1 & ! 0WOODPA?S0 ?AT >E GUID+ US1 IS A BIZ>RE =M ( ?9K+ ?AT IS AS AIRY ON ITS SPIRITUAL PEAKS AS IT IS CRUDELY ME*ANI/IC AT ITS HYPO!TICO-D$UCTIVE BASE4 ,!SE CONTRADICTORY 0ECOLOGICAL ZONES10 AS IT W]E1 REFLECT S]I\S AMBIGUITIES 9 NATURE PHILOSOPHY ITSELF3 NAMELY1 ITS POT5TIAL TO N\RI% REACTION AS WELL AS REVOLUTION1 (T5 ) ! SAME VISIONS ?AT F$ A ,BLAKE AT ONE EXTREME & A ,WAGN] AT ! O!R4 ,!SE 0ECOLOGICAL ZONES0 MU/ BE BRIEFLY SURVEY$ IF ! PROJECT ( ?9K+ ECOLOGICALLY IS TO BE S]I\SLY EXPLOR$4 

,SPIRITUAL ,ME*ANISM 

  

,AT ! P]IL ( /&+ V]Y MU* AT ODDS ) :AT IS VOIC$ !SE DAYS 9 ECOLOGICAL PHILOSOPHY1 LET ME SAY ?AT ! PROBLEM ( DUALISM -- ! MODE ( ?\<T ?AT C\NT]POSES M9D TO BODY1 ?\<T TO REALITY1 & SOCIETY TO NATURE -- :I* RECEIVES SO MU* EMPHASIS 9 ECOLOGICAL LIT]ATURE IS GIV+ WAY TO ! MORE S]I\S PROBLEM ( R$UCTIONISM4 

,DUALISM & R$UCTIONISM1 9 FACT1 >E USUALLY DEEPLY 5TANGL$ ) EA* O!R4 ,A CRUDE DUALISM T5DS TO FO/] ITS C\NT]P>T 9 AN EQUALLY CRUDE MONISM ?AT SIMPLIFIES ALL ( REALITY 9TO A S+LE1 (T5 HOMOG5E\S AG5CY1 =CE1 SUB/ANCE1 OR 5]GY S\RCE4 ,HEGEL CAU/ICALLY CALL$ ?IS 0A NI<T 9 :I* ALL C[S >E BLACK40 ,! MY/ICAL SP>KS ( LI<T ?AT APPE> 9 ?IS 0NI<T0 %\LD NOT DECEIVE US4 ,?AT R$UCTIONI/ NOTIONS GLIMM] ) WORDS LIKE ,SPIRIT1 COSMIC 5]GY1 VITAL =CES1 &  
5]GY C5T]S B>ELY CONCEALS ! FACT ?AT R$UCTIONISM EM]GES FROM WAYS ( ?9K+ ?AT >E NO LESS ME*ANI/IC1 9/RUM5TAL1 & ANALYTICAL ?AN ! HYPO!TICO-D$UCTIVE M5TALITY ?AT HAS ASSUM$ SU* SUPREMACY OV] ! PA/ TWO C5TURIES ( ,WE/]N ?\<T ,SEEM+LY MY/ICAL1 SPIRITUAL1 & EV5 ORGANISMIC CONCLUSIONS >E (T5 D$UC$ BY MEANS ( HYPO!TICO-D$UCTIVE APPROA*ES1 :I* 9 TURN 9FECT ! 5TIRE PROJECT ( 0RE5*ANT+0 ! WORLD ) DISMALLY 0DIS5*ANT+0 9/RUM5TAL UND]P9N+S4 ,9DE$1 AS WE %ALL SEE1 0ME?OD0 CAN NEV] BE BL&LY DETA*$ FROM ! CONT5T IT YIELDS1 JU/ AS ! MEANS ONE USES 9 POLITICS & LIFE G5]ALLY SIGNIFICANTLY DET]M9ES ! 5DS ONE PURSUES4 

,ONE HAS ONLY TO CONSID] ! CURR5T LOVE AFFAIR BETWE5 ECOLOGICAL PHILOSOPHY & SY/EMS !ORY TO OBS]VE ?IS R$UCTIONISM 9 ITS MO/ POPUL>1 UNTUTOR$1 & SYNCRETIC =M4 ,FRITJ( ,CAPRA'S WIDELY READ ,! ,TURN+ ,PO9T CAN BE TAK5 AS AN EXAMPLE4 0,! CREATIVE UNFOLD+ ( LIFE T[>D =MS ( EV] 9CREAS+ COMPLEXITY10 WE LE>N1 0REMA9$ AN UNSOLV$ MY/]Y = MORE ?AN A C5TURY AFT] ,D>W91 BUT REC5T /UDY HAS \TL9$ ! CONT\RS ( A !ORY ( EVOLUTION ?AT PROMISES TO %$ LI<T ON ?IS /RIK+ *>ACT]I/IC ( LIV+ ORGANISMS4 ,?IS IS A SY/EMS !ORY ?AT FOCUSES ON ! DYNAMICS ( SELF-TRANSC5D5CE & IS BAS$ ON ! WORK ( A NUMB] ( SCI5TI/S FROM V>I\S DISCIPL9ES0 -- HE M5TIONS1 AMONG O!RS1 ,ILYA ,PRIGOG9E1 ,GREGORY ,BATESON1 & ,]V9 ,LASZLO1 TO S+LE \T ?OSE :O >E WIDELY KN[N 9 ! ,UNIT$ ,/ATES4 ,CAPRA CONT9UES3  
  

,! BASIC DYNAMICS ( EVOLUTION1 ACCORD+ TO ! NEW SY/EMS VIEW1 BEG9S ) A SY/EM ( HOMEO/ASIS -- A /ATE ( DYNAMIC BALANCE *>ACT]IZ$ BY MULTIPLE 9DEP5D5T FLUCTUATIONS4 ,:5 ! SY/EM IS DI/URB$ IT HAS ! T5D5CY TO MA9TA9 ITS /ABILITY BY MEANS ( NEGATIVE FE$BACK ME*ANISMS1 :I* T5D TO R$UCE ! DEVIATION FROM ! BALANC$ /ATE4 ,H[EV]1 ?IS IS NOT ! ONLY POSSIBILITY4 ,DEVIATIONS MAY ALSO BE RE9=C$ 9T]NALLY ?R\< POSITIVE FE$BACK1 EI!R 9 RESPONSE TO 5VIRONM5TAL *ANGES OR SPONTANE\SLY )\T ANY EXT]NAL 9FLU5CE4 ,! /ABILITY ( A LIV+ SY/EM IS CONT9UALLY TE/$ BY ITS FLUCTUATIONS1 & AT C]TA9 MOM5TS ONE OR SEV]AL ( !M MAY BECOME SO /RONG ?AT !Y DRIVE ! SY/EM OV] AN 9/ABILITY 9TO AN 5TIRELY NEW /RUCTURE1 :I* WILL AGA9 BE FLUCTUAT+ & RELATIVELY /ABLE4 ,! /ABILITY ( LIV+ SY/EMS IS NEV] ABSOLUTE4 ,IT WILL P]SI/ AS LONG AS ! FLUCTUATIONS REMA9 BEL[ A CRITICAL SIZE1 BUT ANY SY/EM IS ALWAYS READY TO TRANS=M ITSELF1 ALWAYS READY TO EVOLVE4 ,?IS BASIC MODEL = EVOLUTION1 WORK$ \T = *EMICAL DISSIPATIVE /RUCTURES BY ,PRIGOG9E & HIS COLLABORATORS1 HAS S9CE BE5 APPLI$ SUCCESSFULLY TO DESCRIBE ! EVOLUTION ( V>I\S BIOLOGICAL1 SOCIAL1 & ECOLOGICAL SY/EMS4.<#e#b.>  
  

,ALMO/ EV]Y?+ ?AT IS TR\BL+ AB\T SPIRITUAL ME*ANISM1 FROM ITS T]M9OLOGY TO ITS ?\<T1 IS CONTA9$ 9 ?IS TELL+ PASSAGE4 ,SY/EMS !ORY IS C]TA9LY USEFUL 9 EXPLA9+ ! OP]ATION ( SY/EMS1 ESPECIALLY ONES SO /RUCTUR$ AS TO L5D !MSELVES TO SY/EMS !ORY ANALYSIS1 JU/ AS ! EQUATIONS ( PHYSICS CAN EXPLA9 ANY PH5OM5ON ?AT CAN BE R$UC$ TO ! T]MS ( PHYSICS4 ,:AT S]I\S PEOPLE 9 ECOLOGICAL PHILOSOPHY HAVE TO ASK !MSELVES IS :E!R EVOLUTION1 LET ALONE SELF-TRANSC5D5CE1 CAN REALLY BE R$UC$ TO 0DYNAMICS10 09T]DEP5D5T FLUCTUATIONS1 0FE$BACK ME*ANISMS0 -- OR EV5 09PUTS0 &'\TPUTS -- ?AT DO NOT DIFF] 9 PR9CIPLE FROM ! ,NEWTONIAN ORI5TATION T[>D PH5OM5A OR FROM ,LA ,METTRIE'S EI<TE5?-C5TURY DESCRIPTION ( HUMAN BE+S AS MA*9ES4 ,IF !RE IS ANY?+ DEVELOPM5TAL OR EVOLUTION>Y 7AS DI/+UI%$ FROM M]ELY K9ETIC7 AB\T A SY/EMS !ORY 0P>ADIGM10 IT IS SIMPLY ?AT SOME RELATIVELY HOMEO-/ATIC PH5OM5A1 CONCEIV$ PRECISELY AS SY/EMS1 MAY REPLAC$ ) O!R1 HOPEFULLY COMPLEX SY/EMS4 ,9 EI!R CASE1 DESPITE ! IMAG]Y ?AT ,CAPRA TRIES TO =M 9 ! READ]'S M9D1 WE CANNOT PROP]LY SPEAK ( ONE ME*ANISM BE+ QUALITATIVEY TRANS=M$ 9TO ANO!R4 ,IF ! ESS5TIAL PROBLEM ( ORGANIC DEVELOPM5T IS R$UC$ AT ALL ITS LEVELS TO 0FE$BACK LOOPS0 AN 0FLUCTUATIONS10 \R ?9K+ HAS NOT ADVANC$ BEYOND ,C>TESIAN & ,HOBBESIAN ME*ANISM1 H[EV] LAVI%LY WE SPEAK ( ! 0COEVOLUTION ( AN ORGANISM PLUS ITS 5VIRONM5T10 ( 0:OL5ESS10 OR ( ,TAOI/ SAGACITY & ,FRANCISCAN !OLOGY4.<#e#c.> 

,!RE IS A PHYSICAL BASIS TO EV]Y?+ ?AT PHYSICS 0,TAOI/10 ,NEWTONIAN1 OR ,PRIGOG9IAN -- DESCRIBES ) V>Y+ DEGREES ( EXACTNESS & AT V>I\S LEVELS ( PHYSICAL DEVELOPM5T ,BUT ?IS FACT IS NO MORE A W>RANT = CA/+ ALL PH5OM5A 9 T]MS ( !SE DESCRIPTIONS ?AN R$UC+ ! 5TIRE WORLD TO MATT] & MOTION4 ,9DE$1 SU* R$UCTIONISM IS FATAL TO ANY =M ( ORGANISMIC ?9K+4 ,CAPRA'S EXPLICATION A SY/EMS !ORY ( EVOLUTION DESCRIBES ?\<T AS 0FREE40.<#e#d.> ,BUT TO SPEAK ( 0AUTONOMY & FRE$OM ( *OICE0 9 NATURE1 PURE & SIMPLE1 IS TO DIM9I% ! E?ICAL MEAN+ ( ! WORDS4 ,NATURE MAY BE AN EVOLV+  
GR\ND = AUTONOMY1 FRE$OM1 & AN 9CREAS+ MEASURE ( *OICE1 BUT A GR\ND IS NO MORE ID5TICAL ) ! E?ICS IT SU/A9S ?AN NUTRI5TS 9 SOIL >E ID5TICAL ) ! PLANTS !Y SU/A94 ,AUTONOMY & FRE$OM PRESUPPOSE HUMAN 9TELLECTION1 ! P[] TO CONCEPTUALIZE & G5]ALIZE4 ,!IR DOMA9 MU/ BE EXPLICAT$ 9 CULTURAL1 LOGICAL1 &1 )9 V]Y DEF9ITE LIMITS1 BIOLOGICAL T]MS -- NOT 9 T]MS ( A COSMIC 0DYNAMICS0 ?AT IS 0BASICALLY OP5 & 9DET]M9ATE40.<#e#e.> ,9DE$1 TO FLIPPANTLY CONFUSE 9DET]M9ACY ) AUTONOMY & OP5NESS ) FRE$OM IS TO %IFT FROM ONE LEVEL TO ANO!R AS C>ELESSLY AS ONE /IRS A CUP ( TEA4 ,CAPRA'S APPROA* TO 0FRE$OM0 R5D]S 9DET]M9ACY & /ATI/ICAL PROBABILITY 9 PHYSICS COEQUAL ) HUMAN SOCIAL FRE$OM1 )\T ! LEA/ REG>D = ! /AGG]+ COMPLEXITY ( SOCIAL 9/ITUTIONS1 WAYW>D 9DIVIDUAL PROCLIVITIES1 DIV]SE CULTURAL TRADITIONS1 & CONFLICT+ P]SONAL WILLS4 

,ILYA ,PRIGOG9E HAS ATTEMPT$ TO EXPLA9 ! ORGANIC PROCESS ( EVOLUTION ?R\< 0*EMICAL DISSIPATIVE /RUCTURES10 9 WDU* V>I\S SY/EMS >E =M$ 9 SUCCESSION1 EA* HOPEFULLY OIF GREAT] COMPLEXITY ?AN ! ONES ?AT PREC$$ IT4.<#e#f.> ,9 A SUCCESSION ( SY/EMS1 !SE 0DISSIPATIVE /RUCTURES10 :I* CAN BE MIA !MATIC ALLY =MULAT$1 >E %[N TO SUCCE$ EA* O!R3 A SY/EM APPROA*ES A 0F> FROM EQUILIBRIUM0 SITUATION1 :I* MI>KS ITS TRANSITION TO A NEW SY/EM4 ,H]E1 AS 0DISSIPATIVE /RUCTURES0 REPLACE ! PHASES ( GR[?1 DEVELOPM5T GIVES WAY TO !RMODYNAMICS4 ,NOR DOES A SY/EM ( POSITIVE FE$BACK1 UPON WDII* ,PRIGOG9IAN SY/EMS !ORY DEP5DS1 ALL[ = A CONCEPT ( POT5TIALITY3 IT IS RA!R *ANCE & /O*A/IC PH5OM5A ?AT ACT AS 0M$IAT+0 PHASES BETWE5 ONE 0DISSIPATIVE /RUCTURE0 & ANO!R4 ,CONFRONT$ ) 0F> FROM EQUILIBRIUM0 DISORD] & SUCCE$+ ORD]LY SY/EMS1 SPECULATIVE ?\<T IS R$UC$ TO M]E OBS]VATION4 ,9DE$1 A SY/EM APPROA*+ TRANSITION MAY NOT ASSUME AN IMMAN5TLY PR$ICTABLE =M !REAFT] -- IT MAY SIMPLY FALL AP>T 9TO 0*AOS40 ,!SE SY/EMS HAVE1 9 EFFECT1 NO 9T]NAL DEVELOPM5TAL LOGIC4 

,PRIGOG9E'S MA!MATICS CAN NO MORE EXPLA9 ! BIOLOGICAL1 SOCIAL1 & P]SONAL DIFF]5TIAE ?AT MAKE UP REALITY1 EV5 ) ! AID ( W+$ ,TAOI/ METAPHORS1 ?AN A HEAP ( BRICKS CAN =M ITSELF 9TO A ,GO?IC CA!DRAL ?R\< ! 0FLUCTUATIONS0 9VOLV$ 9 POSITIVE FE$BACK4 ,ONE C\LD1 ) EQUAL APLOMB1 TRY TO R$UCE ORGANIC METABOLISM TO ,E9/E9'S COSMIC =MULA  
,E"7MC#b1 SIMPLY BECAUSE IT IS COSMIC4 ,AT ! RISK ( ADD+ TO PHILOSOPHY'S ALREADY HEAVY BURD5 ( 0FALLACIES10 ,I W\LD DEF9E ! 0R$UCTIONI/ FALLACY0 AS ! APPLICATION ( ! MO/ G5]AL =MULAS TO ! MO/ DETAIL$ P>TICUL>S1 9 ! BELIEF ?AT :AT IS UNIV]SAL & SEEM+LY ALL-5COMPASS+ MU/ NECESS>ILY EXPLA9 :AT IS HI<LY P>TICUL> & UNIQUELY 9DIVIDUAL4.<#e#g.> ,AT BE/1 A =MULA1 A 0P>ADIGM10 OR MORE PROP]LY1 A PHILOSOPHY1 MAY PROVIDE ! BASIS = AN ORI5TATION T[>D REALITY AT A CLE>LY DEF9ABLE LEVEL ( REALITY4 ,IRONICALLY1 ! MORE UNIV]SAL1 AB/RACT1 & MA!MATICAL A =MULA IS1 ! MORE LIKELY ?AT ITS V]Y G5]ALITY WILL LIMIT IT :5 IT IS APPLI$ TO CONCRETE1 HI<LY P>TICUL>IZ$ PH5OM5A1 ,E"7MC#b IS TOO COSMIC TO EXPLA9 SU* RI*LY >TICULAT$ OR M$IAT$ MODES ( REALITY AS NATURAL EVOLUTION1 ORGANIC METABOLISM1 SOCIAL DEVELOPM5T1 & P]SONAL BEHAVIOR4 

,NOT SURPRIS+LY4 ,NEW ,AGE ACOLYTES ( ECOLOGY BECOME AU!NTIC R$UCTIONI/S4 0,GOD10 0,5]GY10 0,BE+10 0,LOVE10 0,9T]CONNECT$NESS10 & A :OLE REP]TOIRE ( METAPHORS >E 9VOK$ ?AT S]VE TO HOMOG5IZE ! P>TICUL> & DIVE/ IT ( ITS RI*NESS & DIV]SITY4 ,:5 ?IS APPROA* PROVES TOO AB/RACT1 IT IS ALWAYS POSSIBLE TO CREATE A PA/I*E ( ILL-DIGE/$ 0P>ADIGMS0 & !ORIES1 REG>DLESS ( ! FACT ?AT !IR PREMISES & LOGIC MAY CONFLICT ) EA* O!R4 ,H]E ECLECTICISM1 :I* USUALLY CL\DS RADICALLY DIFF]5T WAYS ( ?9K+ & ! MY? ?AT WE ALL %>E A 0COMMON GOAL10 BECOMES ! LA/ R$\BT = %E] 9TELLECTUAL SLOPP9ESS4 

,! LANGUAGE ?AT ! MORE SOPHI/ICAT$ SY/EMS !ORI/S USE REFLECTS ! CONCEPTS !Y BR+ TO !IR 0P>ADIGMS40 ,COMPLEX RESULTS >E /RIPP$ D[N TO !IR MO/ ELEM5TAL LEVELS SO ?AT !Y CAN BE H&L$ 9 PHYSICO-MA!MATICAL T]MS4 ,?AT HYPO!TICO-D$UCTIVE ANALYZES HAVE IMM5SE VALUE 9 RELATIONS ?AT >E AU!NTICALLY DYNAMIC OR ME*ANICAL IS NOT 9 QUE/ION H]E2 !IR VALUE 9 !SE DOMA9S ( KN[L$GE CANNOT BE SURPASS$4 ,:AT IS TR\BL+ IS ?AT SY/EMS !ORY T5DS TO BECOME A HI<LY IMP]IALI/IC IDEOLOGICAL APPROA* ?AT /AKES \T A CLAIM TO ! TOTALITY ( DEVELOPM5T1 9DE$ TO REASON \T & EXPLA9 VIRTUALLY ALL PH5OM5A4 ,IF NATURAL EVOLUTION1 ORGANIC METABOLISM1 & P]SONAL BEHAVIOR W]E SY/EMS1 !N SY/EMS !ORY 9 ALL ITS SELF-FULFILL+ GR&EUR W\LD SEEM TO WORK ADMIRABLY4 ,?AT ?IS 0IF-!N0 CONV]SION 7& ,I WILL HAVE MORE TO SAY AB\T !SE LAT]7 D5UDES PH5OM5A ( MANY COMPLEX QUALITIES ?AT DO NOT L5D !MSELVES TO SY/EMS ANALYSIS IS CONV5I5TLY LO/ 9 A %UFFLE ( GR&IOSE METAPHORS ?AT APPEAL MORE TO AN EV]-YIELD+ HE>T ?AN TO A DEM&+ LOGICAL M9D4 

,BY CONTRA/1 ! P[] ( ! ,WE/'S ORGANISMIC -- MORE PRECISELY1 DIALECTICAL -- TRADITION 7EV5 AT ,HEGEL'S HI<LY CONCEPTUAL LEVEL7 LIES 9 BUILD+ UP ! DIFF]5TIAE ( NATURAL & SOCIAL PH5OM5A FROM :AT IS IMPLICIT 9 !IR AB/RACT LEVEL -- NOT 9 CORROSIVELY R$UC+ !IR RI*LY >TICULAT$ CONCRET5ESS TO AB/RACT1 LOGICALLY MANIPULABLE 0DATA0 ,! DIFF]5CE BETWE5 ! TWO APPROA*ES C\LD NOT BE /AT$ %>PLY 5\<4 ,DIALECTIC1 AS WE %ALL SEE1 TRIES TO ELICIT ! DEVELOPM5T ( PH5OM5A FROM !IR LEVEL ( AB/RACT 0HOMOG5EITY10 LAT5T ) ! RI* DIFF]5TIATION ?AT WILL M>K !IR MATURITY1 :ILE SY/EMS !ORY TRIES TO R$UCE PH5OM5A FROM !IR HI<LY >TICULAT$ P>TICUL>ITY TO ! LEVEL ( HOMOG5E\S AB/RACTION SO NECESS>Y = MA!MATICAL SYMBOLIZATION4 ,DIALECTIC1 9 EFFECT1 IS A LOGIC ( EVOLUTION FROM AB/RACTION T[>D DIFF]5TIATION2 SY/EMS !ORY IS A LOGIC ( DEVOLUTION FROM DIFF]5TIATION T[>D AB/RACTION4 

,= ! PRES5T1 IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE ?AT ! C>ELESS USE ( ! WORD COMPLEXITY (T5 TELLS US NO?+ :ATEV] AB\T ! NATURE ( A COMPLEX PH5OM5ON & ITS DEVELOPM5T1 ANYMORE ?AN ! C>ELESS USE ( ! WORD PROCESS TELLS US ANY?+ AB\T ! NATURE ( A COMPLEX PROCESS4 ,MANY COMPLEX PH5OM5A1 VIEW$ 9 AN E?ICAL OR EV5 9 A SURVIVAL S5SE1 >E POSITIVELY H>MFUL & WOEFULLY UNECOLOGICAL1 SU* AS ! COMPLEX1 PRESUMABLY SELF-REGULAT+ M>KET -- :OSE ADVOCATES >E1 9 FACT1 CAPTIVAT$ BY ! !ORETICAL PREMISES ( ,PRIGOG9E'S V]SION ( SY/EMS !ORY4 ,NOR CAN WE IGNORE COMPLEX PROCESSES ?AT CAN DEGRADE A BIOLOGICALLY DESIRABLE DEVELOPM5T1 SU* AS EPIDEMICS ?AT EXT]M9ATE ECOLOGICALLY VALUABLE SPECIES4 

,DEVELOPM5T )\T A 0GOAL 9 IT1 OR PURPOSE10 AS ,CAPRA DECL>ES SOME:AT DOLEFULLY1 CAN BE EQUALLY MEAN+LESS1 DESPITE ! FACT ?AT HIS 0SY/EMS !ORY ( LIFE0 F9DS A 0RECOGNIZABLE PATT]N ( DEVELOPM5T40.<#e#h.> ,! WORD PATT]N -- OR = ?AT MATT]1  
P>ADIGM -- IS NO SUB/ITUTE = ! IDEA ( T5D5CY 9 SPECULATIVE PHILOSOPHY4 ,9 ! ABS5CE ( EV]Y?+ BUT A SY/EM ( POSITIVE FE$BACK ?AT MAY OR MAY NOT YIELD COMPLEXITY1 ,CAPRA1 LIKE MANY ( HIS ASSOCIATES1 IS OBLIG$ TO TURN TO ! ,EA/ & IMPORT AN E?ICS TO R5D] SY/EMS !ORY MEAN+FUL--EV5 9 FLAT CONTRAV5TION ( HIS ,WE/]N ME?ODOLOGY4 ,9 A SUDD5 LEAP1 ! LANGUAGE 7NOT TO SPEAK ( ! CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK7 (  
,! ,TURN+ ,PO9T UND]GOES A />TL+ TRANS=MATION4 ,9VOCATIONS ( 0A NEW HOLI/IC WORLDVIEW10 0A CONCEPTUAL %IFT FROM /RUCTURE TO RHY?M0 -- EXT5D$ TO ! 0RISE & FALL0 ( CIVILIZATIONS1 9DE$ TO ! 0PLANET AS A :OLE 444 AS IT SP9S >\ND ITS AXIS & MOVES >\ND ! SUN0 -- SUDD5LY OV]LIE ! 0DYNAMICS0 & 0FE$BACK1 LOOPS0 ?AT ACTUALLY =M ! EM95TLY ,WE/]N ME?ODOLOGICAL UND]P9N+S ( HIS 0SY/EMS VIEW ( LIFE40 0,EA/]N MY/ICAL TRADITIONS1 ESPECIALLY 9 ,TAOISM10 >E ?R[N 9TO A POTP\RRI ( =MULATIONS :OSE ONLY SIMIL>ITY IS METAPHORIC4.<#e#i.> 0,! IDEA ( FLUCTUATIONS AS ! BASIS ( ORD] IS ONE ( ! BASIC !MES 9 ,TAOI/ TEXTS10 ,CAPRA APPRIZES US1 MAK+ IT SEEM 9 ! MO/ SUP]FICIAL WAY ?AT ,TAOISM P>ALLELS ,PRIGOG9E'S SY/EMS APPROA*4 ,BUT 0FLUCTUATIONS10 LIKE 0CYCLES10 HAVE BE5 US$ FROM1 TIME IMMEMORIAL TO EXPLA9 /AGNATION RA!R ?AN EVOLUTION1 FIXITY RA!R ?AN *ANGE1 & ET]NALITY RA!R ?AN DEVELOPM5T4 ,SYNCRETICALLY PLAC+ FLUCTUATIONS 9 SY/EMS !ORY ON A P> ) FLUCTUATIONS 9 ,TAOISM IS AB\T AS S\ND AS PLAC+ ! ELECTROMAGNETIC 0ATTRACTION0 9 PHYSICS ON P> ) ,]OS AS A 0COSMIC0 S\RCE ( AFF9ITY & UNITY4 ,FROM A ME?ODOLOGICAL VIEWPO9T1 ,PRIGOG9E'S MA!MATICAL =MULATION ( *EMICAL DISSIPATIVE /RUCTURES FITS JU/ AS SNUGLY 9TO ,NEWTON'S ME*ANI/IC S5SIBILITY AS ! CORPUSCUL> !ORY ( LI<T FITS 9TO ! WAVE !ORY4 ,!SE CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORKS MELD TOGE!R BECAUSE !Y D]IVE FROM ! SAME HYPO!TICO-D$UCTIVE1 9DE$ CLE>LY ME*ANI/IC M5TALITY4 

,NOR IS IT HELPFUL TO RECA/ ! 0SY/EMS VIEW ( LIFE0 9TO ,GREGORY ,BATESON'S !ORETICAL FRAMEWORK4 ,H]E1 MAT]IALITY IS DISSOLV$ 9TO 9T]RELATION%IPS & !N SUBJECTIVIZ$ AS 0M9DS0 ,?IS FRAMEWORK MI<T BE SOME:AT COMPREH5SIBLE TO AN ,EA/]N SAGE1 BUT IT DIVE/S SUB/ANCE1 9DE$ NATURE ITSELF1 ( ITS V]Y PHYSICALITY4 ,AB&ON+ ! /UDY ( ?+S -- LIV+ OR NOT -- = A /UDY ( ! RELATION%IPS BETWE5 !M IS AS ONE-SID$ & R$UCTIONI/ AS AB&ON+ ! /UDY ( RELATION%IPS = ! ?+S !Y 9T]RELATE4 ,IF TRADITIONAL MAT]IALI/ ME*ANISM /RONGLY EMPHASIZ$ ! OBJECT1 (T5 ) RESULTS ?AT 9HIBIT$ SPECULATION BEYOND ! GIV5 /ATE ( AFFAIRS1 ,BATESON'S EMPHASIS ON RELATION%IPS V]GES ON A SUBJECTIVISM ?AT C\LD ALMO/ BE TAK5 = SOLIPSISM IF ONE DID NOT KN[ MORE AB\T ,BATESON'S WORK AS A :OLE4 ,! CLAIM ?AT 0ALL EXP]I5CE IS SUBJECTIVE0 & ?AT 0\R BRA9S MAKE ! IMAGES ?AT WE ?9K WE 'P]CEIVE'0 BORD]S ON AN IDEALI/ C\NT]P>T ( ,JACOB ,MOLES*OTT'S EQUALLY CRUDE MAT]IALI/ MAXIM1 0,NO ?\<T )\T PHOSPHORUS40.<#f.> 

,?9K+ ONCE PRESUPPOS$ A KN[L$GE ( ?\<T AS IT UNFOLD$ OV] MILL5NIA ( PHILOSOPHICAL & SOCIAL DEVELOPM5T4 ,TODAY1 ! 9TELLECTUAL SPAN ( ! PRES5T G5]ATION B>ELY EXT5DS BEYOND A DECADE & IS M>K$ BY A DISQUIET+ BIAS 9 FAVOR ( J\RNALI/IC GLIBNESS4 ,?AT ECOLOGICAL ACOLYTES ( SY/EMS !ORY (T5 M]ELY /& ,NEWTONIAN ME*ANISM ON ITS HEAD YET RECEIVE NO CRITICISM FROM ECOLOGICALLY ORI5T$ 9TELLECTUALS IS EVID5CE ( ! CULTURAL ,D>K ,AGES ?AT >E GA!R+ >\ND US4 ,WE >E EV5 WITNESS+ A REVIVAL ( ,HUME'S 0IS-\<T0 CRITICISM1 :I* D5IES SPECULATIVE ?\<T ! RI<T TO REASON FROM ! 0:AT-IS0 TO ! 0:AT-%\LD-BE40 ,?IS POSITIVI/IC M\SETRAP IS A PROBLEM NOT 9 LOGIC BUT 9 E?ICS -- NOTABLY1 ! RI<T ( ! E?ICAL 0%\LD-BE0 TO 5JOY AN OBJECTIVE /ATUS4 ,! PROBLEM ( CON/ITUT+ AN OBJECTIVE E?ICS1 :I* CONF\ND$ ! ,FRANKFURT ,S*OOL1 IS NO LESS S]I\S ?AN ,HUME'S QU>REL ) ORGANIZ$ RELIGION4 ,SPECULATIVE PHILOSOPHY BY DEF9ITION CLAIMS ?AT REASON CAN PROJECT BEYOND ! GIV5 /ATE ( AFFAIRS1 :E!R TO ,PLATO'S EXEMPL>Y DOMA9 ( =MS OR ,M>X & ,KROPOTK9'S VISIONS ( A COOP]ATIVE SOCIETY4 ,TO REMA9 )9 ! 0:AT-IS0 9 ! NAME ( LOGICAL CONSI/5CY IS TO D5Y REASON ! RI<T TO ASS]T GOALS1 VALUES1 & SOCIAL RELATION%IPS ?AT PROVIDE A VOICE TO ! CLAIMS ( ECOLOGY AS A SOCIAL DISCIPL9E4 

,!SE !ORETICAL PROBLEMS HAVE AN EM95TLY PRACTICAL SIGNIFICANCE4 ,9 ALL CASES !Y REVEAL AN 9TELLECTUAL GLIBNESS ?AT DISSOLVES ?AT :I* IS CONCRETE 9 ! ECOLOGICAL PICTURE1 9DE$ ! LIFE-=MS ?AT GIVE SUB/ANTIALLY TO ! V>I\S SY/EMS1 9TO 9T]RELATION%IPS1 0DYNAMICS10 & 0M9DS0 ?AT ,CAPRA1 ,PRIGOG9E1 ,BATESON1 ET AL41 AB/RACT 9TO LIFELESS CATEGORIES4 ,?US R$UCTIONISM NOT ONLY TURNS COMPLEX ORGANISMS & !IR EQUALLY COMPLEX EVOLUTION 9TO ME*ANICAL 0FLUCTUATIONS10 DEBAS+ CONCRETE ORGANISMS 9TO AB/RACT 9T]RELATION%IPS2 IT TURNS LIFE 9 ALL ITS RI* SPECIFICITY 9TO AN AB/RACTION1 !REBY DIVE/+ NATURE ( ! V>IETY1 9DE$ ! SPECIES-9DIVIDUALITY SO ESS5TIAL TO AN UND]/&+ ( NATURE'S FECUNDITY & ITS EVOLUTION>Y IMPETUS4.<#f#a.> 

,HUMANISM & ,ANTIHUMANISM 

  

0,HUMANITY10 CURR5TLY SO UNFULFILL$ & DIVID$ AGA9/ ITSELF1 HAS SC>CELY REALIZ$ ITS POT5TIALITIES4 ,BUT 9 MU* CURR5T 0ECOLOGICAL0 ?9K+ ! CONCEPT ( HUMANITY IS NO LESS SUCK$ 9TO ! IDEOLOGICAL BLACK HOLE4.<#f#b.> ,IDEOLOGICALLY1 ! PH5OM5ON ( HUMAN SELF-HATR$ 7& HUMAN BE+S SEEM TO BE ! ONE SPECIES ?AT HAS ! ABILITY TO LUXURIATE 9 SELF-HATR$7 TAKES A NUMB] ( =MS3 A LOGICALLY AMBIGU\S 0BIOC5TRISM0 & (T5 /RID5T ANTIHUMANISM >E SET AGA9/ 0AN?ROPOC5TRISM0 & HUMANISM -- PRESUMABLY ! C>D9AL S9S ( AN AB/RACT 0,MAN0 :O IS DET]M9$ TO DESPOIL AN EQUALLY AB/RACT 0,NATURE40 ,IF SY/EMS !ORY DIVE/S NONHUMAN LIFE ( ITS SPECIFICITY1 BIOC5TRISM & ANTIHUMANISM DIVE/ HUMAN LIFE ( SOCIAL DEVELOPM5T4 ,SOCIETY BECOMES AN AB/RACTION ?AT SOMEH[ IS 9FLICT$ UPON 0,NATURE0 )\T ANY REG>D = SU* SOCIAL *>ACT]I/ICS AS HI]>*Y1 DOM9ATION1 & ! /ATE4 ,AS A RESULT1 A SIMPLI/IC BIOLOGISM EM]GES1 (T5 /RUCTUR$ >\ND 0NATURAL LAWS10 ?AT SEES 0,MAN0 & HUMANISM AS A CURSE ?AT AFFLICTS 0,NATURE0 ) ECOLOGICAL DEGRADATION4 ,AS A RESULT1 SOME VOICES 9 ! ECOLOGY MOVEM5T CALL = A MORAL 0BIOSPH]IC DEMOCRACY0 9 :I* HUMANITY'S 0RI<T0 TO LIVE & FULFILL ITSELF IS EQUATABLE ) ?AT SAME 0RI<T0 9 BUTT]FLIES1 ANTS1 :ALES1 APES1 & -- YES -- PA?OG5IC VIRUSES & G]MS4 

,VIEW$ HEURI/ICALLY1 BIOC5TRISM IS AN EF=T TO BRIDLE 0HUMAN0 >ROGANCE T[>D O!R LIFE-=MS & DEFY ! PRES5T DE/RUCTION ( ! BIOSPH]E4 ,BUT H[ LONG ONE CAN CONT9UE TO BELABOR 0HUMANITY0 = ITS AFFRONTS TO ! BIOSPH]E )\T DI/+UI%+ BETWE5 RI* & POOR1 M5 & WOM51 :ITES & PEOPLE ( COLOR1 EXPLOIT]S & EXPLOIT$1 IS A NAGG+ PROBLEM ?AT MANY ECOLOGICAL PHILOSOPH]S HAVE YET TO RESOLVE1 OR P]HAPS EV5 RECOGNIZE4 ,BIOC5TRISM1 = ALL ! CAVEATS ITS SUPPORT]S ISSUE TO QUALIFY IT1 /RIKES ME AS BLUNTLY MISAN?ROPIC & LESS AN ECOLOGICAL PR9CIPLE ?AN AN >GUM5T AGA9/ ! HUMAN SPECIES ITSELF AS A LIFE-=M4 

,TAK5 SEP>ATELY1 P]HAPS1 ! 9T5TIONS ( !IR ADH]5TS MAY BE GOOD1 EV5 AS !SE !ORIES >E S]I\SLY FAULTY4 ,UNIT$ 9TO A S+LE 5SEMBLE1 H[EV]1 !Y DEVELOP A H>% LOGIC & CREATE AN >5A = EXPLICITLY VICI\S VIEWS4 ,IT WAS NOT SURPRIS+ ?AT ,DAVID ,=EMAN1 !N ( ,E>? ,FIR/6 & AN AV[$ ACOLYTE ( 0DEEP ECOLOGY10 C\LD ADVANCE ! FOLL[+ 0ECOLOGICAL0 V]DICT ON ! ,?IRD ,WORLD3  
  

,:5 ,I TELL PEOPLE H[ ! WOR/ ?+ WE C\LD DO 9 ,E?IOPIA IS TO GIVE AID -- ! BE/ ?+ W\LD BE TO JU/ LET NATURE SEEK ITS [N BALANCE1 TO LET ! PEOPLE !RE JU/ />VE 444 !Y ?9K ?AT IS MON/R\S4 ,BUT ! ALT]NATIVE IS ?AT Y\ GO 9 & SAVE !SE HALF-DEAD *ILDR5 :O NEV] WILL LIVE A :OLE LIFE4 ,!IR DEVELOPM5T WILL BE /UNT$4 ,& :AT'S GO+ TO HAPP5 9 T5 YE>S' TIME IS ?AT TWICE AS MANY PEOPLE WILL SUFF] & DIE4 

,LIKEWISE1 LETT+ ! ,U,S,A BE AN OV]FL[ VALVE = PROBLEMS 9 ,LAT9 ,AM]ICA IS NOT SOLV+ A ?+4 ,IT'S JU/ PUTT+ MORE PRESSURE ON RES\RCES WE HAVE 9 ! ,U,S,A4 ,IT IS JU/ CAUS+ MORE DE/RUCTION ( \R WILD]NESS1 MORE POISON+ ( WAT] & AIR1 & IT ISN'T HELP+ ! PROBLEMS 9 ,LAT9 ,AM]ICA4.<#f#c.>  
  

,REGRETTABLY1 IT IS ALL TOO EASY TO 9T]PRET SU* REM>KS AS AN APOLOGIA = IMP]IALISM1 RACISM1 & G5OCIDE4 ,TO CONSID] />VATION AS M]ELY AN 0ALT]NATIVE0 TO ! CIVIL W> ?AT WRACK$ ,E?IOPIA & ! DE/RUCTION ( SO MU* ( ! CULTURAL 9TEGRITY ( ,LAT9 ,AM]ICAN VILLAGES BY 7L>GELY ,AM]ICAN7 CORPORATE 9T]E/S REVEALS A %OCK+ SOCIAL AMNESIA4 ,IT IS BREA?TAK+ TO CONTEMPLATE ! EXT5T TO :I* ?IS 0ECOLOGICAL0 5SEMBLE ( IDEAS DEFLECTS PUBLIC ATT5TION FROM ! SOCIAL ORIG9S ( ECOLOGICAL PROBLEMS4 ,?AT ANY?+ BESIDES 0NATURE0 IS SEEK+ ITS 0BALANCE0 9 ! ,?IRD ,WORLD SEEMS TO ELUDE ,=EMAN1 :OSE OBFUSCATION ( SOCIAL PROBLEMS EXPRESSES ! LOGIC ( A R$UCTIONI/ 0ECOLOGY40 ,SU* 0REV]5CE = ! E>?0 /IFLES EV5 ! MODE/ DEC5CIES ( MIDDLE-CLASS VIRTUES LIKE EMPA?Y & CONC]N = ! PLI<T ( HUNGRY *ILDR54 0,E>? WISDOM0 ( ?IS K9D C\LD WELL LEAVE US ) A 0LOVE0 ( ! PLANET BUT NO C>E = ! UND]PRIVILEG$ :O MAKE UP SO MU* ( ! HUMAN SPECIES4 

,YET ,=EMAN'S REM>KS >E NOT IDIOSYNCRATIC4 ,QUITE TO ! CONTR>Y3 AM AU?ORIT>IAN /REAK IS LAT5T 9 A CRUDE BIOLOGISM ?AT CONCEALS AN EV]-DIM9I%+ HUMAN5ESS ) 0NATURAL LAW0 & PAP]S OV] ! FACT ?AT IT IS CAPITALISM ?AT IS AT WORK H]E1 NOT AN AB/RACT 0,HUMANITY0 & 0,SOCIETY40 ,?IS AU?ORIT>IAN M5TALITY SOMETIMES COEXI/S ) PI\S APPEALS TO V>IANTS ( ,EA/]N SPIRITUALITY1 PLAC+ A SA9TLY MASK ON ! RU?LESS EGOISM ?AT /EMS FROM B\RGEOIS GRE$4 0,ECOLOGICAL ?9K+0 ( ?IS K9D IS ALL ! MORE S9I/] BECAUSE IT SUBV]TS ! ORGANIC1 9DE$ DIALECTICAL ?9K+ ?AT CAN RESCUE US FROM R$UCTIONISM4 ,AN UNBRIDGEABLE GULF SEP>ATES SOCIAL ECOLOGY FROM ! NEO-,MAL?USIANISM ?AT ! 5SEMBLE ( BIOC5TRISM1 ANTIHUMANISM1 & 0NATURAL LAW0 !ORY HAVE SPAWN$4 ,WE >E GRIMLY 9 NE$ ( A 0RE5*ANTM5T0 ( HUMANITY -- TO USE ! QUASI-MY/ICAL J>GON ( \R DAY -- ) A FLUID1 ORGANISMIC1 & DIALECTICAL RATIONALITY4 ,= IT IS 9 ?IS HUMAN RATIONALITY ?AT NATURE ULTIMATELY ACTUALIZES ITS [N EVOLUTION ( SUBJECTIVITY OV] LONG EONS ( NEURAL & S5SORY DEVELOPM5T4 ,!RE IS NO?+ MORE NATURAL ?AN HUMANITY'S CAPACITY TO CONCEPTUALIZE1 G5]ALIZE1 RELATE IDEAS1 5GAGE 9 SYMBOLIC COMMUNICATION1 & 9NOVATE *ANGES 9 ! WORLD >\ND IT1 NOT M]ELY TO ADAPT TO ! CONDITIONS IT F9DS AT H&4 ,= BIOC5TRIC1 ANTIHUMANI/1 & 0NATURAL LAW0 ADVOCATES TO SET !IR FACES AGA9/ ! SELF-REALIZATION ( NATURE 9 AN ECOLOGICALLY ORI5T$ HUMANITY & DIALECTICAL ?\<T IS TO FO/] ! IMAGE ( A BLI<T$ HUMANITY4 ,NO LESS ?AN ,ADAM & ,EVE'S ACQUISITION ( KN[L$GE1 HUMANITY'S P[] ( ?\<T BECOMES ITS ABID+ 0ORIG9AL S940 

,ECOLOGIZ+ ! ,DIALECTIC 

  

,IT IS EM95TLY NATURAL = HUMANITY TO CREATE A 0SECOND NATURE0 FROM ITS EVOLUTION 9 0FIR/ NATURE40 ,BY SECOND NATURE1 ,I MEAN ! DEVELOPM5T ( UNIQUELY HUMAN CULTURE1 ) A WIDE V>IETY ( 9/ITUTIONALIZ$ HUMAN COMMUNITIES1 EFFECTIVE HUMAN TE*NICS1 RI*LY SYMBOLIC LANGUAGES1 & C>EFULLY MANAG$ S\RCES ( NUTRIM5T4 ,DUALISM1 9 ALL ITS =MS1 HAS OPPOS$ !SE TWO NATURES TO EA* O!R1 AS ANTAGONI/S4 ,MONISM1 9 TURN1 (T5 DISSOLVES ONE 9TO ! O!R -- BE IT LIB]ALISM1 FASCISM1 OR MORE REC5TLY1 ! BIOC5TRISM ?AT SO CLOSELY APPROXIMATES MISAN?ROPIC ANTIHUMANISM4 ,!SE MONI/ IDEOLOGIES DIFF] PRIM>ILY 9 :E!R !Y WANT TO DISSOLVE FIR/ NATURE 9TO SECOND OR SECOND NATURE 9TO FIR/4 

,:AT !SE DUALISMS & MONISMS HAVE 9 COMMON IS AN ACCEPTANCE ( DOM9ATION4 ,CLASSICALLY1 ! C\NT]P>T ( ! DOM9ATION ( NATURE BY MAN0 HAS BE5 ! 0DOM9ATION ( MAN BY NATURE4 ,JU/ AS ,M>XISM & LIB]ALISM SEE ! =M] AS A DESID]ATUM ?AT EM]GES \T ( ! LATT]1 SO 5?USIA/S ( 'NATURAL LAW0 ACCEPT ! LATT] AS A FACT & CONDEMN EF=TS TO A*IEVE ! =M]4 ,!SE VIEWS >E DEEPLY FLAW$ -- NOT ONLY BECAUSE !Y >E CONCEPTUALLY ONE-SID$ OR SIMPLY WRONG1 BUT BECAUSE ( ! WAY !Y >E PHILOSOPHICALLY /RUCTUR$ & WORK$ \T4 ,! REAL QUE/ION1 ,I SUBMIT1 IS NOT :E!R SECOND NATURE P>ALLELS1 OPPOSES1 OR BL&LY 0P>TICIPATES0 9 AN 0EGALIT>IAN0 FIR/ NATURE2.<#f#d.> RA!R1 IT IS H[ SECOND NATURE IS D]IV$ FROM FIR/ NATURE4 ,MORE SPECIFICALLY1 9 :AT WAYS DID ! HI<LY GRAD$ & MANY-PHAS$ EVOLUTION FROM FIR/ NATURE 9TO SECOND GIVE RISE TO SOCIAL 9/ITUTIONS1 =MS ( 9T]ACTIONS BETWE5 PEOPLE1 & AN 9T]ACTION BETWE5 FIR/ & SECOND NATURE ?AT1 9 ! BE/ ( CASES1 5RI*ES BO? & YIELDS A SECOND NATURE ?AT HAS AN EVOLUTION>Y DEVELOPM5T ( ITS [N8 ,! ECOLOGICAL CRISIS WE FACE TODAY IS V]Y MU* A CRISIS 9 ! EM]G5CE ( SOCIETY \T ( BIOLOGY1 9 ! PROBLEMS 7! RISE ( HI]>*Y1 DOM9ATION1 PATRI>*Y1 CLASSES1 & ! /ATE7 ?AT UNFOLD$ ) ?IS DEVELOPM5T1 & 9 ! LIB]ATORY PA?WAYS ?AT PROVIDE AN ALT]NATIVE TO ?IS W>P$ HI/ORY4 

,! FACT ?AT FIR/ & SECOND NATURE EXI/ & CAN NEV] BE DUALIZ$ 9TO 0P>ALLELS0 OR SIMPLI/IC ALLY R$UC$ TO EA* O!R ACC\NTS1 9 GREAT P>T1 = MY PHRASE SOCIAL ECOLOGY4 ,ADDITIONALLY1 SOCIAL ECOLOGY HAS ! SPECIAL MEAN+ ?AT ! ECOLOGICAL CRISIS ?AT BELEAGU]S US /EMS FROM A SOCIAL CRISIS1 A CRISIS ?AT ! CRUDE BIOLOGISM ( 0DEEP ECOLOGY0 G5]ALLY IGNORES4 ,/ILL FUR!R1 ?AT ! RESOLUTION ( ?IS SOCIAL CRISIS CAN ONLY BE A*IEV$ BY REORGANIZ+ SOCIETY ALONG RATIONAL L9ES1 IMBU$ ) AN ECOLOGICAL PHILOSOPHY & S5SIBILITY4 

,SU* A PHILOSOPHY & S5SIBILITY CANNOT BE ECLECTICALLY PAT*$ TOGE!R FROM BITS & PIECES ( ME*ANISM & MY/ICISM1 OR ( CONV5TIONAL REASON & ,EA/]N SPIRITUALITY4 ,ONE C\LD RESPECT A CONSI/5TLY ,EA/]N MY/ICAL VIEW OR A CONSI/5TLY ,WE/]N ME*ANI/IC VIEW1 H[EV] ONE-SID$ OR ]RONE\S EA* MAY BE4 ,BUT NEI!R VIEW CAN FRUITFULLY D]IVE SECOND NATURE FROM FIR/ NATURE ORGANICALLY4 ,?AT REQUIRES A MODE ( ?\<T ?AT DI/+UI%ES ! PHASES ( ! EVOLUTION>Y CONT9UUM FROM :I* SECOND NATURE EM]GES & YET PRES]VES FIR/ NATURE AS P>T ( ! PROCESS4 ,COMMON S5SE BETRAYS US ) ITS DEM& = CONCEPTUAL FIXITY2 MY/ICISM1 9 TURN1 DEFLECTS US FROM RATIONALITY ?AT GOES SUB/ANTIALLY BEYOND POETIC METAPHORS4 ,A GOOD DEAL ( ECOLOGICAL ?9K+ TODAY1 AS WE HAVE SE51 P>TAKES ( BO? MODES -- ! ME*ANI/IC & ! MY/ICAL -- 9 AN OPPORTUNI/IC1 0CAT*-AS-CAT*-CAN0 MANN]1 RA!R ?AN RE/RUCTUR+ ITS MODE ( ?\<T 9 AN AU!NTICALLY ORGANIC MANN]4 

,?IS MU* %\LD BE CLE>3 ! PURELY D$UCTIVE LOGIC ?AT WE USE TO BUILD BRIDGES1 BUDGET \R 9COME & EXP5SES1 PLAN \R EV]YDAY LIVES1 & CALCULATE \R *ANCES ( 0MAK+ \T0 9 ! WORLD HOLDS NO PROMISE ( GRASP+ ! RI*LY >TICULAT$ OR M$IAT$ DEVELOPM5T ?AT BO? UNITES & DIFF]5TIATES FIR/ & SECOND NATURE4 ,COMMON S5SE DEM&S ONLY 9F]5CE1 CONSI/5CY1 & ! V]IFICATION ?AT ORD9>Y S5SORY EXP]I5CE PROVIDES4 ,AP>T FROM ! 9DUCTIVELY APPREH5D$ P>TICUL>S ?AT HELP US >RIVE 7(T5 QUITE 9TUITIVELY7 AT ! CONCRETE PREMISES = \R 9F]5CES1 WE NORMALLY T5D TO D$UCE \R IDEAS S*EMATICALLY1 AS A S]IES ( WELL-ORD]$ & RIGIDLY FIX$ CONCEPTS4 ,TRU? 9 ?IS EV]YDAY LOGICAL DOMA9 IS NORMALLY LITTLE MORE ?AN CONSI/5CY4 ,?US1 WE >E HELD TO BE 0LOGICAL0 :5 \R CONCLUSIONS CAN BE FRAM$ 9TO FIX$ CATEGORIES -- SUPPORT$1 TO BE SURE1 BY ?OSE ATOMIZ$ ISOLATES KN[N AS 0BRUTE FACTS40 ,?IS A*IEVEM5T IS CELEBRAT$ AS 0CL>ITY0 & ITS RESULTS AS 0C]TA9TY40 ,TO CONCEIVE ( ANY =M ( REASON+ O!R ?AN A HYPO!TICO-D$UCTIVE LOGIC IS EVID5CE ( FUZZY-HEAD$NESS4 ,FACTS1 Y\ KN[1 >E FACTS1 & TRU? IS TRU?4 ,CONSI/5CY1 ! =MALI/IC 0IF-!N0 PROPOSITIONS ?AT MAKE UP CONV5TIONAL LOGIC1 TOGE!R ) EXP]I5CE AS A SEQU5CE ( 0CLE>-CUT0 DATA & ! EM95TLY PRACTICAL RESULTS ?AT CONV5TIONAL LOGIC A*IEVES -- ALL1 TAK5 TOGE!R1 >E ! MEANS TO 0?9K CLE>LY0 & UND]/& ! 0REAL WORLD40 

,YET !RE IS A HI<LY P]SONAL SPH]E ( LIFE 9 :I* WE ?9K V]Y DIFF]5TLY FROM CONV5TIONAL REASON4 ,WE DO NOT DEAL ) *ILDR5 ! WAY WE DEAL ) \R BUS9ESS AFFAIRS & ! PRAGMATICS ( EV]YDAY LIV+4 ,WE SEE *ILDR5 AS DEVELOP+ BE+S :O PASS ?R\< NECESS>Y PHASES ( GR[? & 9CREAS+ CAPABILITIES4 ,WE TRY NOT TO IMPOSE MORE DEM&S UPON !M ?AN !Y CAN ADEQUATELY H&LE AT !IR AGE 7ASSUM+1 TO BE SURE1 ?AT WE >E RATIONAL & HUMANE PEOPLE74 ,NOR DO WE TRY TO AFFLICT !M ) PROBLEMS !Y CANNOT YET RESOLVE4 ,WE S5SE A FL[ 9 !IR LIVES ?AT 9VOLVES ! ACTUALIZATION ( !IR POT5TIALITIES AT DIFF]5T LEVELS ( !IR DEVELOPM5T4 ,IT REQUIRES NO UNUSUAL P]CEPTION TO RECOGNIZE ! 9FANT ?AT L+]S ON 9 ! *ILD1 ! *ILD ?AT L+]S ON 9 ! Y\?1 ! Y\? ?AT L+]S ON 9 ! ADULT -- 9 %ORT1 ! CUMULATIVE NATURE ( HUMAN DEVELOPM5T1 9 CONTRA/ TO M]E SUB/ITUTION & SUCCESSION ,ONLY A FOOL BELIEVES ?AT ! MAN OR WOMAN C\LD -- OR %\LD -- COMPLETELY REPLACE ! BOY OR GIRL4 ,PROP]LY UND]/OOD1 A MATURE P]SON IS NOT AN 9V5TORY ( TE/ RESULTS & MEASUREM5TS4 ,HE OR %E IS AN 9DIVIDUAL BIOGRAPHY1 ! DEVELOPM5TAL EMBODIM5T ( P>TIALLY OR :OLLY REALIZ$ QUALITIES ?AT AN 5VIRONM5T SURELY CONDITIONS BUT :OSE 9H]5T MAKEUP W\LD ULTIMATELY DET]M9E HIS OR H] DEVELOPM5T IF SOCIETY ACQUIR$ A HI<LY RATIONAL =M4 

,H[EV] 9TUITIVE IT MAY BE1 ?IS K9D ( ?9K+ IS /RUCTUR$ >\ND NOT D$UCTION BUT $UCTION4 ,IF D$UCTION CONSI/S ( ! 9F]5TIAL 0IF-!N0 /EPS WE TAKE1 ) DUE REV]5CE = CONSI/5CY1 TO >RIVE AT UN%AKABLE & CLE>LY DEF9$ JUDGM5TS AB\T 0BRUTE FACTS10 $UCTION FULLY MANIFE/S & >TICULATES ! LAT5T POSSIBILITIES ( PH5OM5A4 ,$UCTION IS A PHAS$ PROCESS 9 :I* 0IF0 IS NOT A FIX$ HYPO!TICAL PREMISE BUT RA!R A POT5TIALITY4 0,/EPS0 9 $UCTION >E NOT M]E 9F]5CES BUT /AGES ( DEVELOPM5T4 0,CONSI/5CY10 F> FROM BE+ AN IMPOS$ CANON ( LOGIC BAS$ ON PR9CIPLES ( ID5TITY1 CONTRADICTION1 & ! EXCLUD$ MIDDLE1 IS ! IMMAN5T PROCESS WE PROP]LY CALL SELF-DEVELOPM5T4 ,F9ALLY1 0!N0 IS ! FULL ACTUALIZATION ( POT5TIALITY 9 ITS RI*1 SELF-9CORPORATIVE 0/AGES0 ( GR[?1 DIFF]5TIATION1 MATURATION1 & :OL5ESS4 ,?AT ! 0MATURE0 & 0:OLE0 >E NEV] SO COMPLETE ?AT !Y CEASE TO BE ! POT5TIALITY = A /ILL FUR!R DEVELOPM5T REPRES5TS AN ECOLOGICAL *ANGE ,I AM ADVANC+ H]E4 

,:I* BR+S US TO ! PROBLEM ( :AT WE >E OBLIG$ TO MODIFY 9 ! DIALECTICAL PHILOSOPHY ( ITS TWO MO/ \T/&+ VOICES1 ,>I/OTLE & ,HEGEL1 9 ORD] TO R5D] IT AN ECOLOGICAL MODE ( ?\<T4.<#f#e.> ',TO DO ?IS1' WE MU/ BRIEFLY SUMM>IZE :AT AN ECOLOGICAL DIALECTIC %>ES ) ! ,>I/OTELIAN & ,HEGELIAN4 ,DIALECTICAL PHILOSOPHY MOVES FROM ! UNDIFF]5TIAT$ AB/RACT TO ! HI<LY DIFF]5TIAT$ CONCRETE 7:ILE MO/ COMMONS5SICAL =MS ( ?\<T MOVE 9 ! OPPOSITE DIRECTION74 ,9 ?IS RESPECT DIALECTIC PICKS UP ! ?READ ( CLASSICAL $UCTION & GOES BEYOND IT1 MOV+ FROM ?AT :I* IS IMPLICIT 9 B>E POT5TIALITY TO ITS REALIZATION 9 A FULLY >TICULAT$ ACTUALITY4 ,MU* ( ,GREEK PHILOSOPHY EXPRESS$ ?IS PROBLEMATIC AS ?AT ( ! EM]G5CE ( ! ,MANY FROM ! ,ONE3 9 ,>I/OTLE'S WORK1 ! APOGEE ( CLASSICAL ?\<T1 0A CONCEPTION ( SUB/ANCE1 OR ! REAL1 AS ! GOAL T[>D :I* DEVELOPS A POT5TIAL BE+ ?AT1 SAVE AS ULTIMATELY REALIZ$1 IS NEI!R REAL NOR 9TELLIGIBLE1 DOM9ATES ! :OLE C\RSE ( ,>I/OTLE'S SPECULATION10 OBS]VES ,G4,R4,G4 ,MURE 9 A V]Y PI?Y =MULATION4 0,FOLL[ HIM AS HE APPLIES IT 9 EV]Y SPH]E :I* HE 9VE/IGATES2 WAT* IT GR[ FROM ?IS 9ITIAL AB/RACT =MULA 9TO A CONCRETE UNIV]SE ( ?\<T2 & Y\ MAY HOPE TO GRASP ! ESS5TIAL MEAN+ ( HIS PHILOSOPHY0.<#f#f.> ,! SAME C\LD BE SAID ( ,HEGEL1 :OSE ELABORATION ( ?IS ,>I/OTELIAN MOTIF IS MORE SUBJECTIVIZ$ & 9=M$1 AL?\< AT TIMES IT IS CLUTT]$ BY ! M\NTA9 ( PROBLEMATICS ?AT HAD BE5 ADD$ TO ,WE/]N PHILOSOPHY S9CE ,>I/OTLE'S TIME4 

,AN ECOLOGICAL DIALECTIC W\LD HAVE TO ADDRESS ! FACT ?AT ,>I/OTLE & ,HEGEL DID NOT WORK ) AN EVOLUTION>Y !ORY ( NATURE BUT RA!R SAW ! NATURAL WORLD MORE AS A  
SCALA NATURAE1 A LADD] ( 0,BE+10 ?AN AS A FL[+ CONT9UUM ,AN ECOLOGICAL DIALECTIC 9TRODUCES EVOLUTION 9TO ?IS TRADITION & REPLACES ! NOTION ( A SCALA NATURAE ) A RI*LY M$IAT$ CONT9UUM4 ,BO? ?9K]S W]E MORE PR(\NDLY 9FLU5C$ BY ,PLATO ?AN !IR WRIT+S W\LD SEEM TO 9DICATE1 ) ! RESULT ?AT 9 ! CASE ( ,HEGEL1 WE MOVE )9 A REALM ( CONCEPT MORE ?AN HI/ORY 7H[EV] HI/ORICAL ,HEGEL'S DIALECTIC 9V>IABLY WAS74 ,HEGEL WAS /RONGLY PREOCCUPI$ ) ! 0IDEA0 ( NATURE RA!R ?AN ) ITS EXI/5TIAL DETAILS1 AL?\< HE HONOR$ ?IS PREOCCUPATION 9 ! BREA*4 ,F9ALLY1 ! OV]>*+0 TELEOLOGY ( ! TWO PHILOSOPH]S T5DS TO SUBORD9ATE ! CONT+5CY1 SPONTANEITY1 & CREATIVITY ?AT M>K NATURAL PH5OM5A4.<#f#g.> ,HEGEL1 ) HIS /RONG !OLOGICAL B5T1 T]M9AT$ ! UNFOLD+ ( ! WORLD 9 AN 0,ABSOLUTE0 ?AT 5COMPASSES IT 9 AN ID5TITY ( SUBJECT & OBJECT4 ,9 AN ECOLOGICAL DIALECTIC1 BY CONTRA/ !RE W\LD BE NO T]M9ALITY ?AT C\LD CULM9ATE 9 A ,GOD OR AN ,ABSOLUTE4 0,ACTUALITY10 TO USE ,HEGEL'S SPECIAL T]M1 IS ! ALMO/ MOM5T>Y CULM9ATION ( MATURITY1 SO ?AT ! OBJECTIVITY ( ! POT5TIAL1 :I* IS CRUCIAL = AN OBJECTIVE E?ICS1 IS SUBORD9AT$ TO ITS ACTUALIZATION4 

,5GLI% TRANSLATIONS ( ,HEGEL (T5 ]RONE\SLY R5D] REAL & ACTUAL AS SYNONYMS 9 C]TA9 PASSAGES1 ALL[+ ! ,HEGELIAN 0REAL0 TO BE CONCEIV$ AS ! ACTUALIZATION ( ! POT5TIAL -- A FAIL+ ?AT ,I BELIEVE %\LD BE CORRECT$4 ,:AT IS LESS 0REAL0 ?AN ,HEGEL'S 0REALITY0 -- NOTABLY ! 0BRUTE FACTS0 OR ! GIV5 0IS0 ( COMMON S5SE -- W\LD MORE CLOSELY CORRESPOND TO :AT ,HEGEL CONSID]S 0! APP>5T0 7DAS ,]S*E95DE74 ,FROM AN ECOLOGICAL VIEWPO9T1 ?IS MI/RANSLATION C\LD LEAD TO MU* CONFUSION4 ,H5CE1 ,I HAVE US$ ! WORD REAL TO MEAN SIMPLY 0:AT-IS10 NOT 0:AT IS NECESS>ILY LAT5T 9 ! POT5TIAL40 ,! ACTUAL REMA9S V]Y MU* :AT ,HEGEL MEANT IT TO MEAN3 ! RATIONAL REALIZATION ( ! POT5TIAL1 AS DI/+UI%$ FROM ! 0REAL0 AS ! EXI/5TIAL4.<#f#h.> ,F9ALLY1 AN ECOLOGICAL DIALECTIC GREATLY MODIFIES ! CREATIVE ROLE ?AT ,HEGEL IMP>T$ TO /RIFE1 (T5 9T]PRET$ AS M]E 0ANTI!SIS0 7:I* IS R\<LY AS F> AS ,!ODOR ,ADORNO TAKES ! DIALECTIC 9 HIS ,NEGATIVE ,DIALECTICS71 BUT NOT )\T IGNOR+ ! PRES5CE ( /RIFE 9 HUMAN HI/ORY4 ,IT EMPHASIZES ?AT ! DIALECTIC1 NO LESS 9 ,HEGEL'S ?AN 9 MY [N ?9K+1 UND]GOES DIFF]5TIATION ?R\< A TRANSC5D5CE BEYOND M]E ANTI!SIS1 NOTABLY :AT ,HEGEL CALL$ AN ,AUFHEBUNG OR NEGATION ( ! NEGATION4 ,DIALECTIC IS ?US A PHILOSOPHY ( PROGRESS 9 :I* !RE IS A GR[+ ELABORATION & SELF-CONSCI\SNESS1 9S(> AS ! WORLD IS RATIONAL4 

,DIALECTIC1 LET ME EMPHASIZE1 IS NOT M]ELY 0*ANGE10 0MOTION1 OR EV5 PROCESS1 ALL BANAL IMPUTATIONS TO ! CONTR>Y NOT)/&+4 ,NOR CAN IT BE SUBSUM$ UND] 0PROCESS PHILOSOPHY40 ,DIALECTIC IS DEVELOPM5T1 NOT ONLY *ANGE2 IT IS D]IVATION1 NOT ONLY MOTION2 IT IS M$IATION1 NOT ONLY PROCESS2 & IT IS  
CUMULATIVE1 NOT ONLY CONT9U\S4 ,?AT IT IS ALSO *ANGE1 MOTION1 PROCESS1 & A CONT9UUM TELLS US ONLY P>T ( ITS TRUE CONT5T4 ,BUT D5I$ ITS IMMAN5T SELF-DIRECTIV5ESS & ITS 5TELE*IAL $UCTION ( ! POT5TIAL 9TO ! ACTUAL1 ?IS 0PROCESS PHILOSOPHY1 9DE$ ?IS REM>KABLE NOTION ( CAUSALITY1 CEASES TO BE DIALECTIC4 ,9/EAD1 IT BECOMES A M]E HUSK ?AT \R CURR5T FLOCK ( 0ECO0-FADDI/S CAN R$UCE TO 0K9ETICS10 0DYNAMICS1 0FLUCTUATIONS10 & 0FE$BACK LOOPS0 -- ! SAME ME*ANI/IC V]BIAGE ) :I* SY/EMS !ORY DRESSES ITSELF UP AS A DEVELOPM5TAL PHILOSOPHY4 

,AS ,HEGEL W>N$ 9 ! C\RSE ( $UC+ ! COMPLEXITY ( ! DIALECTICAL PROCESS3 KN[L$GE HAS 0NO O!R OBJECT ?AN TO DRAW \T :AT IS 9W>D OR IMPLICIT & ?US TO BECOME OBJECTIVE40 ,BUT IF  
  

?AT :I* IS IMPLICIT COMES 9TO EXI/5CE1 IT C]TA9LY PASSES 9TO *ANGE1 YET IT REMA9S ONE & ! SAME4444 ,! PLANT1 = EXAMPLE1 DOES NOT LOSE ITSELF 9 M]E 9DEF9ITE *ANGE4 ,FROM ! G]M MU* IS PRODUC$ :5 AT FIR/ NO?+ WAS TO BE SE52 BUT ! :OLE ( :AT IS BR\<T =?1 IF NOT DEVELOP$1 IS YET HIDD5 & IDEALLY CONTA9$ )9 ITSELF4 ,! PR9CIPLE ( ?IS PROJECTION 9TO EXI/5CE IS ?AT ! G]M CANNOT REMA9 M]ELY IMPLICIT1 BUT IS IMPELL$ T[>D DEVELOPM5T1 S9CE IT PRES5TS ! CONTRADICTION ( BE+ ONLY IMPLICITLY & YET NOT DESIR+ TO BE SO4.<#f#i.>  
  

,?US DIALECTIC IS NOT WAYW>D MOTION1 ! M]E K9ETICS ( *ANGE4 ,!RE IS A RATIONAL 05D 9 VIEW0 -- NOT ONE ?AT IS PREORDA9$1 TO /ATE ?IS PO9T FROM AN ECOLOGICAL VIEWPO9T RA!R ?AN A !OLOGICAL ONE1 BUT ?AT ACTUALIZES :AT IS IMPLICIT 9 ! POT5TIAL4 ,EV]Y 0IF-!N0 PROPOSITION IS PREMIS$ NOT ON ANY IF ?AT SPR+S 9TO ONE'S HEAD LIKE A GAMBL] S HUN*2 IT POSITS A POT5TIALITY ?AT HAS ITS ANCE/RY 9 ! DIALECTICAL PROCESSES ?AT PREC$$ IT4 

,R$UCTIONISM BREAKS ?IS PROCESS D[N TO ! MO/ UNDIFF]5TIAT$ 9T]ACTIONS IT CAN =MULATE4 ,BUT IT DOES SO AT ! CO/ ( DEMOLI%+ ! V>I\S PHASES OR 0MOM5TS0 7TO USE ,HEGELIAN T]M9OLOGY7 FROM :I* ! PROCESS IS LIT]ALLY CON/ITUT$4 ,A HUMAN BE+ IS CLE>LY AN 5SEMBLE ( *EMICALS4 ,:ILE R$UCTIONISM CAN EXPLA9 ITS EXI/5CE AS A PHYSICO-*EMICAL PH5OM5ON1 IT CANNOT COMPREH5D IT AS A REM>KABLY COMPLEX =M ( LIFE4 ,*EMICAL ANALYSIS PROVIDES US ) NO SUB/ITUTE = ! MULTITUDE ( =MS1 RELATION%IPS1 PROCESSES1 & 5VIRONM5TS ?AT ! ORGANIC CREATES = ITSELF AS IT METABOLICALLY SU/A9S ITS [N 0SELFHOOD0 9 DI/9CTION FROM O!R 0SELVES40 ,9DE$1 C>RI$ TOO F> 9TO A L[] LEVEL ( PH5OM5A1 R$UCTION LEADS TO DISSOLUTION1 SO ?AT ! V]Y 9TEGRITY ( A GIV5 LEVEL ( PH5OM5A -- BE IT SOCIAL1 BIOLOGICAL1 *EMICAL1 OR PHYSICAL -- SIMPLY DISAPPE>S 9TO M]E 0MATT]0 & 0MOTION40 ,9 A K9D ( IDEOLOGICAL 5TROPY1 ?\<T NO LONG] HAS ! DIFF]5TIAE ) :I* TO DEF9E ITS SUBJECT MATT]1 LET ALONE EXPLORE IT4 ,AS ! COMPLEX IS TRIMM$ D[N TO ITS 0IRR$UCIBLE0 COMPON5TS1 ! :OLE ?AT =MS ! V]Y PREMISES ( ?\<T DISAPPE>S 9TO A MEAN+LESS1 9DE$ =MLESS HEAP ( 0MATT]10 !REBY ]AS+ ! V]Y B\ND>IES ?AT GIVE DEF9ITION TO A PH5OM5ON AS A COMPON5T ( A MORE COMPLEX 0:OLE40 

,9 ! ORGANIC WORLD1 ! METABOLIC ACTIVITY ( ! SIMPLE/ LIFE-=MS CON/ITUTES ! S5SE ( SELF-ID5TITY1 H[EV] G]M9AL1 FROM :I* NATURE ACQUIRES A RUDIM5T>Y SUBJECTIVITY4 ,NOT ONLY DOES ?IS RUDIM5T>Y SUBJECTIVITY 7:I* R$UCTIONISM NECESS>ILY CANNOT 5COMPASS7 D]IVE FROM ! METABOLIC PROCESS ( SELF-MA9T5ANCE1 A PROCESS ?AT DEF9ES ANY LIFE-=M AS A UNIQUE :OLE2 IT EXT5DS ITSELF BEYOND SELF-MA9T5ANCE TO BECOME A /RIV+ ACTIVITY1 NOT UNLIKE ! DEVELOPM5T FROM ! VEGETATIVE TO ! ANIMATIVE1 ?AT ULTIMATELY YIELDS M9D1 WILL1 & ! POT5TIALITY = FRE$OM4 ,CONCEIV$ DIALECTICALLY1 ORGANIC EVOLUTION IS1 9 A BROAD S5SE1 SUBJECTIVE 9S(> AS LIFE-=MS BEG9 TO EX]CISE *OICES 9 ADAPT+ TO NEW 5VIRONM5TS -- A CONCEPTION ?AT /&S MU* AT ODDS ) ?AT CLE>LY DEF9ABLE FIXITY WE BLISSFULLY CALL 0CLE> ?9K+40 ,SY/EMS !ORY 5T]S 9TO ! R$UCTIONI/ TABLEAU 9 A S9I/] WAY3 BY DISSOLV+ ! SUBJECTIVE ELEM5T 9 BIOLOGICAL PH5OM5A SO ?AT !Y CAN BE TREAT$ AS MA!MATICAL SYMBOLS1 SY/EMS !ORY P]MITS EVOLUTION>Y 9T]ACTION1 SUBJECTIVE DEVELOPM5T1 & EV5 PROCESS ITSELF1 TO BE TAK5 OV] BY 0! SY/EM10 JU/ AS ! 9DIVIDUAL1 ! FAMILY1 & ! COMMUNITY >E DE/RUCTUR$ 9TO 0! ,SY/EM0 EMBODI$ BY ! ECONOMIC CORPORATION & ! /ATE4 ,LIFE CEASES TO HAVE SUBJECTIVITY & BECOMES A ME*ANISM 9 :I* ! T5D5CY ( LIFE=MS T[>D EV]-GREAT] ELABORATION IS REPLAC$ ) 0FE$BACK LOOPS10 & !IR EVOLUTION>Y ANTEC$5TS ) PROGRAMM$ 09=MATION40 ,A 0SY/EMS VIEW ( LIFE0 LIT]ALLY CONCEIVES ( LIFE AS A SY/EM1 NOT ONLY AS 0FLUCTUATIONS0 & 0CYCLES0 -- ME*ANI/IC AS !SE CONCEPTS >E 9 !MSELVES4 

,DESPITE ! EXT]NAL SELECTIVE FACTORS ) :I* ,D>W9IANS DESCRIBE EVOLUTION1 ! T5D5CY ( LIFE T[>D A GREAT] COMPLEXITY ( SELFHOOD -- A T5D5CY ?AT YIELDS 9CREAS+ DEGREES ( SUBJECTIVITY -- CON/ITUTES ! 9T]NAL OR IMMAN5T IMPULSE ( EVOLUTION T[>D GR[+ SELF-AW>5ESS4 ,?IS EVOLUTION>Y DIALECTIC CON/ITUTES ! ESS5CE ( LIFE AS A SELF-MA9TA9+ ORGANISM ?AT BE>S ! POT5TIAL = ! DEVELOPM5T ( SELF-CONSCI\S ORGANISMS4 ,DIALECTIC1 9 EFFECT1 IS NOT M]ELY A 0LOGIC0 OR A 0ME?OD0 ?AT CAN BE B\NC$ >\ND & 0APPLI$0 PROMISCU\SLY TO A CONT5T4 ,IT HAS NO 0H&BOOK0 O!R ?AN REASON ITSELF TO GUIDE ?OSE :O SEEK TO DEVELOP A DIALECTICAL S5SIBILITY4 ,DIALECTIC CAN NO MORE BE APPLI$ TO PROBLEMS 9 5G9E]+ ?AN ,E9/E9'S G5]AL !ORY ( RELATIVITY CAN BE APPLI$ TO PLUMB+2 !SE PROBLEMS CAN BE/ BE RESOLV$ BY CONV5TIONAL =MS ( LOGIC1 COMMON S5SE1 & ! PRAGMATIC KN[L$GE ACQUIR$ ?R\< EXP]I5CE4 ,DIALECTIC CAN ONLY EXPLICATE A RATIONALLY DEVELOPM5TAL PH5OM5ON1 JU/ AS SY/EMS !ORY CAN ONLY EXPLICATE ! WORK+S ( A FLUCTUAT+ & CYCLICAL SY/EM4 ,! K9D ( V]IFICATION ?AT VALIDATES OR 9VALIDATES ! S\NDNESS ( DIALECTICAL REASON+1 9 TURN1 MU/ BE DEVELOPM5TAL1 NOT RELATIVELY /ATIC OR = ?AT MATT] 0FLUCTUAT+0 K9DS ( PH5OM5A4 

,H5CE1 IT DI/ORTS ! V]Y MEAN+ ( DIALECTIC TO SPEAK ( IT AS A 0ME?OD40 ,9DE$1 DIALECTICAL PHILOSOPHY1 PROP]LY CONCEIV$ & FRE$ ( ME*ANI/IC PRESUMPTIONS1 IS AN ONGO+ PROTE/ AGA9/ ! MY? ( ME?ODOLOGY3 NOTABLY1 ?AT ! 0TE*NIQUES0 = ?9K+ \T A PROCESS CAN BE SEP>AT$ FROM ! PROCESS ITSELF4 ,ITS S5SITIVITY = CONCRETE PH5OM5A1 EV5 :5 !Y >E DI/ILL$ 9TO 0CONCEPTS10 AS ,HEGEL DID1 IS :AT R5D]S DIALECTIC SU* AN EXI/5TIALLY VITAL & PALPABLY ORGANISMIC PHILOSOPHY4 ,IT WAS ,HEGEL'S G5IUS TO RE9TRODUCE ,PLATO'S SUPRA-MUNDANE WORLD ( =MS -- AN EXEMPL>Y & H5CE A MORAL WORLD1 NOT M]ELY A METAPHYSICAL ONE -- 9TO REALITY & TO DEVELOP ,>I/OTLE'S NOTION ( 5TELE*Y 9TO A CONCEPT ( 0TRANSC5D5CE0 7,ANFHEBUNG7 ?AT NUANCES PROCESSES AS M$IAT$ 0MOM5TS 9 ! SELF-FULFILLM5T ( !IR POT5TIALITIES40 ,FRE$ ( ITS !OLOGICAL TRAPP+S1 DIALECTIC EXPLA9S1 ) A P[] BEYOND ?AT ( ANY CONV5TIONAL LOGIC1 H[ ! ORGANIC FL[ ( FIR/ 9TO SECOND NATURE IS A REWORK+ ( BIOLOGICAL 9TO SOCIAL REALITY4 ,EA* PHASE OR 0MOM5T0 PRESS$ BY ITS [N 9T]NAL LOGIC 9TO AN ANTI!TICAL & ULTIMATELY A MORE TRANSC5D5T =M1 EM]GES AS A MORE COMPLEX UNITY-9-DIV]SITY ?AT 5COMPASSES ITS E>LI] MOM5TS EV5 AS IT GOES BEYOND !M4 ,DESPITE ! IMAG]Y ( /RIFE ?AT P]MEATES ! ,HEGELIAN V]SION ( ?IS PROCESS1 ! ULTIMATE PO9T ( ! ,HEGELIAN ,AUFHEBUNG IS RECONCILIATION1 NOT ! NIHILISM ( PURE NEGATION4 ,MOREOV]1 NORMS -- ! ACTUALIZATION ( ! POT5TIAL 0IS0 9TO ! E?ICAL 0\<T0 -- >E AN*OR$ 9 ! OBJECTIVE REALITY ( POT5TIALITY ITSELF1 NOT AS IT ALWAYS 0IS10 TO BE SURE1 BUT AS 0%\LD BE10 SU* ?AT SPECULATION BECOMES A VALID ACC\NT ( REALITY 9 ITS TRU?4 ,HEGEL1 ,I W\LD >GUE1 RADICALLY EXP&$ ! V]Y CONCEPT ( ,BE+ 9 PHILOSOPHY & 9 ! REAL WORLD TO 5COMPASS ! POT5TIAL & ITS ACTUALIZATION 9TO ! RATIONAL 0:AT-%\LD-BE0 NOT ONLY AS AN EXI/5TIAL 0:AT-IS40.<#g.> 

,DIALECTICAL SPECULATION1 DESPITE ,HEGEL'S [N VIEW ( ! RETROSPECTIVE FUNCTION ( PHILOSOPHY1 ?US IS PROJECTIVE 9 A %>PLY CRITICAL S5SE 7QUITE UNLIKE 0FUTUROLOGY10 :I* DISSOLVES ! FUTURE3 BY MAK+ IT A M]E EXTRAPOLATION ( ! PRES5T74 ,9 ITS RE/LESS CRITIQUE ( REALITY WE CAN CALL DIALECTIC A 0NEGATIVE PHILOSOPHY0 -- 9 CONTRA/1 ,I %\LD ADD1 TO ,ADORNO'S NIHILISM OR 0NEGATIVE DIALECTICS4 ,BY ! SAME TOK51 SPECULATION IS CREATIVE 9 ?AT IT CEASELESSLY CONTRA/S ! FREE1 RATIONAL1 & MORAL ACTUALITY ( 0:AT-C\LD-BE1 :I* 9H]ES 9 NATURE'S ?RU/ T[>D SELF-REFLEXIVITY1 ) ! EXI/5TIAL REALITY ( 0:AT-IS40.<#g#a.> ,SPECULATION CAN ASK 0:Y0 7NOT ONLY 0H[07 ! REAL HAS BECOME ! IRRATIONAL -- 9DE$1 ! 9HUMAN & ANTI-ECOLOGICAL -- PRECISELY BECAUSE DIALECTIC ALONE IS CAPABLE ( GR\ND+ AN ECOLOGICAL E?ICS 9 ! POT5TIAL1 ?AT IS1 9 ITS OBJECTIVE POSSIBILITIES = ! REALIZATION ( REASON & TRU?4 

,?IS OBJECTIVIZATION ( POSSIBILITIES -- ( POT5TIALITY CONT9U\S ) ITS YET UNREALIZ$ ACTUALIZATION -- IS ! GR\ND = A G5U9ELY OBJECTIVE E?ICS1 AS DI/+UI%$ FROM AN E?ICAL RELATIVISM SUBJECT TO ! WAYW>DNESS ( ! OP9ION POLL4 ,AN ECOLOGICAL DIALECTIC1 9 EFFECT1 OP5S ! WAY TO AN E?ICS ?AT IS ROOT$ 9 ! OBJECTIVITY ( ! POT5TIAL1 NOT 9 ! COMM&M5TS ( A DEITY OR 9 ! ET]NALITY ( A SUPRAMUNDANE & TRANSC5D5TAL 0REALITY40 ,H5CE1 ! 0:AT-%\LD-BE0 IS NOT ONLY OBJECTIVE1 IT =MS ! OBJECTIVE CRITIQUE ( ! GIV5 REALITY4 

,HUMAN 9T]V5TION 9TO NATURE IS 9H]5T & 9EVITABLE4 ,TO >GUE ?AT ?IS 9T]V5TION %\LD NOT OCCUR IS UTT]LY OBFUSCATORY1 S9CE HUMANITY'S SECOND NATURE IS NOT SIMPLY AN EXT]NAL IMPOSITION ON BIOLOGY'S FIR/ NATURE BUT IS ! RESULT ( FIR/ NATURE'S 9H]5T EVOLUTION>Y PROCESS4 ,:AT IS AT ISSUE 9 HUMANITY'S TRANS=MATION ( NATURE IS :E!R ITS PRACTICE IS CONSI/5T ) AN OBJECTIVE ECOLOGICAL E?ICS ?AT IS RATIONALLY DEVELOP$1 NOT HAPHAZ>DLY DIV9$1 FELT1 OR 9TUIT$4 ,M9IMALLY1 SU* AN ECOLOGICAL E?ICS W\LD 9VOLVE HUMAN /EW>D%IP ( ! PLANET4 ,A HUMANITY ?AT FAIL$ TO SEE ?AT IT IS POT5TIALLY NATURE R5D]$ SELF-CONSCI\S & SELF-REFLEXIVE W\LD SEP>ATE ITSELF FROM NATURE MORALLY AS WELL AS 9TELLECTUALLY4 ,SECOND NATURE 9 SU* A SITUATION W\LD LIT]ALLY BE DIVE/$ ( ITS LA/ TIES TO FIR/ NATURE2 WORSE1 ! VACUUM LEFT BY ! DEP>TURE ( CONSCI\SNESS W\LD BE FILL$ BY BL9D M>KET-ORI5T$ 9T]E/S & AN EGOI/IC M>KETPLACE M5TALITY4 ,9 ANY CASE1 !RE IS NO ROAD BACK FROM SECOND TO FIR/ NATURE1 ANY MORE ?AN SECOND NATURE AS IT IS N[ CON/ITUT$ CAN RESCUE ! BIOSPH]E FROM DE/RUCTION ) 0TE*NOLOGICAL FIXES0 & POLITICAL RE=MS4 

,GIV5 ! MASSIVE ECOLOGICAL CRISIS ?AT CONFRONTS US1 9TELLECTUAL CONFUSION 9 ! ECOLOGY MOVEM5T MAY YIELD H>MFUL RESULTS ( IMMEASURABLE PROPORTIONS4 ,9 ! PRES5T P]IOD ( HI/ORY1 TO C>ELESSLY HEAP FRAGM5TS ( IDEAS UPON EA* O!R & CALL ?IS ECOPHILOSOPHY IS NO LONG] AN AF=DABLE LUXURY4 ,/EW>D%IP ( ! E>? NE$ NOT CONSI/ ( SU* ACCOMMODAT+ MEASURES AS ! E/ABLI%M5T ( ECOLOGICAL WILD]NESS ZONES OR HALF MEASURES TO PAT* UP 5VIRONM5TAL DISLOCATIONS4 ,:AT IT CAN & %\LD MEAN IS A RADICAL 9TEGRATION ( SECOND NATURE FIR/ NATURE ALONG F>-REA*+ ECOLOGICAL L9ES1 AN 9TEGRATION ?AT W\LD YIELD NEW ECOCOMMUNITIES1 ECOTE*NOLOGIES1 & AN ABID+ ECOLOGICAL S5SIBILITY ?AT EMBODIES NATURE'S ?RU/ T[>D SELF-REFLEXIVITY4 ,= BIOC5TRI/S & ANTIHUMANI/S TO ?R[ WORD >ROGANCE >\ND :5EV] ANYONE CITES HUMAN BE+S AS E?ICAL & M5TAL REF]5TS = NATURE & NATURAL EVOLUTION IS MANIPULATIVE4 ,NATURE )\T AN ACTIVE HUMAN PRES5CE W\LD BE AS UNNATURAL AS A TROPICAL RA9=E/ ?AT LACK$ MONKEYS & ANTS4 ,DIALECTIC1 IT %\LD BE NOT$1 IS NO LESS A CRITIQUE ( ONE SID$NESS & SIMPLICITY ?AN ( EXI/+ REALITY & AN ADAPTIVE M5TALITY TO ! /ATUS QUO4 ,CA/ 9 RADICAL ECOLOGICAL T]MS1 IT CALLS = A D5IAL ( C5TRICITY AS SU*1 BE IT 0AN?ROPOC5TRICITY10 0BIOC5TRICITY10 OR SO-CALL$ 0ECOC5TRICITY10 :I* IS MEANT TO 9CLUDE ROCKS & RIV]S AS WELL AS LIFE-=MS4 ,A PHILOSOPHY ( ORGANIC DEVELOPM5T IS ABOVE ALL A PHILOSOPHY ( :OL5ESS 9 :I* EVOLUTION REA*ES A DEGREE ( UNITY-9-DIV]SITY SU* ?AT NATURE CAN ACT UPON ITSELF RATIONALLY ?R\< RATIONAL HUMAN AG5CY1 ) ITS D]IVATION 9 NATURE'S POT5TIAL = FRE$OM & CONCEPTUAL ?\<T4 

,9 ! 9T]M$IATE ZONE BETWE5 FIR/ & SECOND NATURE ?AT SAW ! GRAD$ PASSAGE ( BIOLOGICAL EVOLUTION 9TO SOCIAL1 SOCIAL EVOLUTION BEGAN TO ASSUME 9CREAS+LY HI]>*ICAL =M2 ,:E!R ?IS C\LD HAVE BE5 AVOID$ IS IMPOSSIBLE TO SAY -- & MEAN+LESS TO DIV9E4 ,9 ANY CASE1 SOCIAL EVOLUTION UNFOLD$ 9 ! DIRECTION ( HI]>*ICAL1 CLASS-ORI5T$1 & /ATI/ 9/ITUTION GIV+ RISE TO ! NATION-/ATE & ULTIMATELY1 ALBEIT NOT 9EVITABLY1 TO A CAPITALI/ ECONOMY4 ,9 \R [N TIME1 ! MASSIVE P5ETRATION ( ?IS ECONOMY 9TO SOCIETY AS A :OLE HAS PRODUC$ AN EV5 MORE S]I\S DI/ORTION ( SECOND NATURE4 ,! M>KET ECONOMY1 :I* ALL CULTURES FROM ANTIQUITY TO REC5T TIMES HAVE RESI/$ TO ONE DEGREE OR ANO!R1 HAS ESS5TIALLY BECOME A M>KET SOCIETY4 ,?IS SOCIETY IS HI/ORICALLY UNIQUE4 ,IT ID5TIFIES PROGRESS ) COMPETITION RA!R ?AN COOP]ATION4 ,IT VIEWS SOCIETY AS A REALM = POSSESS+ ?+S RA!R ?AN = ELABORAT+ HUMAN RELATION%IPS4 ,IT CREATES A MORALITY BAS$ ON GR[? RA!R ?AN LIMIT & BALANCE4 ,= ! FIR/ TIME 9 HUMAN HI/ORY1 SOCIETY & COMMUNITY HAVE BE5 R$UC$ TO LITTLE MORE ?AN A HUGE %OPP+ MALL4 

,UNLESS ECOLOGY EXPLORES ?IS W>P$ DEVELOPM5T SY/EMATICALLY -- ?AT IS1 UNLESS IT UNE>?S ITS 9T]NAL LOGIC 9 A REASON$ & ORGANISMIC WAY -- ITS CRITICAL ?RU/ WILL BE 5TIRELY LO/ & ITS 9TEGRITY HOPELESSLY IMPUGN$4 ,TODAY1 ECLECTICISM & R$UCTIONISM -- A HODGEPODGE ( DISCONNECT$1 EV5 CONTRADICTORY IDEAS DEGRAD$ TO !IR L[E/ COMMON D5OM9ATOR -- >E ! MO/ S]I\S OB/ACLES TO ! REALIZATION ( ?IS CRITICAL PROJECT4 ,ECLECTICISM MAY APPEAL TO LAZY M9DS ?AT PREF] SLOGANS TO REASON$ /UDIES ( SOCIETY & ITS IMPACT ON ! NATURAL WORLD4 ,BUT ) LAZY M9DS COME LAZY ?\<TS & A PASSIVE-RECEPTIVE M5TALITY ?AT 9CREAS+LY R5D]S ! M9D VULN]ABLE TO AU?ORIT>IAN CONTROL4 

,BEYOND ,FIR/ & ,SECOND ,NATURE 

  

,WE MU/ TRY TO BR+ ! ?READS ( \R DISCUSSION TOGE!R & EXAM9E ! IMPORTANT IMPLICATIONS DIALECTIC HAS = ECOLOGICAL ?9K+4 ,A 0DIALECTICAL VIEW ( LIFE0 IS A SPECIAL =M ( PROCESS PHILOSOPHY4 ,ITS EMPHASIS IS NOT ON *ANGE ALONE BUT ON DEVELOPM5T4 ,IT IS $UCTIVE RA!R ?AN M]ELY D$UCTIVE1 M$IAT$ RA!R ?AN M]ELY PROCESSUAL1 & CUMULATIVE RA!R ?AN M]ELY CONT9U\S4 ,ITS OBJECTIVITY BEG9S ) ! EXI/5CE ( ! POT5TIAL1 NOT ) ! M]E FACTICITY ( ! REAL2 H5CE ITS E?ICS SEEKS ! 0:AT-%\LD-BE0 AS A REALM ( OBJECTIVE POSSIBILITIES4 ,?AT 0POSSIBILITIES0 >E OBJECTIVE1 ALBEIT NOT 9 ! S5SE ( A SIMPLI/IC MAT]IALISM1 IS DIALECTICALLY JU/IFI$ BY ! P]CEPTION ?AT POT5TIALITY & ITS LAT5T POSSIBILITIES =M AN EXI/5TIAL CONT9UUM ?AT CON/ITUTES ! AU!NTIC WORLD ( TRU? -- ! WORLD ( ! 0:AT-%\LD-BE10 NOT SIMPLY ! WORLD ( ! 0:AT-IS10 ) ALL ITS 9COMPLET5ESS & FALSEHOOD4 

,FROM A DIALECTICAL VIEWPO9T1 A *ANGE 9 A GIV5 LEVEL ( BIOTIC1 COMMUNAL1 OR = ?AT MATT]1 SOCIAL ORGANIZATION CONSI/S NOT SIMPLY ( ! APPE>ANCE ( A NEW1 POSSIBLY MORE COMPLEX 5SEMBLE ( 0FE$BACK LOOPS40 ,RA!R1 IT CONSI/S ( QUALITATIVELY NEW ATTRIBUTES1 9T]RELATION%IPS1 & DEGREES ( SUBJECTIVITY ?AT EXPRESS & RADICALLY CONDITION ! EM]G5CE ( A NEW POT5TIALITY1 OP5+ UP A NEW REALM ( POSSIBILITY ) ITS [N UNIQUE T5D5CY -- NOT A GREAT] OR LESS] NUMB] ( 0FLUCTUATIONS0 & 0RHY?MS40 ,MOREOV]1 ?IS NEW POT5TIALITY IS ITSELF ! RESULT ( O!R ACTUALIZATIONS ( POT5TIALITIES ?AT1 TAK5 TOGE!R HI/ORICALLY & CUMULATIVELY1 CON/ITUTE A DEVELOPM5TAL CONT9UUM -- NOT A BULLET 0%OT FROM A PI/OL0 ?AT EXPLODES 9TO ,BE+ )\T A HI/ORY ( ITS [N OR A CONT9UUM ( :I* IT IS P>T4.<#g#b.> 

,DIALECTICAL LOGIC IS AN IMMAN5T LOGIC ( PROCESS -- AN ONTOLOGICAL LOGIC1 NOT ONLY A LOGIC ( CONCEPTS1 CATEGORIES1 & SYMBOLS4 ,?IS LOGIC IS EM]G5T1 9 ! S5SE ?AT ONE SPEAKS ( ! 0LOGIC ( EV5TS40 ,CONSID]$ 9 T]MS ( ITS EMPHASIS ON DIFF]5TIATION1 ?IS LOGIC IS PROVOCATIVELY CONCRETE 9 ITS RELATION%IP TO AB/RACT G5]ALIZATIONS -- H5CE ,HEGEL'S SEEM+LY P>ADOXICAL EXPRESSION 0CONCRETE UNIV]SAL40 ,DIALECTIC !REBY OV]COMES ,PLATO'S DUALI/IC SEP>ATION ( EXEMPL>Y IDEAS FROM ! PH5OM5AL WORLD ( IMP]FECT 0COPIES0 -- H5CE ITS E?ICAL ?RU/ IS LIT]ALLY /RUCTUR$1 CUMULATIVELY AS WELL AS SEQU5TIALLY1 9 ! CONCRETE4 ,EM]G+ FROM ?IS SUP]B 5SEMBLE IS A WORLD ?AT IS ALWAYS E?ICALLY PROBLEMATICAL BUT ALSO AN E?ICS ?AT IS ALWAYS OBJECTIVE1 A RECOGNITION ( SELFHOOD & SUBJECTIVITY ?AT EMBODIES NONHUMAN & HUMAN NATURE1 & A DEVELOPM5T FROM METABOLIC SELF-MA9T5ANCE TO RATIONAL SELF-DIRECTION & 9NOVATION ?AT LOCATES ! ORIG9S ( REASON )9 NATURE1 NOT 9 A SUPRAMUNDANE DOMA9 AP>T FROM NATURE4 ,! SOCIAL IS ?US W$D$ TO ! NATURAL1 & HUMAN REASON IS W$D$ TO NONHUMAN SUBJECTIVITY ?R\< PROCESSES ?AT >E RI*LY M$IAT$ & GRAD$ 9 A %>$ CONT9UUM ( DEVELOPM5T4 ,?IS ECOLOGICAL 9T]PRETATION ( DIALECTIC NOT ONLY OV]COMES DUALISM BUT MOVES ?R\< DIFF]5TIATION AWAY FROM R$UCTIONISM4 

,ECOLOGY CLEANSES ! REM>KABLE H]ITAGE ( ,EUROPEAN ORGANISMIC ?\<T ( ! H>D TELEOLOGICAL PR$ET]M9ATIONS IT ACQUIR$ FROM ,GREEK !OLOGY1 ! ,PLATONI/IC D5IGRATION ( PHYSICALITY1 & ! ,*RI/IAN PREOCCUPATION ) HUMAN 9W>DNESS AS 0S\L0 & A REV]5CE = ,GOD4 ,ONLY ECOLOGY CAN V5TILATE ! DIALECTIC AS AN ORI5TATION T[>D ! OBJECTIVE WORLD BY R5D]+ IT COEXT5SIVE ) NATURAL EVOLUTION1 A POSSIBILITY ?AT >OSE 9 ! LA/ C5TURY ) ! APPE>ANCE ( EVOLUTION>Y !ORY4 

,AS SU*1 AN ECOLOGICAL DIALECTIC IS NOT SOLELY A WAY ( ?9K+ ORGANICALLY2 IT CAN BE A S\RCE ( MEAN+ TO NATURAL EVOLUTION -- ( E?ICAL MEAN+1 NOT ONLY RATIONAL MEAN+4 ,TO /ATE ?IS IDEA MORE PROVOCATIVELY3 WE CANNOT HOPE TO F9D HUMANITY'S 0PLACE 9 NATURE0 )\T KN[+ H[ IT EM]G$ FROM NATURE1 ) ALL ITS PROBLEMS & POSSIBILITIES4 ,AN ECOLOGICAL DIALECTIC PRODUCES A CREATIVE P>ADOX3 SECOND NATURE 9 AN ECOLOGICAL SOCIETY W\LD BE ! ACTUALIZATION ( FIR/ NATURE'S POT5TIALITY TO A*IEVE M9D & TRU?4 ,HUMAN 9TELLECTION 9 AN ECOLOGICAL SOCIETY W\LD ?US 0FOLD BACK0 UPON ! EVOLUTION>Y CONT9UUM ?AT EXI/S 9 FIR/ NATURE4 ,9 ?IS S5SE -- & 9 ?IS S5SE ALONE -- SECOND NATURE W\LD ?US BECOME FIR/ NATURE R5D]$ SELF-REFLEXIVE1 A ?9K+ NATURE ?AT W\LD KN[ ITSELF & C\LD GUIDE ITS [N EVOLUTION1 NOT AN UN?9K+ NATURE ?AT 0S\<T ITS [N BALANCE0 ?R\< ! 0DYNAMICS0 ( 0FLUCTUATIONS0 & 0FE$BACK0 ?AT CAUSE NE$LESS PA91 SUFF]+1 & DEA?4 ,AL?\< ?\<T1 SOCIETY1 & CULTURE W\LD RETA9 !IR 9TEGRITY1 !Y W\LD CONSCI\SLY EXPRESS ! ABID+ T5D5CY )9 FIR/ NATURE TO PRESS ITSELF T[>D ! LEVEL ( CONSCI\S SELF-DIRECTIV5ESS4 

,9 A V]Y REAL S5SE1 AN ECOLOGICAL SOCIETY W\LD BE  
A TRANSC5D5CE ( BO? FIR/ NATURE & SECOND NATURE 9TO A NEW DOMA9 ( A 0FREE NATURE10 A NATURE ?AT 9 A TRULY RATIONAL HUMANITY REA*$ ! LEVEL ( CONCEPTUAL ?\<T -- 9 %ORT1 A NATURE ?AT W\LD WILLFULLY & ?9K+LY COPE ) CONFLICT1 CONT+5CY1 WA/E1 & COMPULSION4 ,9 ?IS NEW SYN!SIS1 :]E FIR/ & SECOND NATURE >E MELD$ 9TO A FREE1 RATIONAL1 & E?ICAL NATURE1 NEI!R FIR/ NOR SECOND W\LD LOSE ITS SPECIFICITY & 9TEGRITY4 ,HUMANITY1 F> FROM DIM9I%+ ! 9TEGRITY ( NATURE1 W\LD ADD ! DIM5SION ( FRE$OM1 REASON1 & E?ICS TO IT & RAISE EVOLUTION TO A LEVEL ( SELF-REFLEXIVITY ?AT HAS ALWAYS BE5 LAT5T 9 ! EM]G5CE ( ! NATURAL WORLD4 

,TO D5Y ! POT5TIALITY = ?IS TRANSC5D5CE & SYN!SIS ( FIR/ & SECOND NATURE 9TO A FREE NATURE IS TO LEAVE ECOLOGICAL ?9K+ OP5 TO ALL ! WAYW>D 0IF-!N0 PROPOSITIONS ?AT ?REAT5 TO OV]RUN & BRUTALIZE IT4 ,COMMONS5SE 0BRA9/ORMS10 ?R[+ IDEAS 9TO ! AIR ) A PRAY] ?AT M]E PROBABILITY WILL PROVIDE US ) A MEAN+FUL PATT]N1 W\LD REPLACE REFLECTION & 9TELLECTUAL EXPLORATION4 

,TODAY1 ! RESULTS ( ?IS DESY/EMATIZ$ ?9K+ >E (T5 LUDICR\S :5 !Y >E NOT SIMPLY CRUEL OR EV5 VICI\S4 ,IF ALL ORGANISMS 9 ! BIOSPH]E >E 09TR9SICALLY0 EQUALLY 0WOR?Y0 ( A 0RI<T0 TO 0SELF-REALIZATION10 AS MANY BIOC5TRI/S BELIEVE1 !N HUMAN BE+S HAVE NO RI<T1  
GIV5 ! FULL LOGIC ( ?IS PROPOSITION1 TO TRY TO /AMP \T MOSQUITOES ?AT C>RY MAL>IA & YELL[ FEV]4 ,NOR DOES ! LOGIC ( ?IS PROPOSITION GIVE HUMANITY ! RI<T TO ELIM9ATE ! ,A,I,D,S VIRUS OR O!R ORGANIC S\RCES ( DEADLY ILLNESS4.<#g#c.> ,IT H>DLY HELPS ?AT ,BILL ,DEVALL & ,GEORGE ,SESSIONS1 ! COAU?ORS ( ,DEEP ,ECOLOGY1 H$G$ 0BIOC5TRIC EQUALITY0 ) ! QUALIFI] ?AT 0WE HAVE NO RI<T TO DE/ROY O!R LIV+ BE+S )\T SUFFICI5T REASON40.<#g#d.> ,A LOOPHOLE LIKE 0SUFFICI5T REASON0 IS AMBIGU\S 5\< TO DIVE/ ! 5TIRE PHRASE ( ITS LOGICAL 9TEGRITY4 ,LOGIC1 9 FACT1 GIVES WAY TO A PURELY RELATIVI/IC E?ICS4 ,:AT ,DEVALL & ,SESSIONS CONSID] 09SUFFICI5T REASON0 TO TAKE A LIFE MAY BE V]Y SUFFICI5T TO MANY O!R PEOPLE :OSE WELL-BE+1 9DE$1 :OSE V]Y SURVIVAL UND] ! PRES5T 0SY/EM0 DEP5DS ON IT4 ,9 ?IS K9D ( >GUM5TATION1 :I* DIVE/S E?ICS ( ITS SOCIAL BASIS & SECOND NATURE ( ITS D]IVATION FROM FIR/ NATURE1 0C5TRICITY0 BIFURCATES 9TO TWO OPPOS+ BODIES ( VALUES3 A BIOC5TRISM ?AT MAKES HUMANS & VIRUSES EQUAL 0CITIZ5S0 9 A 0BIOSPH]IC DEMOCRACY10 & AN AN?ROPOC5TRISM ?AT MAKES HUMANS 9TO SELF-C5T]$ SOV]EIGNS 9 :AT IS PRESUMABLY A BIOSPH]IC TYRANNY4 ,?AT BO? VIEWS >E 9 ]ROR IS A C5TRAL PO9T 9 ?IS WORK4 ,9 ANY CASE1 0DEEP ECOLOGY0 TAK5 AT ITS WORD1 LEADS US 9TO A FOGGY & DANG]\S LOGICAL REALM FROM :I* !RE IS USUALLY NO REC\RSE BUT ,EA/]N MY/ICISM4.<#g#e.> 

,!RE IS NO 0BIOSPH]IC DEMOCRACY0 -- OR 0TYRANNY10 = ?AT MATT] -- 9 NATURE O!R ?AN :AT HUMAN SECOND NATURE IMPUTES TO NONHUMAN FIR/ NATURE1 JU/ AS !RE IS NO HI]>*Y1 DOM9ATION1 CLASS /RUCTURE1 OR /ATE 9 ! NATURAL WORLD -- ONLY :AT ! SOCIALLY CONDITION$ HUMAN M9D PROJECTS ONTO NONHUMAN BIOLOGICAL RELATION%IPS4 

0,RI<TS10 9 ANY MEAN+FUL S5SE ( ! WORD1 >E ! PRODUCT ( CU/OM1 TRADITION1 9/ITUTIONAL DEVELOPM5T1 & SOCIAL RELATION%IPS1 ( AN 9CREAS+LY SELF-CONSCI\S HI/ORICAL EXP]I5CE1 & ( M9D -- ?AT IS1 CONCEPTUAL ?\<T ?AT PA9/AK+LY =MULATES A CON/ELLATION ( RI<TS & DUTIES ?AT MAKES = AN EMPA!TIC RESPECT = 9DIVIDUALS & COLLECTIVITIES4 ,!Y EM]GE FROM ! HUMAN SOCIAL SPH]E & FROM WAYS 9 :I* HUMAN COMMUNITIES 9/ITUTIONALIZE !MSELVES4 ,LEOP>DS CLAIM NO 0RI<TS0 = !MSELVES & C]TA9LY RECOGNIZE NO 0RI<T0 TO LIFE1 MU* LESS TO 0SELF-REALIZATION10 9 ! ANIMALS ON :I* !Y PREY4 

,AS MAMMALS1 !SE PR$ATORS MAY BE MORE SELF-AW>E ?AN1 SAY1 FROGS1 BECAUSE ( !IR MORE COMPLEX NEUROLOGICAL & S5SORY APP>ATUS4 ,H5CE1 !Y MAY BE MORE SUBJECTIVE1 EV5 MORE RATIONAL 9 A DIM WAY4 ,BUT !IR RANGE ( CONCEPTUALIZATION1 FROM EV]Y?+ WE KN[1 IS SO LIMIT$1 (T5 SO IMM$IATELY FOCUS$ ON !IR [N SURVIVAL NE$S1 ?AT TO IMPUTE E?ICAL JUDGM5TS 9VOLV+ 0RI<TS0 TO !M IS TO BE TRULY AN?ROPOMORPHIC1 (T5 )\T EV5 KN[+ SO4 ,:5 BIOC5TRI/S1 ANTIHUMANI/S1 & 0DEEP ECOLOGI/S0 FLAGELLATE US ) CLAIMS ?AT LIFE-=MS HAVE 0RI<TS0 TO LIFE & 0SELF-REALIZATION0 ?AT WE1 AS HUMANS1 FAIL TO RECOGNIZE1 !Y UNKN[+LY P>TICIPATE 9 A HIDD5 AN?ROPOMORPHISM ?AT WE BR+ TO MANY =MS ( LIFE4 ,!Y WORK FROM )9 HUMAN IDEAS & FEEL+S -- 9DE$1 ! BE/ ?AT CON/ITUTES HUMANISM -- TO 9C>NATE 0RI<TS0 & ! NOTION ( A 0BIOSPH]IC DEMOCRACY0 9 FIR/ NATURE4 ,A HUMAN EMPA?Y & S5SE ( ID5TIFICATION ?AT YIELD A PR(\ND RESPECT & S5SITIVITY = ! NONHUMAN WORLD %\LD NOT BE CONFUS$ ) SOPHI/ICAT$ E?ICAL 0RI<TS0 & A 0DEMOCRACY0 ?AT HAVE MORAL & POLITICAL MEAN+ -- ?AT IS1 UNLESS WE >E PREP>$ TO UND]M9E ! AU!NTIC SOCIAL CONT5T ( 0RI<TS0 & 0DEMOCRACY0 = HUMAN SOCIETY & 9TELLECTION4 ,IRONICALLY1 IF !RE IS TO BE ANY?+ ?AT APPROXIMATES A 0BIOSPH]IC DEMOCRACY0 9 ! NONHUMAN WORLD1 IT WILL BE %AP$ BY HUMAN EMPA?Y1 :I*  
PRESUPPOSES ! RATIONAL & ECOLOGICAL 9T]V5TION ( HUMAN BE+S 9TO ! NATURAL WORLD4 ,?IS W\LD 5TAIL ! 9FUSION ( HUMAN VALUES 9TO NATURE1 & HUMAN M9D 9TO NONHUMAN SUBJECTIVITY4.<#g#f.> 

,BIOC5TRI/S & ANTIHUMANI/S CAN H>DLY HAVE !IR CAKE & EAT IT TOO4 ,EI!R HUMANITY IS A DI/9CTIVE MORAL AG5T 9 ! BIOSPH]E1 ?AT CAN PRACTICE AN ECOLOGICAL /EW>D%IP ( NATURE -- OR ELSE IT IS 0ONE0 ) ! :OLE WORLD ( LIFE & SIMPLY DISSOLVES 9TO IT4 ,IF ! LATT] IS TRUE1 !N HUMAN BE+S HAVE A 0BIOSPH]IC RI<T0 TO USE ! BIOSPH]E EXCLUSIVELY TO SUIT !IR [N 5DS1 A 0RI<T0 ?AT CANNOT BE D5I$ ANY MORE ?AN ! LEOP>D'S 0RI<T0 TO KILL & FEA/ ON ITS PREY1 ALBEIT LESS 0EFFICI5TLY0 ?AN HUMAN BE+S4 ,AT ?IS PO9T1 ANTIHUMANI/S MAY *ANGE ! :OLE LEVEL ( ! >GUM5T BY REPLY+ ?AT ! DESPOLIATION ( ! E>? BY PLUND]+ 0HUMANS0 7:OEV] !Y MAY BE7 WILL ULTIMATELY BOOM]ANG ON ! HUMAN SPECIES4 ,BUT ?IS TURNS !IR >GUM5T 9TO A PRAGMATIC PROBLEM ( A PURELY 9/RUM5TAL *>ACT]1 R$UCES A PROBLEM 9 MORALITY TO A PROBLEM 9 5G9E]+ NEW TE*NOLOGICAL FIXES & ! DEPLOYM5T ( ME HUMAN CUNN+4 ,NATURE ?US REV]TS TO A ,D>W9IAN JUNGLE ?AT IS MORALLY NEUTRAL AT BE/ OR 5GAG$ 9 A DUEL BETWE5 HUMAN CUNN+ & ANIMAL M9DLESSNESS AT WOR/4 

,ON ! O!R H&1 IF WE UND]/& ?AT HUMAN BE+S >E 9DE$ MORAL AG5TS BECAUSE NATURAL EVOLUTION CONF]S UPON !M A CLE> RESPONSIBILITY T[>D ! NATURAL WORLD1 WE CANNOT EMPHASIZE !IR UNIQUE ATTRIBUTES TOO /RONGLY4 ,= IT IS ?IS UNIQUE ABILITY TO ?9K CONCEPTUALLY & FEEL A DEEP EMPA?Y = ! WORLD ( LIFE ?AT MAKES IT POSSIBLE = HUMANITY TO REV]SE ! DEVA/ATION IT HAS 9FLICT$ ON ! BIOSPH]E & CREATE A RATIONAL SOCIETY4 ,?IS IMPLIES NOT ONLY ?AT HUMANITY1 ONCE IT CAME 9TO ITS [N HUMANITY AS ! ACTUALIZATION ( ITS POT5TIALITIES1 C\LD BE A RATIONAL EXPRESSION ( NATURE'S CREATIVITY & FECUNDITY1 BUT ?AT HUMAN 9T]V5TION 9TO NATURAL PROCESSES C\LD BE AS CREATIVE AS NATURAL EVOLUTION ITSELF4 

,?IS EVOLUTION>Y & DIALECTICAL VIEWPO9T1 :I* D]IVE2 ! HUMAN SPECIES FROM NATURE AS ! EMBODIM5T ( NATURE'S [N ?RU/ T[>D SELF-REFLEXIVITY1 *ANGES ! 5TIRE >GUM5T >\ND COMPET+ 0RI<TS0 BETWE5 HUMAN & NONHUMAN LIFE =MS 9TO AN EXPLORATION ( ! WAYS 9 :I* HUMAN BE+S 9 T]V5E 9TO ! BIOSPH]E4 ,:E!R HUMANITY RECOGNIZES ?AT AN ECOLOGICAL SOCIETY W\LD BE ! FULFILLM5T ( A MAJOR T5D5CY 9 NATURAL EVOLUTION1 OR REMA9S BL9D TO ITS [N HUMANITY AS A MORAL & ECOLOGICAL AG5T 9 NATURE1 BECOMES A SOCIAL PROBLEM ?AT REQUIRES A SOCIAL ECOLOGY4 ,! SELF-EFFAC+ QUIETISM & 0SPIRITUALITY0 SO RAMPANT TODAY AFFLICT A SIZABLE1 HI<LY PRIVILEG$ SECTOR ( ,EURO-,AM]ICAN SOCIETY -- HUMAN TYPES SO CONSUM$ BY A 0LOVE0 ( NATURE & LIFE ?AT !Y MAY WELL IGNORE ! NE$LESS BUT V]Y REAL SUFF]+ & PA9 ?AT EXI/ 9 NATURE & SOCIETY ALIKE4 

O ,*APT] #d 3 ,HI/ORY1 ,CIVILIZATION1 & ,PROGRESS3 ,\TL9E = A ,CRITICISM ( ,MOD]N ,RELATIVISM 
,HI/ORY1 ,CIVILIZATION1 & ,PROGRESS3  

 ,\TL9E = A ,CRITICISM ( ,MOD]N ,RELATIVISM 

  
,I 

  

,R>ELY HAVE ! CONCEPTS ?AT LIT]ALLY DEF9E ! BE/ ( ,WE/]N CULTURE -- ITS NOTIONS ( A MEAN+FUL ,HI/ORY1 A UNIV]SAL ,CIVILIZATION1 & ! POSSIBILITY ( ,PROGRESS -- BE5 CALL$ SO RADICALLY 9TO QUE/ION AS !Y >E TODAY4 ,9 REC5T DECADES1 BO? 9 ! ,UNIT$ ,/ATES & ABROAD1 ! ACADEMY & A SUBCULTURE ( SELF-/YL$ PO/MOD]NI/ 9TELLECTUALS HAVE N\RI%$ AN 5TIRELY NEW 5SEMBLE ( CULTURAL CONV5TIONS ?AT /EM FROM A CORROSIVE SOCIAL1 POLITICAL1 & MORAL RELATIVISM4 ,?IS 5SEMBLE 5COMPASSES A CRUDE NOM9ALISM1 PLURALISM1 & SKEPTICISM1 AN EXTREME SUBJECTIVISM1 & EV5 \TRI<T NIHILISM & ANTIHUMANISM 9 V>I\S COMB9ATIONS & P]MUTATIONS1 SOMETIMES ( A ?OR\<LY MISAN?ROPIC NATURE4 ,?IS RELATIVI/IC 5SEMBLE IS PITT$ AGA9/ COH]5T ?\<T AS SU* & AGA9/ ! 0PR9CIPLE ( HOPE0 7TO USE ,]N/ ,BLO*'S EXPRESSION7 ?AT M>K$ RADICAL !ORY ( ! REC5T PA/4 ,SU* NOTIONS P]COLATE FROM SO-CALL$ RADICAL ACADEMICS 9TO ! G5]AL PUBLIC1 :]E !Y TAKE ! =M ( P]SONALISM1 AMORALISM1 & 0NEOPRIMITIVISM40 

,TOO (T5 9 ?IS PREVAIL+ 0P>ADIGM10 AS IT IS FREQU5TLY CALL$1 ECLECTICISM REPLACES ! SE>* = HI/ORICAL MEAN+2 A SELF-9DULG5T DESPAIR REPLACES HOPE2 DY/OPIA REPLACES ! PROMISE ( A RATIONAL SOCIETY2 & 9 ! MORE SOPHI/ICAT$ =MS ( ?IS 5SEMBLE A VAGUELY DEF9$ 09T]SUBJECTIVITY0' -- OR 9 ITS CRUD] =MS1 A PRIMITIVI/IC MY?OPOESIS -- REPLACES ALL =MS ( REASON1 P>TICUL>LY DIALECTICAL REASON4 ,9 FACT1 ! V]Y CONCEPT ( REASON ITSELF HAS BE5 *ALL5G$ BY A WILLFUL ANTIRATIONALISM4 ,BY /RIPP+ ! GREAT TRADITIONS ( ,WE/]N ?\<T ( !IR CONT\RS1 NUANCES1 & GRADATIONS1 !SE RELATIVI/IC 0PO/-HI/ORICI/S10 0PO/MOD]NI/S10 & 7TO CO9 A NEW WORD7 0PO/-HUMANI/S0 ( \R DAY >E1 AT BE/1 CONDEMN+ CONTEMPOR>Y ?\<T TO A D>K PESSIMISM OR1 AT WOR/1 SUBV]T+ IT ( ALL ITS MEAN+4 

,SO GROSSLY HAVE ! CURR5T CRITICS ( ,HI/ORY1 ,CIVILIZATION1 & ,PROGRESS1 ) !IR PROCLIVITIES = FRAGM5TATION & R$UCTIONISM1 SUBV]T$ ! COH]5CE ( !SE BASIC ,WE/]N CONCEPTS ?AT !Y WILL LIT]ALLY HAVE TO BE DEF9$ AGA9 IF !Y >E TO BE MADE 9TELLIGIBLE TO PRES5T & FUTURE G5]ATIONS4 ,EV5 MORE DI/URB+LY1 SU* CRITICS HAVE ALL BUT AB&ON$ ATTEMPTS TO DEF9E ! V]Y CONCEPTS !Y EXCORIATE4 ,:AT1 AFT] ALL1 IS ,HI/ORY8 ,ITS RELATIVI/IC CRITICS T5D TO DISSOLVE ! CONCEPT 9TO ECLECTICALLY ASSEMBL$ 0HI/ORIES0 MADE UP ( A MULTIPLICITY ( DISJO9T$ EPISODES -- OR EV5 WORSE1 9TO MY?S ?AT BELONG TO 0DIFF]5T0 G5D]1 E?NIC1 & NATIONAL GR\PS & ?AT !Y CONSID] TO BE IDEOLOGICALLY EQUATABLE4 ,ITS NOM9ALI/IC CRITICS SEE ! PA/ L>GELY AS A S]IES ( 0ACCID5TS10 :ILE ITS SUBJECTIVI/IC CRITICS OV]EMPHASIZE IDEAS 9 DET]M9+ HI/ORICAL REALITIES1 CONSI/+ ( 0IMAG9>IES0 ?AT >E ESS5TIALLY DISCONT9U\S FROM ONE ANO!R4 ,& :AT1 AFT] ALL1 IS ,CIVILIZATION8 0,NEO-PRIMITIVI/S0 & O!R CULTURAL R$UCTIONI/S HAVE SO BLACK5$ ! WORD ?AT ITS RATIONAL COMPON5TS >E N[ 9 NE$ ( A SCRUPUL\S SORT+ \T FROM ! IRRATIONALITIES ( ! PA/ & PRES5T4 ,& :AT1 F9ALLY1 IS ,PROGRESS8 ,RELATIVI/S HAVE REJECT$ ITS ASPIRATIONS TO FRE$OM 9 ALL ITS COMPLEXITY1 9 FAVOR ( A FA%IONABLE ASS]TION ( 0AUTONOMY10 (T5 R$UCIBLE TO P]SONAL PROCLIVITIES4 ,MEAN:ILE1 ANTIHUMANI/S HAVE DIVE/$ ! V]Y CONCEPT ( ,PROGRESS ( ALL RELEVANCE & MEAN+ 9 ! F>RAGO ( HUMAN SELF-D5IGRATION ?AT M>KS ! MOOD ( ! PRES5T TIME4 

,A SKEPTICISM ?AT D5IES ANY MEAN+1 RATIONALITY1 COH]5CE1 & CONT9UITY 9 ,HI/ORY1 ?AT CORRODES ! V]Y EXI/5CE ( PREMISES1 LET ALONE ! NECESSITY ( EXPLOR+ !M1 R5D]S DISC\RSE ITSELF VIRTUALLY IMPOSSIBLE4 ,9DE$1 PREMISES AS SU* HAVE BECOME SO SUSPECT ?AT ! NEW RELATIVI/S REG>D ANY ATTEMPTS TO E/ABLI% !M AS EVID5CE ( A CULTURAL PA?OLOGY1 MU* AS ,FREUDIAN ANALY/S MI<T VIEW A PATI5T'S RESI/ANCE TO TREATM5T AS SYMPTOMATIC ( A PSY*OLOGICAL PA?OLOGY4 ,SU* A PSY*OLOGIZATION ( DISCUSSION CLOSES (F ALL FUR!R DISPUTE4 ,NO LONG] >E S]I\S *ALL5GES TAK5 ON !IR [N T]MS & GIV5 A S]I\S RESPONSE2 RA!R1 !Y >E DISMISS$ AS SYMPTOMS ( A P]SONAL & SOCIAL MALAISE4 

,SO F> HAVE !SE T5D5CIES BE5 P]MITT$ TO PROCE$ ?AT ONE CANNOT N[ M\NT A CRITIQUE ( 9COH]5CE1 = EXAMPLE1 )\T EXPOS+ ONESELF TO ! *>GE ( A HAV+ A 0PR$ISPOSITION0 TO 0COH]5CE0 -- OR A 0,EUROC5TRIC0 BIAS4 ,A DEF5SE ( CL>ITY1 EQUALLY UNACCEPTABLE1 9VITES ! ACCUSATION ( RE9=C+ ! 0TYRANNY ( REASON10 :ILE AN ATTEMPT TO UPHOLD ! VALIDITY ( REASON IS DISMISS$ AS AN 0OPPRESSIVE0 PRESUPPOSITION ( REASON'S EXI/5CE4 ,! V]Y ATTEMPT AT DEF9ITION IS REJECT$ AS 9TELLECTUALLY 0CO]CIVE40 ,RATIONAL DISCUSSION IS IMPUGN$ AS A REPRESSION ( NONLIT]ATE =MS ( 0EXPRESSION0 SUCK AS RITUALS1 H[L+1 & DANC+1 OR ON AN O/5SIBLY PHILOSOPHICAL SCALE1 ( 9TUITIONS1 PRESCI5CES1 PSY*OLOGICAL MOTIVATIONS1 ( 0POSITIONAL0 9SI<TS ?AT >E DEP5D5T ON ONE'S G5D] OR E?NICITY1 OR ( REVELATIONS ( ONE K9D OR ANO!R ?AT (T5 FE$ 9TO \TRI<T MY/ICISM4 

,?IS CON/ELLATION ( RELATIVI/IC VIEWS1 :I* RANGE FROM ! CRUDE TO ! 9TELLECTUALLY EXOTIC1 CANNOT BE CRITICIZ$ RATIONALLY BECAUSE !Y D5Y ! VALIDITY ( RATIONALLY 9DEP5D5T CONCEPTUAL =MULATIONS AS SU*1 PRESUMABLY 0CON/RICT$0 BY ! CLAIMS ( REASON4 ,= ! NEW RELATIVI/S1 0FRE$OM0 5DS :]E CLAIMS TO RATIONALITY BEG9 -- 9 M>K$ CONTRA/ TO ! ANCI5T ,A!NIANS1 = :OM VIOL5CE BEGAN :]E RATIONAL DISCUSSION 5D$4 ,PLURALISM1 ! DEC5T]+ ( MEAN+S1 ! D5IAL ( F\NDATIONS1 & ! HYPO/ASIZATION ( ! IDIOSYNCRATIC1 ( ! E?ICALLY & SOCIALLY CONT+5T1 & ( ! PSY*OLOGICAL -- ALL SEEM LIKE P>T ( ! MASSIVE CULTURAL DECAY ?AT CORRESPONDS TO ! OBJECTIVE DECAY ( \R ]A4 ,9 ,AM]ICAN UNIV]SITIES TODAY1 RELATIVI/S 9 ALL !IR MUTATIONS TOO (T5 RETREAT 9TO ! LEPR\S 0LIMIT EXP]I5CES0 ( ,F\CAULT2 9TO A VIEW ( ,HI/ORY AS FRAGM5T>Y 0COLLECTIVE REPRES5TATIONS0 7,DURKHEIM71 0CULTURE-PATT]NS0 7,B5$ICT71 OR 0IMAG9>IES0 7,CA/ORIADIS72 OR 9TO ! NIHILI/IC ASOCIALITY ( PO/MOD]NISM4 

,:5 TODAY'S RELATIVI/S DO (F] DEF9ITIONS ( ! CONCEPTS !Y OPPOSE1 !Y TYPICALLY OV]/ATE & EXAGG]ATE !M4 ,!Y DECRY ! PURSUIT ( F\NDATIONS -- AN 5DEAVOR ?AT !Y HAVE *>ACT]I/ICALLY TURN$ 9TO AN 0ISM10 0F\NDATIONALISM0 -- AS 0TOTALI/IC10 )\T ANY REG>D = ! PAT5T NE$ = BASIC PR9CIPLES4 ,?AT F\NDATIONS EXI/ ?AT >E CONF9$ TO >EAS ( REALITY 
:]E !IR EXI/5CE IS VALID & KN[ABLE SEEMS TO ELUDE !SE ANTI-F\NDATIONALI/S1 = :OM F\NDATIONS MU/ EI!R 5COMPASS ! 5TIRE COSMOS OR ELSE NOT EXI/ AT ALL4 ,REALITY W\LD 9DE$ BE A MY/]Y IF A FEW PR9CIPLES OR F\NDATIONS C\LD 5COMPASS ALL ?AT EXI/S1 9DE$1 ALL ITS 9NOVATIONS UNFOLD+ FROM ! SUBATOMIC REALM TO 9ORGANIC MATT]1 FROM ! SIMPLE/ TO ! MO/ COMPLEX LIFE-=MS1 & ULTIMATELY TO ! REALM ( A/ROPHYSICS4 

,SOME HI/ORICAL RELATIVI/S OV]EMPHASIZE ! SUBJECTIVE 9 HI/ORY AT ! EXP5SE ( ! MAT]IAL4 ,SUBJECTIVE FACTORS C]TA9LY DO AFFECT OBVI\SLY OBJECTIVE DEVELOPM5TS4 ,9 ! ,HELL5I/IC ,AGE1 = EXAMPLE4 ,H]ON REPUT$LY DESIGN$ /EAM 5G9ES1 YET SO F> AS WE KN[ !Y W]E NEV] US$ TO REPLACE HUMAN LABOR1 AS !Y W]E TWO ?\S& YE>S LAT]4 ,SUBJECTIVE HI/ORIANS1 TO BE SURE1 W\LD EMPHASIZE ! SUBJECTIVE FACTORS 9 ?IS FACT4 ,BUT :AT 9T]ACTION BETWE5 IDEOLOGICAL & MAT]IAL FACTORS EXPLA9S :Y ONE SOCIETY -- CAPITALISM -- US$ ! /EAM 5G9E ON A VA/ SCALE = ! MANUFACTURE ( COMMODITIES1 :ILE ANO!R -- ,HELL5I/IC SOCIETY -- US$ IT M]ELY TO OP5 TEMPLE DOORS = ! PURPOSES ( MASS MY/IFICATION8 ,OV]LY SUBJECTIVI/IC HI/ORIANS W\LD DO WELL TO EXPLORE NOT ONLY H[ DIFF]5T TRADITIONS & S5SIBILITIES YIELD$ !SE DISP>ATE USES ( MA*9ES BUT :AT  
MAT]IAL AS WELL AS BROADLY SOCIAL FACTORS EI!R FO/]$ OR PRODUC$ !M4.<#g#g.> 

,O!R HI/ORICAL RELATIVI/S >E NOM9ALI/IC1 OV]EMPHASIZ+ ! IDIOSYNCRATIC 9 ,HI/ORY1 (T5 BEGG+ BASIC QUE/IONS ?AT MU/ BE EXPLOR$4 ,A SMALL GR\P ( PEOPLE 9 ANCI5T ,JUDEA1 WE MAY BE TOLD1 =MULAT$ A LOCALIZ$1 E?NICALLY BAS$ BODY ( MONO!I/IC BELIEFS ?AT AT A *RONOLOGICALLY LAT] PO9T BECAME ! BASIS ( ! ,JUDEO-,*RI/IAN WORLD RELIGION4 ,>E !SE TWO EV5TS UNRELAT$8 ,WAS !IR CONJUNCTION A M]E ACCID5T8 ,TO CONCEIVE ?IS VA/ DEVELOPM5T 9 A NOM9ALI/IC WAY1 )\T PROB+ 9TO :Y ! ,ROMAN EMP]ORS ADOPT$ ! ,JUDEO-,*RI/IAN SYN!SIS -- 9 AN EMPIRE COMPOS$ ( V]Y DIFF]5T CULTURES & LANGUAGES ?AT WAS DIRELY 9 NE$ ( IDEOLOGICAL UNITY TO PREV5T ITS COMPLETE COLLAPSE -- IS TO PRODUCE CONFUSION RA!R ?AN CL>ITY4 

,P]HAPS ! MO/ PROBLEMATIC ASPECT ( RELATIVISM IS ITS MORAL >BITR>9ESS4 ,! MORAL RELATIVISM ( ! TRITE MAXIM 0,:AT'S GOOD = ME IS GOOD = ME1 & :AT'S GOOD = Y\ IS GOOD = Y\10 H>DLY REQUIRES ELUCIDATION4.<#g#h.> ,9 ?IS APP>5TLY MO/ =MLESS ( TIMES1 RELATIVISM HAS LEFT US ) A SOLIPSI/IC MORALITY & 9 C]TA9 SUBCULTURES A POLITICS LIT]ALLY PREMIS$ ON *AOS4 ,! TURN ( MANY AN>*I/S !SE DAYS T[>D A HI<LY P]SONALI/IC1 PRESUMABLY 0AUTONOM\S0 SUBCULTURE AT ! EXP5SE ( RESPONSIBLE SOCIAL COMMITM5T & ACTION REFLECTS1 9 MY VIEW1 A TRAGIC ABDICATION ( A S]I\S 5GAGEM5T 9 ! POLITICAL & REVOLUTION>Y SPH]ES4 ,?IS IS NO IDLE PROBLEM TODAY1 :5 9CREAS+ NUMB]S ( PEOPLE ) NO KN[L$GE ( ,HI/ORY TAKE CAPITALISM TO BE A NATURAL1 ET]NAL SOCIAL SY/EM4 ,A POLITICS ROOT$ 9 PURELY RELATIVI/IC PREF]5CES1 9 ASS]TIONS ( P]SONAL 0AUTONOMY0 ?AT /EM L>GELY FROM AN 9DIVIDUAL'S 0DESIRE0 CAN YIELD A CRUDE & SELF-S]V+ OPPORTUNISM1 ( A TYPE :OSE PREVAL5CE TODAY EXPLA9S MANY SOCIAL ILLS4 ,CAPITALISM ITSELF1 9 FACT1 FA%ION$ ITS PRIM>Y IDEOLOGY ON AN EQUATION ( FRE$OM ) ! P]SONAL AUTONOMY ( ! 9DIVIDUAL1 :I* ,ANATOLE ,FRANCE ONCE IMPI%LY DESCRIB$ AS ! 0FRE$OM0 ( EV]YONE TO SLEEP AT NI<T UND] ! SAME BRIDGE OV] ! ,SE9E4 ,9DIVIDUALITY IS 9SEP>ABLE FROM COMMUNITY1 & AUTONOMY IS H>DLY MEAN+FUL UNLESS IT IS EMB$D$ 9 A COOP]ATIVE COMMUNITY4.<#g#i.> ,COMP>$ ) HUMANITY'S POT5TIALITIES = FRE$OM1 A RELATIVI/IC & P]SONALI/IC 0AUTONOMY0 IS LITTLE MORE ?AN PSY*O!RAPY WRIT L>GE & EXP&$ 9TO A SOCIAL !ORY4 

,F> TOO MANY ( ! RELATIVI/IC CRITICS ( ,HI/ORY1 ,CIVILIZATION1 & ,PROGRESS SEEM LESS LIKE S]I\S SOCIAL !ORI/S ?AN LIKE FRI<T5$ =M] RADICAL IDEOLOGUES :O HAVE NOT FULLY COME TO T]MS ) ! FAILURES ( ! ,LEFT & ( 0EXI/+ SOCIALISM0 9 REC5T YE>S4 ,! 9COH]5CE ?AT IS CELEBRAT$ 9 PRES5T-DAY !ORY IS DUE 9 NO SMALL P>T TO ! ONE-SID$ & EXAGG]AT$ REACTION ( ,FR5* ACADEMIC 0LEFTI/S0 TO ! ,MAY-,JUNE EV5TS ( #a#i#f#h1 TO ! BEHAVIOR ( ! ,FR5* ,COMMUNI/ ,P>TY1 & 9 EV5 GREAT] P>T TO ! V>I\S MUTATIONS ( ,HOLY ,MO!R ,RUSSIA FROM ,CZ>ISM ?R\< ,/AL9ISM TO ,YELTS9ISM4 ,TOO (T51 ?IS DIS5*ANTM5T PROVIDES AN ESCAPE R\TE = ]/:ILE 0REVOLUTION>IES0 TO 5SCONCE !MSELVES 9 ! ACADEMY1 TO EMBRACE SOCIAL DEMOCRACY1 OR SIMPLY TO TURN TO A VACU\S NIHILISM ?AT H>DLY CON/ITUTES A ?REAT TO ! EXI/+ SOCIETY4 ,FROM RELATIVISM1 !Y HAVE CON/RUCT$ A SKEPTICAL B>RI] BETWE5 !MSELVES & ! RE/ ( SOCIETY4 ,YET ?IS B>RI] IS AS 9TELLECTUALLY FRAGILE AS ! ONE-SID$ ABSOLUTISM ?AT ! ,OLD ,LEFT TRI$ TO D]IVE FROM ,HEGEL1 ,M>X1 & ,L594 

,FAIRNESS REQUIRES ME TO EMPHASIZE ?AT CONTR>Y TO ! CONV5TIONAL WISDOM AB\T ! ,LEFT TODAY1 !RE HAS NEV] BE5 ANY 0EXI/+ SOCIALISM10 ! ]/:ILE CLAIMS ( ,EA/]N ,EUROPEAN LEAD]S TO HAVE A*IEV$ IT NOT)/&+4 ,NOR WAS ,HEGEL A M]E TELEOLOGI/2 NOR ,M>X A M]E 0PRODUCTIVI/02 NOR ,L59 ! IDEOLOGICAL 0FA!R0 ( ! RU?LESS OPPORTUNI/ & C\NT]REVOLUTION>Y1 ,/AL94.<#h.> ,9 REACTION TO ! NI<TM>E ( ! 0,SOVIET0 SY/EM1 TODAY'S RELATIVI/S HAVE NOT ONLY OV]REACT$ TO & EXAGG]AT$ ! %ORTCOM+S ( ,HEGEL1 ,M>X1 & ,L592 !Y HAVE CONCOCT$ AN IDEOLOGICAL PROPHYLAXIS TO PROTECT !MSELVES FROM ! /ILL-UNEXORCIS$ DEMONS ( A TRAGICALLY FAIL$ PA/ 9/EAD ( =MULAT+ A CR$IBLE PHILOSOPHY ?AT CAN ADDRESS ! PROBLEMS ?AT N[ CONFRONT US AT ALL LEVELS ( SOCIETY & ?\<T4 

,CURR5T EXPOSITIONS ( OXYMORONIC 0M>KET SOCIALISMS0 & 0M9IMAL /ATISMS0 BY 0NEO-0 & 0PO/-,M>XI/S SUGGE/ :]E POLITICAL RELATIVISM & ASS]TIONS ( 0AUTONOMY0 CAN LEAD US4.<#h#a.> ,9DE$1 IT IS QUITE FAIR TO ASK :E!R TODAY'S FA%IONABLE POLITICAL RELATIVISM ITSELF W\LD PROVIDE US ) MORE ?AN A PAP]-?9 OB/ACLE TO TOTALIT>IANISM4 ,! DISMISSAL ( ATTEMPTS TO D]IVE CONT9UITY 9 ,HI/ORY1 COH]5CE 9 ,CIVILIZATION1 & MEAN+ 9 ,PROGRESS AS EVID5CE ( A 0TOTALIZ+0 OR 0TOTALIT>IAN0 M5TALITY 9 PURSUIT ( ALL-5COMPASS+ F\NDATIONS DIRECTLY OR 9DIRECTLY IMBRICATES REASON1 P>TICUL>LY ?AT ( ! ,5LI<T5M5T ]A1 ) TOTALIT>IANISM1 & EV5 SIGNIFICANTLY TRIVIALIZES ! H>% REALITY & P$IGREE ( TOTALIT>IANISM ITSELF4 ,9 FACT1 ! ACTIONS ( ! WOR/ TOTALIT>IANS ( \R ]A1 ,/AL9 & ,HITL]1 W]E GUID$ LESS BY ! OBJECTIVELY GR\ND$ PR9CIPLES OR 0F\NDATIONAL0 IDEAS !Y SO CYNICALLY VOIC$ 9 PUBLIC ?AN BY A K9D ( RELATIVI/IC OR SITUATIONAL E?ICS4 ,= ,/AL91 :O WAS NO MORE A 0SOCIALI/0 OR 0COMMUNI/0 ?AN HE WAS AN 0AN>*I/0 OR 0LIB]AL10 !ORY WAS M]ELY AN IDEOLOGICAL FIG LEAF = ! CONC5TRATION ( P[]4 ,TO OV]LOOK ,/AL9'S %E] OPPORTUNISM IS MYOPIC AT BE/ & CYNICAL AT WOR/4 ,UND] HIS REGIME1 ONLY A HOPELESSLY DOGMATIC 0,COMMUNI/0 :O HAD MANAG$ TO NEGOTIATE & SURVIVE ,/AL9'S V>I\S *ANGES 9 ! 0P>TY L9E0 C\LD HAVE TAK5 ,/AL9 S]I\SLY AS A 0,M>XI/-,L59I/40 ,HITL]1 9 TURN1 EXHIBIT$ AMAZ+ FLEXIBILITY 9 BYPASS+ IDEOLOGY = /RICTLY PRAGMATIC 5DS4 ,9 HIS FIR/ MON?S 9 P[]1 HE DECIMAT$ ALL ! 0TRUE BELIEV]S0 ( ,NATIONAL ,SOCIALISM AMONG HIS /ORM TROOP]S AT ! BEHE/ ( ! ,PRUSSIAN (FIC] CA/E1 :I* FE>$ & DETE/$ ! ,NAZI RABBLE4 

,9 ! ABS5CE ( AN OBJECTIVE GR\ND+ -- NOTABLY1 ! V]Y REAL HUMAN POT5TIALITIES ?AT HAVE BE5 =M$ BY ! NATURAL1 SOCIAL1 MORAL1 & 9TELLECTUAL DEVELOPM5T ( \R SPECIES -- NOTIONS LIKE FRE$OM1 CREATIVITY1 & RATIONALITY >E R$UC$ TO 09T]SUBJECTIVE0 RELATIONS1 UND]P9N$ BY P]SONAL & 9DIVIDUALI/IC PREF]5CES 7NO?+ MORE67 ?AT >E 0RESOLV$0 BY ANO!R K9D ( TYRANNY -- NOTABLY1 ! TYRANNY ( CONS5SUS4 ,LACK+ F\NDATIONS ( ANY K9D1 LACK+ ANY REAL =M & SOLIDITY1 NOTIONS ( 09T]SUBJECTIVITY0 CAN BE FRI<T5+LY HOMOG5IZ+ BECAUSE ( !IR SEEM+LY 0DEMOCRATIC0 LOGIC ( CONS5SUALITY -- A LOGIC ?AT PRECLUDES ! DISS5SUS & IDEOLOGICAL DISSONANCE SO NECESS>Y = /IMULAT+ 9NOVATION4 ,9 ! CONS5SUAL 0IDEAL SPEE* SITUATION0 ?AT ,JURG5 ,HAB]MAS DEPLOY$ TO BEFOG ! SOCIALI/ VISION ( ! #a#i#gS1 ?IS 09T]SUBJECTIVITY10 A TRANSC5D5TAL 0,SUBJECT0 OR 0,EGO0 LIKE A MUTAT$ ,R\SSEAUIAN 0,G5]AL ,WILL10 REPLACES ! RI* ELABORATION ( REASON4 ,TODAY ?IS SUBJECTIVISM OR 09T]SUBJECTIVITY0 -- BE IT 9 ! =M ( ,HAB]MAS'S NEO-,KANTIANISM OR ,BAUDRILL>D'S EGOISM -- L5DS ITSELF TO A NOTION ( 0SOCIAL !ORY0 AS A MATT] ( P]SONAL TA/E4 ,M]E CON/RUCTIONS ( 0SOCIALLY CONDITION$0 HUMAN M9DS1 FREE-FLOAT+ 9 A SEA ( RELATIVISM & AHI/ORICISM1 REJECT A POT5TIAL OBJECTIVE GR\ND = FRE$OM 9 ! 9 T]E/S ( AVOID+ 0TOTALIT>IAN ,TOTALITIES0 & ! 0TYRANNY0 ( AN 0,ABSOLUTE40 ,9DE$1 REASON ITSELF IS ESS5TIALLY R$UC$ TO 09T]SUBJECTIVITY40 ,JUXTAPOS$ ) LIT]>Y CELEBRATIONS ( ! 0SUBJECTIVE REASON0 ( P]SONALISM1 & ITS ,AM]ICAN SEQUELAE ( MY/ICISM1 9DIVIDUAL R$EMPTION1 & CON=MITY1 & ITS PO/- #aifh ,FR5* SEQUELAE ( PO/MOD]NI/1 PSY*OANALYTIC1 RELATIVI/1 & NEO-,SITUATIONI/ VAG>IES1 ,M>X'S COMMITM5T TO ?OR\< ?9K+ W\LD BE ATTRACTIVE4 

,IDEAS ?AT >E OBJECTIVELY GR\ND$1 UNLIKE ?OSE ?AT >E RELATIVI/ICALLY ASS]T$1 CAN PROVIDE US ) A DEF9ABLE BODY ( PR9CIPLES ) :I* WE CAN S]I\SLY GRAPPLE4 ,! F\NDATIONAL COH]5CE &1 9 ! BE/ ( CASES1 ! RATIONALITY ( OBJECTIVELY GR\ND$ VIEWS AT LEA/ MAKE !M EXPLICIT & TANGIBLE & FREE !M FROM ! VAG>IES ( ! LABYR9?9E P]SONALISM SO V]Y MU* 9 VOGUE TODAY4 ,UNLIKE A F\NDATIONLESS SUBJECTIVISM ?AT IS (T5 R$UCIBLE1 UND] ! RUBRIC ( 0AUTONOMY10 TO P]SONAL PREF]5CES1 OBJECTIVE F\NDATIONS >E AT LEA/ SUBJECT TO *ALL5GES 9 A FREE SOCIETY4 ,F> FROM PRECLUD+ RATIONAL CRITIQUE1 !Y 9VITE IT4 ,F> FROM TAK+ REFUGE 9 AN UN*ALL5GEABLE NOM9ALI/ ELUSIV5ESS1 !Y OP5 !MSELVES TO ! TE/ ( COH]5CE4 ,PAUL ,FEY]AB5D'S CORROSIVE 79 MY VIEW1 CYNICAL7 RELATIVISM TO ! CONTR>Y NOT)/&+1 ! NATURAL SCI5CES 9 ! PA/ ?REE C5TURIES HAVE BE5 AMONG ! MO/ EMANCIPATORY HUMAN 5DEAVORS 9 ! HI/ORY ( IDEAS -- P>TLY BECAUSE ( !IR PURSUIT ( UNIFY+ OR F\NDATIONAL EXPLANATIONS ( REALITY4.<#h#b.> ,9 ! 5D1 :AT %\LD ALWAYS BE ( CONC]N TO US IS ! CONT5T ( OBJECTIVE PR9CIPLES1 BE !Y 9 SCI5CE1 SOCIAL !ORY1 OR E?ICS1 NOT A FLIPPANT CONDEMNATION ( !IR CLAIMS TO COH]5CE & OBJECTIVITY P] SE4 

,9DE$1 DESPITE CLAIMS TO ! CONTR>Y1 RELATIVISM HAS ITS [N HIDD5 0F\NDATIONS0 & METAPHYSICS4 ,AS SU*1 BECAUSE ITS PREMISES >E MASK$1 IT MAY WELL PRODUCE AN IDEOLOGICAL TYRANNY F> MORE P>ALYZ+ ?AN ! 0TOTALIT>IANISM0 ?AT IT IMPUTES TO OBJECTIVISM & AN EXPRESSLY REASON$ 0F\NDATIONALISM 0 ,9S(> AS \R CONC]NS %\LD C5T] ON ! BASES ( FRE$OM & ! NATURE ( REASON1 MOD]N RELATIVISM HAS 0DEC5T]$0 !SE CRUCIAL ISSUES 9TO WISPY EXPRESSIONS ( P]SONAL FAI? 9 AN ATMOSPH]E ( G5]AL SKEPTICISM4 ,WE MAY *OOSE TO APPLAUD ! RELATIVI/ :O UPHOLDS HIS OR H] /RICTLY P]SONAL FAI? BY REIT]AT+ ,LU!R'S DEFIANT WORDS AT ,WORMS1 @&,HI] /EHE I*1 I* KANN NI*T &]S"9 70,H]E ,I /&1 ,I CANNOT DO O!RWISE074 ,BUT TO SPEAK FRANKLY1 UNLESS WE ALSO HE> A RATIONAL >GUM5T TO VALIDATE ?AT /&1 ONE BAS$ ON MORE ?AN A SUBJECTIVE 9CL9ATION1 :O GIVES A DAMN AB\T ?IS RESOLVE8 

,I,I 

  

,:I* AGA9 RAISES ! PROBLEM ( :AT ,HI/ORY1 ,CIVILIZATION1 & ,PROGRESS ACTUALLY >E4 

,HI/ORY1 ,I WI% TO CONT5D1 IS ! RATIONAL CONT5T & CONT9UITY ( EV5TS 7) DUE REG>D = QUALITATIVE 0LEAPS07 ?AT >E GR\ND$ 9 HUMANITY'S POT5TIALITIES = FRE$OM1 SELF-CONSCI\SNESS1 & COOP]ATION1 9 ! SELF-=MATIVE DEVELOPM5T ( 9CREAS+LY LIB]T>IAN =MS ( CONSOCIATION4 ,IT IS ! RATIONAL 09FRA/RUCTURE10 SO TO SPEAK1 ?AT COH]ES HUMAN ACTIONS & 9/ITUTIONS OV] ! PA/ & ! PRES5T 9 ! DIRECTION ( AN EMANCIPATORY SOCIETY & EMANCIPAT$ 9DIVIDUALS4 ,?AT IS TO SAY4 ,HI/ORY IS PRECISELY :AT IS RATIONAL 9 HUMAN DEVELOPM5T4 ,IT IS :AT IS RATIONAL1 MOREOV]1 9 ! DIALECTICAL S5SE ( ! IMPLICIT ?AT UNFOLDS1 EXP&S1 & BEG9S 9 V>Y+ DEGREES ?R\< 9CREAS+ DIFF]5TIATION TO ACTUALIZE HUMANITY'S V]Y REAL POT5TIALITIES = FRE$OM1 SELF-CONSCI\SNESS1 & COOP]ATION4.<#h#c.> 

,IT WILL IMM$IATELY BE OBJECT$ ?AT IRRATIONAL EV5TS1 UNRELAT$ TO ?IS ACTUALIZATION1 EXPLODE UPON US AT ALL TIMES1 9 ALL ]AS & CULTURES4 ,BUT 9S(> AS !Y DEFY RATIONAL 9T]PRETATION1 !Y REMA9 PRECISELY EV5TS1 NOT ,HI/ORY1 H[EV] CONSEQU5TIAL !IR EFFECTS MAY BE ON ! C\RSE ( O!R EV5TS4 ,!IR IMPACT MAY BE V]Y P[]FUL1 TO BE SURE1 BUT !Y >E NOT DIALECTICALLY ROOT$ 9 HUMANITY'S POT5TIALITIES = FRE$OM1 SELF-CONSCI\SNESS1 & COOP]ATION4.<#h#d.> ,!Y CAN BE ASSEMBL$ 9TO ,*RONICLES1 ! /UFF \T ( :I* ,FROISS>T CON/RUCT$ HIS L>GELY ANECDOTAL 0HI/ORIES10 BUT NOT ,HI/ORY 9 ! S5SE ,I AM DESCRIB+4 ,EV5TS MAY EV5 0OV]TAKE ,HI/ORY10 SO TO SPEAK1 & ULTIMATELY SUBM]GE IT 9 ! IRRATIONAL & ! EVIL4 ,BUT )\T AN 9CREAS+LY SELF-REFLEXIVE ,HI/ORY1 :I* PRES5T-DAY RELATIVISM ?REAT5S TO EXT+UI%1 WE W\LD NOT EV5 KN[ ?AT IT HAD HAPP5$4 

,IF WE D5Y ?AT HUMANITY HAS !SE POT5TIALITIES = FRE$OM1 SELF-CONSCI\SNESS1 & COOP]ATION -- CONCEIV$ AS ONE 5SEMBLE -- !N ALONG ) MANY SELF-/YL$ 0SOCIALI/S0 & EV5 =M] AN>*I/S LIKE ,DANIEL ,COHN-,B5DIT1 WE MAY WELL CONCLUDE ?AT 0CAPITALISM HAS WON10 AS ONE DISILLUSION$ FRI5D PUT IT2 ?AT 0HI/ORY0 HAS REA*$ ITS T]M9US 9 0B\RGEOIS DEMOCRACY0 7H[EV] T5TATIVE ?IS 0T]M9US0 MAY ACTUALLY BE72 & ?AT RA!R ?AN ATTEMPT TO 5L>GE ! REALM ( ! RATIONAL & ! FREE1 WE W\LD DO BE/ TO 5SCONCE \RSELVES 9 ! LAP ( CAPITALISM & MAKE IT AS COM=TABLE A RE/+ PLACE AS POSSIBLE = \RSELVES4 

,AS A M]E ADAPTATION TO :AT EXI/S1 TO ! 0:AT-IS10 SU* BEHAVIOR IS M]ELY ANIMALI/IC4 ,SOCIOBIOLOGI/S MAY EV5 REG>D IT AS G5ETICALLY UNAVOIDABLE4 ,BUT MY CRITICS NE$ NOT BE SOCIOBIOLOGI/S TO OBS]VE ?AT ! HI/ORICAL RECORD EXHIBITS A GREAT DEAL ( ADAPTATION & WORSE -- ( IRRATIONALITY & VIOL5CE1 ( PLEASURE 9 ! DE/RUCTION ( ONESELF & O!RS -- & TO QUE/ION MY ASS]TION ?AT ,HI/ORY IS ! UNFOLD+ ( HUMAN POT5TIALITIES = FRE$OM1 SELF-CONSCI\SNESS1 & COOP]ATION4 ,9DE$1 HUMANS HAVE 5GAG$ 9 DE/RUCTION & LUXURIAT$ 9 REAL & IMAG9>Y CRUELTIES T[>D ONE ANO!R ?AT HAVE PRODUC$ HELLS ON E>?4 ,!Y HAVE CREAT$ ! MON/ROSITIES ( ,HITL]'S DEA? CAMPS & ,/AL9'S GULAGS1 NOT TO SPEAK ( ! M\NTA9S ( SKULLS ?AT ,MONGOL & ,T>T> 9VAD]S ( ,EURASIA LEFT BEH9D 9 DI/ANT C5TURIES4 ,BUT ?IS RECORD H>DLY SUPPLANTS A DIALECTIC ( UNFOLD+ & MATUR+ ( POT5TIALITIES 9 SOCIAL DEVELOPM5T1 NOR IS ! CAPACITY ( HUMANS TO 9FLICT CRUELTIES ON EA* O!R EQUIVAL5T TO !IR POT5TIALITIES = FRE$OM1 SELF-CONSCI\SNESS1 & COOP]ATION4 

,H]E1 HUMAN CAPACITIES & HUMAN POT5TIALITIES MU/ BE DI/+UI%$ FROM EA* O!R4 ,! HUMAN CAPACITY = 9FLICT+ 9JURY BELONGS TO ! REALM ( NATURAL HI/ORY1 TO :AT HUMANS %>E ) ANIMALS 9 ! BIOLOGICAL WORLD OR 0FIR/ NATURE40 ,FIR/ NATURE IS ! DOMA9 ( SURVIVAL1 ( CORE FEEL+S ( PA9 & FE>1 & 9 ?AT S5SE \R BEHAVIOR REMA9S ANIMALI/IC1 :I* IS BY NO MEANS ALT]$ ) ! EM]G5CE ( SOCIAL OR 0SECOND NATURE40  
,UNKN[+ ANIMALS M]ELY TRY TO SURVIVE & ADAPT TO ONE DEGREE OR ANO!R TO ! WORLD 9 :I* !Y EXI/4 ,BY CONTRA/4 HUMANS >E ANIMALS ( A V]Y SPECIAL K9D2 !Y >E KN[+ ANIMALS1 !Y HAVE ! 9TELLIG5CE TO CALCULATE & TO DEVISE1 EV5 9 ! S]VICE ( NE$S ?AT !Y %>E ) NONHUMAN LIFE-=MS4 ,HUMAN REASON & KN[L$GE HAVE COMMONLY S]V$ AIMS ( SELF-PRES]VATION & SELF-MAXIMIZATION BY ! USE ( A =MAL LOGIC ( EXP$I5CY1 A LOGIC ?AT RUL]S HAVE DEPLOY$ = SOCIAL CONTROL & ! MANIPULATION ( SOCIETY4 ,!SE ME?ODS HAVE !IR ROOTS 9 ! ANIMAL REALM ( SIMPLE MEANS-5DS *OICES TO SURVIVE4 

,BUT HUMANS ALSO HAVE ! CAPACITY TO DELIB]ATELY 9FLICT PA9 & FE>1 TO USE !IR REASON = P]V]SE PASSIONS1 9 ORD] TO CO]CE O!RS OR M]ELY = CRUELTY = ITS [N SAKE4 ,ONLY KN[+ ANIMALS1 IRONICALLY CAPABLE ( 9TELLIG5T 9NOVATION1 ) !  
,S*AD5FREUDE TO 5JOY VIC>I\SLY ! TORM5T ( O!RS1 CAN 9FLICT FE> & PA9 9 A COLDLY CALCULAT$ OR EV5 PASSIONATE MANN]4 ,! ,F\CAULDIAN HYPO/ASIZATION ( ! BODY AS ! 0T]RA90 ( SADO-MASO*I/IC PLEASURE CAN BE EASILY ELABORAT$ 9TO A METAPHYSICAL JU/IFICATION ( VIOL5CE1 DEP5D+1 TO BE SURE1 ON :AT 0PLEASES0 A P>TICUL> P]PETRAT+ EGO4.<#h#e.> ,9 ?IS S5SE1 HUMAN BE+S >E TOO 9TELLIG5T NOT TO LIVE 9 A RATIONAL SOCIETY1  
NOT TO LIVE )9 9/ITUTIONS =M$ BY REASON & E?ICS ?AT RE/RICT !IR CAPACITY = IRRATIONALITY & VIOL5CE4.<#h#f.> ,9S(> AS !Y DO NOT1 HUMANS REMA9 DANG]\SLY WAYW>D & UN=M$ CREATURES ) 5ORM\S P[]S ( DE/RUCTION AS WELL AS CREATION4 

,HUMANITY MAY HAVE A 0POT5TIALITY = EVIL10 AS ONE COLLEAGUE HAS >GU$4 ,BUT ?AT OV] ! C\RSE ( SOCIAL DEVELOPM5T PEOPLE HAVE EXHIBIT$ AN EXPLOSIVE CAPACITY TO P]PETRATE ! MO/ APPALL+LY EVIL ACTS DOES NOT MEAN ?AT HUMAN POT5TIALITY IS CON/ITUT$ TO PRODUCE EVIL & A NIHILI/IC DE/RUCTIV5ESS4 ,! CAPACITY ( C]TA9 ,G]MANS TO E/ABLI% AN ,AUS*WITZ1 9DE$ ! MEANS & ! GOAL TO EXT]M9ATE A :OLE PEOPLE 9 A T]RIFY+LY 9DU/RIAL MANN]1 WAS 9H]5T NEI!R 9 ,G]MANY'S DEVELOPM5T NOR 9 ! DEVELOPM5T ( 9DU/RIAL RATIONALIZATION AS SU*4 ,H[EV] ANTI-,SEMITIC MANY ,G]MANS W]E OV] ! PREVI\S TWO C5TURIES4 ,EA/]N ,EUROPEANS W]E EQUALLY OR EV5 MORE SO2 IRONICALLY1 9DU/RIAL DEVELOPM5T 9 ,WE/]N ,EUROPE MAY HAVE DONE MORE TO A*IEVE ,JEWI% JURIDICAL EMANCIPATION 9 ! N9ETE5? & TW5TIE? C5TURIES ?AN ALL ! ,*RI/IAN PIETIES ?AT M>K$ PRE9DU/RIAL LIFE DUR+ ! ,MIDDLE ,AGES4 ,9DE$1 EVIL MAY HAVE A 0LOGIC0 -- ?AT IS TO SAY1 IT MAY BE EXPLA9$4 ,BUT MO/ G5]AL ACC\NTS EXPLA9 ! EVOLUTION ( EVIL 9 T]MS ( ADV5TITI\S EVIL ACTS & EV5TS1 IF ?IS CAN BE REG>D$ AS EXPLANATION AT ALL4 ,HITL]'S TAKEOV] ( ,G]MANY1 MADE POSSIBLE MORE BY ECONOMIC & POLITICAL DISLOCATIONS ?AN BY ! RACIAL VIEWS HE ESP\S$1 WAS PRECISELY A T]RIBLE EV5T ?AT CANNOT BE EXPLA9$ 9 T]MS ( ANY HUMAN POT5TIALITY = EVIL4 ,! HORROR ( ,AUS*WITZ LIES ALMO/ AS MU* 9 ITS 9EXPLICABILITY1 9 ITS APPALL+LY EXTRAORD9>Y *>ACT]1 AS 9 ! MON/ROSITIES ?AT ! ,NAZIS G5]ALLY 9FLICT$ ON ,EUROPEAN ,JEWS4 ,IT IS 9 ?IS S5SE ?AT ,AUS*WITZ REMA9S HAUNT+LY 9HUMAN & ?AT IT HAS TRAGICALLY PRODUC$ AN ABID+ MI/RU/ BY MANY PEOPLE ( ,CIVILIZATION & ,PROGRESS4 

,:5 EXPLANATIONS ( EVIL >E NOT M]ELY N>RATIONS ( EV5TS1 !Y EXPLA9 EVIL 9 T]MS ( 9/RUM5TAL OR CONV5TIONAL LOGIC4 ,! KN[+ ANIMAL1 ! HUMAN BE+1 :O IS VICI\SLY H>MFUL1 DOES NOT USE ! DEVELOPM5TAL REASON ( DIALECTIC1 ! REASON ( E?ICAL REFLECTION2 NOR A COH]5T1 REFLECTIVE REASON1 GR\ND$ 9 A KN[L$GE ( ,HI/ORY & ,CIVILIZATION2 NOR EV5 ! KN[+ ( AN AMBIGU\S1 >BITR>Y1 SELF-G5]AT$ 0IMAG9>Y10 OR A MORALITY ( P]SONAL TA/E & PLEASURE4 ,RA!R1 ! KN[+ ANIMAL USES 9/RUM5TAL CALCULATION TO S]VE EVIL 5DS1 9CLUD+ ! 9FLICTION ( PA94 

,! V]Y EXI/5CE ( IRRATIONALISM & EVIL 9 MANY SOCIAL PH5OM5A TODAY COMPELS US TO UPHOLD A CLE> /&>D ( ! 0RATIONAL0 & ! 0GOOD0 BY :I* TO JUDGE ! ONE AGA9/ ! O!R4 ,A PURELY P]SONALI/IC1 RELATIVI/IC1 OR FUNCTIONAL APPROA* WILL H>DLY DO = E/ABLI%+ E?ICAL /&>DS -- AS MANY CRITIQUES ( SUBJECTIVISM & SUBJECTIVE REASON HAVE %[N4 ,! P]SONAL TA/ES FROM :I* SUBJECTIVISM & RELATIVISM D]IVE !IR E?ICAL /&>DS >E AS TRANSI5T & FLEET+ AS MOODS4 ,NOR WILL A NOM9ALI/IC APPROA* SUFFICE3 TO R$UCE ,HI/ORY TO AN 9COMPREH5SIBLE ASSORTM5T ( PATT]NS OR TO 9EXPLICABLE PRODUCTS ( ! IMAG9ATION IS TO D5Y SOCIAL DEVELOPM5T ALL 9T]NAL E?ICAL COH]5CE4.<#h#g.> ,9DE$1 AN UNSORT$1 UNGRAD$1 UNM$IAT$ APPROA* R$UCES \R UND]/&+ ( ,HI/ORY TO A CRUDE ECLECTICISM RA!R ?AN AN 9SI<TFUL COH]5CE1 TO AN OV]EMPHASIS ON DIFF]5TIAE 7SO EASY TO DO1 !SE M9DLESS DAYS67 & ! IDIOSYNCRATIC RA!R ?AN ! MEAN+FUL & ! UNIV]SAL1 MORE (T5 ATTRACT+ ! COMMONS5SICAL 9DIVIDUAL TO ! PSY*OANALYTIC C\* ?AN HELP+ HIM OR H] RECON/ITUTE A LEFT LIB]T>IAN SOCIAL MOVEM5T4 

,IF \R VIEWS ( SOCIAL DEVELOPM5T >E TO BE /RUCTUR$ >\ND ! DIFF]5CES ?AT DI/+UI% ONE CULTURE OR P]IOD FROM ANO!R1 WE WILL IGNORE UND]LY+ T5D5CIES ?AT1 ) EXTRAORD9>Y UNIV]SALITY1 HAVE GREATLY EXP&$ ! MAT]IAL &4 CULTURAL CONDITIOI'IS = FRE$OM ON V>I\S LEVELS ( 9DIVIDUAL & SOCIAL SELF-UND]/&+4 ,BY GROSSLY EMPHASIZ+ DISJUNCTIONS1 SOCIAL ISOLATES1 UNIQUE CONFIGURATIONS1 & *ANCE EV5TS1 WE WILL R$UCE %>$1 CLE>LY COMMON SOCIAL DEVELOPM5TS TO AN >*IPELAGO ( CULTURES1 EA* ESS5TIALLY UNRELAT$ TO ?OSE ?AT PREC$$ & FOLL[$ IT4 ,YET MANY HI/ORICAL =CES HAVE EM]G$1 DECL9$1 & EM]G$ AGA91 DESPITE ! =MIDABLE OB/ACLES ?AT (T5 SEEM$ TO /& 9 !IR WAY4 ,ONE DOES NOT HAVE TO EXPLA9 0EV]Y?+0 9 0F\NDATIONAL0 T]MS TO RECOGNIZE ! EXI/5CE ( ABID+ PROBLEMS SU* AS SC>CITY1 EXPLOITATION1 CLASS RULE1 DOM9ATION1 & HI]>*Y ?AT HAVE AGONIZ$ OPPRESS$ PEOPLES = ?\S&S ( YE>S4.<#h#h.> ,IF CRITICS W]E CORRECT 9 DUBB+ DIALECTIC A MY/]Y = CLAIM+ TO 5COMPASS ALL -- PH5OM5A BY A FEW COSMIC =MULAS1 !N !Y W\LD BE OBLIG$ TO REG>D HUMAN SOCIAL DEVELOPM5T AS A MY/]Y IF !Y CLAIM$ ?AT IT LACKS ANY CONT9UITY & UNITY -- ?AT IS1 ! BASES = A PHILOSOPHY ( ,HI/ORY4 ,)\T A NOTION ( CONT9UITY 9 ,HI/ORY1 H[ CAN WE EXPLA9 ! EXTRAORD9>Y EFFLORESC5CE ( CULTURE & TE*NIQUE ?AT ,HOMO SAPI5S SAPI5S PRODUC$ DUR+ ! ,MAGDEL5IAN P]IOD1 SOME TW5TY OR ?IRTY ?\S& YE>S AGO8 ,H[ CAN WE EXPLA9 ! CLE>LY UNRELAT$ EVOLUTION ( COMPLEX AGRICULTURAL SY/EMS 9 AT LEA/ ?REE SEP>ATE P>TS ( ! WORLD -- ! ,MIDDLE ,EA/1 ,S\!A/ ,ASIA1 & ,MESOAM]ICA -- ?AT APP>5TLY HAD NO CONTACT ) ONE ANO!R & ?AT W]E BAS$ ON ! CULTIVATION ( V]Y DIFF]5T GRA9S1 NOTABLY :EAT1 RICE1 & MAIZE8 ,H[ CAN WE EXPLA9 ! GREAT GA!R+ ( SOCIAL =CES 9 :I*1 AFT] T5 ?\S& YE>S ( >IS+1 /AGNAT+1 & DISAPPE>+1 CITIES F9ALLY GA9$ CONTROL OV] ! AGR>IAN WORLD ?AT HAD IMP$$ !IR DEVELOPM5T1 YIELD+ ! 0URBAN REVOLUTION10 AS ,V4 ,GORDON ,*ILDE CALL$ IT1 9 DIFF]5T >EAS ( ! WORLD ?AT C\LD HAVE HAD NO CONTACT ) ONE ANO!R8 

,MESOAM]ICA & ,MESOPOTAMIA1 MO/ CLE>LY1 C\LD NOT HAVE HAD ANY CONTACT ) EA* O!R S9CE ,PALEOLI?IC TIMES1 YET !IR AGRICULTURE1 T[NS & CITIES1 LIT]ACY1 & MA!MATICS DEVELOP$ 9 WAYS ?AT >E REM>KABLY SIMIL>4 ,9ITIALLY ,PALEOLI?IC =AG]S1 BO? PRODUC$ HI<LY URBANIZ$ CULTURES BAS$ ON GRA9 CULTIVATION1 GLYPHS1 ACCURATE CAL5DRICS1 & V]Y ELABORATE POTT]Y1 TO CITE ONLY ! MO/ /RIK+ P>ALLELS4 ,! :EEL WAS KN[N TO ,MESOAM]ICANS1 AL?\< !Y DO NOT SEEM TO HAVE US$ IT1 PROBABLY = WANT ( APPROPRIATE DRAFT ANIMALS1 AS WELL AS ! Z]O1 DESPITE ! ABS5CE ( ANY COMMUNICATION ) ,EURASIAN SOCIETIES4 ,IT REQUIRES AN A/ONI%+ DISREG>D = ! UNITY ( ,CIVILIZATION ON ! P>T ( HI/ORICAL RELATIVI/S TO EMPHASIZE (T5 M9OR DIFF]5CES1 SU* AS CLO?+1 SOME DAILY CU/OMS1 & MY?S1 AT ! EXP5SE ( A REM>KABLE UNITY ( CONSCI\SNESS & SOCIAL DEVELOPM5T ?AT ! TWO CULTURES EXHIBIT$ ON TWO SEP>ATE CONT95TS AFT] MANY MILL5NIA ( ISOLATION FROM EA* O!R4 

,! UNITY ( SOCIAL EVOLUTION IS H>DLY VITIAT$ BY SU* NOM9ALI/IC P]PLEXITIES AS 0,:Y DIDN'T A ,L59 APPE> 9 ,G]MANY RA!R ?AN ,RUSSIA 9 #a#i#a#g-#a#i#a#h80 ,9 VIEW ( ! GREAT TIDAL MOVEM5TS ( ,HI/ORY1 IT MI<T BE MORE APPROPRIATE TO EXPLORE -- ,L59'S /RONG WILL & ,K]5SKY'S PSY*OLOGICAL FLACCIDITY ASIDE -- :E!R ! TRADITIONAL PROLET>IAT WAS EV] CAPABLE ( CREAT+ A 0WORK]S' /ATE10 9DE$1 :AT ?AT /ATI/ CONCEPT REALLY MEANT :5 WORK+ M5 & WOM5 W]E OBLIG$ TO DEVOTE ! GREAT] AM\NT ( !IR LIVES TO >DU\S LABOR AT ! EXP5SE ( !IR P>TICIPATION 9 MANAG+ SOCIAL AFFAIRS4 ,CAPRICE1 ACCID5T1 IRRATIONALITY1 & 0IMAG9>IES0 C]TA9LY 5T] 9TO SOCIAL DEVELOPM5T = BETT] OR WORSE4 ,BUT !Y LIT]ALLY HAVE NO MEAN+ IF !RE IS NO E?ICAL /&>D BY :I* TO DEF9E ! O!R ( :AT WE >E PRESUPPOS+ ) \R /&>D4.<#h#i.> ,SEEM+LY ACCID5TAL OR ECC5TRIC FACTORS MU/ BE RAIS$ TO ! LEVEL ( SOCIAL !ORY RA!R ?AN %RIVEL$ TO ! LEVEL ( NOM9ALI/IC M9UTIAE IF WE >E TO UND]/& !M4 

,DESPITE ! ACCID5TS1 FAILURES1 & O!R AB]RATIONS ?AT CAN ALT] ! C\RSE ( RATIONAL SOCIAL & 9DIVIDUAL DEVELOPM5T1 !RE IS A 0LEGACY ( FRE$OM10 AS ,I NAM$ A KEY *APT] 9 MY BOOK  
,! ,ECOLOGY ( ,FRE$OM1 A TRADITION ( 9CREAS+ APPROXIMATION ( HUMANITY T[>D FRE$OM & SELF-CONSCI\SNESS1 9 IDEAS & MORAL VALUES & ! OV]ALL T]RA9 ( SOCIAL LIFE4 ,9DE$1 ! EXI/5CE ( ,HI/ORY AS A COH]5T UNFOLD+ ( REAL EMANCIPATORY POT5TIALITIES IS CLE>LY V]IFI$ BY ! EXI/5CE ( ,CIVILIZATION1 ! POT5TIALITIES ( ,HI/ORY EMBODI$ & P>TIALLY ACTUALIZ$4 ,IT CONSI/S ( ! CONCRETE ADVANCES1 MAT]IAL AS WELL AS CULTURAL & PSY*OLOGICAL1 ?AT HUMANITY HAS MADE T[>D GREAT] DEGREES ( FRE$OM1 SELF-CONSCI\SNESS1 & COOP]ATION1 AS WELL AS RATIONALITY ITSELF4 ,TO HAVE TRANSC5D$ ! LIMITATIONS ( ! K9%IP TIE2 TO HAVE GONE BEYOND M]E =AG+ 9TO AGRICULTURE & 9DU/RY2 TO HAVE REPLAC$ ! P>O*IAL B& OR TRIBE ) ! 9CREAS+LY UNIV]SAL CITY2 TO HAVE DEVIS$ WRIT+1 PRODUC$ LIT]ATURE1 & DEVELOP$ RI*] =MS ( EXPRESSION ?AN NON-LIT]ATE PEOPLES C\LD HAVE EV] IMAG9$ -- ALL ( !SE & MANY MORE ADVANCES HAVE PROVID$ ! CONDITIONS = EVOLV+ 9CREAS+LY SOPHI/ICAT$ NOTIONS ( 9DIVIDUALITY & EXP&+ NOTIONS ( REASON ?AT REMA9 /UNN+ A*IEVEM5TS TO ?IS V]Y DAY4 

,IT IS DIALECTICAL REASON RA!R ?AN CONV5TIONAL REASON ?AT APPREH5DS ! DEVELOPM5T ( ?IS TRADITION4 ,9DE$1 DIALECTICAL LOGIC CAN H>DLY BE TREAT$ COEQUALLY ) ]UPTIONS ( BRUTALITY1 H[EV] CALCULAT$ !Y MAY BE1 S9CE 9 NO S5SE CAN EPISODIC CAPACITIES BE EQUAT$ ) AN UNFOLD+ POT5TIALITY4 ,A DIALECTICAL UND]/&+ ( ,HI/ORY APPREH5DS DIFF]5TIAE 9 QUALITY1 LOGICAL CONT9UITY1 & MATURATION 9 HI/ORICAL DEVELOPM5T1 AS DI/+UI%$ FROM ! K9ETICS ( M]E *ANGE OR A SIMPLE DIRECTIVITY ( 0SOCIAL DYNAMICS40 ,R>EFY+ PROJECTS = HUMAN LIB]ATION TO ! PO9T ?AT !Y >E L>GELY SUBJECTIVE 0IMAG9>IES10 )\T RELEVANCE TO ! REALITIES ( ! OV]ALL HUMAN EXP]I5CE & ! 9SI<TS ( SPECULATIVE REASON1 CAN CAUSE US TO OV]LOOK ! EXI/5TIAL IMPACT ( !SE DEVELOPM5TS & ! PROMISE !Y HOLD = EV]-GREAT] FRE$OM1 SELF-CONSCI\SNESS1 & COOP]ATION4 ,WE TAKE !SE A*IEVEM5TS ALL TOO EASILY = GRANT$ )\T ASK+ :AT K9D ( HUMAN BE+S WE W\LD BE IF !Y HAD NOT OCCURR$ AS A RESULT ( HI/ORICAL & CULTURAL MOVEM5TS MORE FUNDAM5TAL ?AN ECC5TRIC FACTORS4 ,!SE A*IEVEM5TS1 LET US ACKN[L$GE QUITE CLE>LY1 >E ,CIVILIZATION1 9DE$ A CIVILIZ+ CONT9UUM ?AT IS NONE!LESS 9FUS$ BY T]RIBLY B>B>IC1 9DE$ ANIMALI/IC FEATURES4 ,! CIVILIZ+ PROCESS HAS BE5 AMBIGU\S1 AS ,I HAVE EMPHASIZ$ 9 MY 0,AMBIGUITIES ( ,FRE$OM10.<#i.> BUT IT HAS NONE!LESS HI/ORICALLY TURN$ FOLK 9TO CITIZ5S1 :ILE ! PROCESS ( 5VIRONM5TAL ADAPTATION ?AT HUMANS %>E ) ANIMALS HAS BE5 TRANS=M$ 9TO A WIDE-RANG+1 /RICTLY HUMAN PROCESS ( 9NOVATION 9 DI/9CTLY ALT]ABLE 5VIRONM5TS4.<#i#a.> ,IT IS A PROCESS ?AT REA*$ ITS GREATE/ UNIV]SALITY1 PRIM>ILY 9 ,EUROPE1 H[EV] MU* O!R P>TS ( ! WORLD HAVE F$ 9TO ! EXP]I5CE4 ,?OSE ( US :O UND]/&ABLY FE> ?AT ! B>RI] BETWE5 ,CIVILIZATION & *AOS IS FRAGILE ACTUALLY PRESUPPOSE ! EXI/5CE ( ,CIVILIZATION1 NOT SIMPLY ( *AOS1 & ! EXI/5CE ( RATIONAL COH]5CE1 NOT SIMPLY ( IRRATIONAL 9COH]5CE4 

,MOREOV]1 ! DIALECTIC ( FRE$OM HAS EM]G$ AGA9 & AGA9 9 RECURR+ /RUGGLES = FRE$OM1 IDEOLOGICAL AS WELL AS PHYSICAL1 ?AT HAVE ABID+LY EXP&$ OV]ALL GOALS ( FRE$OM1 SELF-CONSCI\SNESS1 & COOP]ATION -- AS MU* 9 SOCIAL EVOLUTION AS A :OLE AS )9 SPECIFIC TEMPORAL P]IODS4 ,! PA/ IS REPLETE ) 9/ANCES 9 :I* MASSES ( PEOPLE1 H[EV] DISP>ATE !IR CULTURES1 HAVE TRI$ TO RESOLVE ! SAME MILL5NIA-OLD PROBLEMS 9 REM>KABLY SIMIL> WAYS & ) REM>KABLY SIMIL> VIEWS4 ,! FAM\S CRY = EQUALITY ?AT ! ,5GLI% PEASANTS RAIS$ 9 !IR #a*a REVOLT -- 0,:5 ,ADAM DELV$ & ,EVE SPAN1 :O WAS !N ! G5TLEMAN80 -- IS AS MEAN+FUL = CONTEMPOR>Y REVOLTS AS IT WAS SIX HUNDR$ YE>S AGO1 9 A WORLD ?AT PRESUMABLY HAD A F> DIFF]5T 0IMAG9>Y0 FROM \R [N4 ,! D5IAL ( A RATIONAL UNIV]SAL ,HI/ORY1 ( ,CIVILIZATION1 ( ,PROGRESS1 & ( SOCIAL CONT9UITY R5D]S ANY HI/ORICAL P]SPECTIVE IMPOSSIBLE & H5CE ANY REVOLUTION>Y PRAXIS MEAN+LESS EXCEPT AS A MATT] ( P]SONAL1 9DE$ (T5 V]Y P]SONAL1 TA/E4 

,EV5 AS SOCIAL MOVEM5TS ATTEMPT TO ATTA9 :AT !Y MI<T CALL A RATIONAL SOCIETY1 9 DEVELOP+ HUMANITY'S POT5TIALITIES = FRE$OM1 SELF-CONSCI\SNESS1 & COOP]ATION4 ,HI/ORY MAY CON/ITUTE ITSELF AS AN EV]-DEVELOP+ 0:OLE40 ,?IS :OLE1 ,I %\LD EMPHASIZE1 MU/ BE DI/+UI%$ FROM A T]M9AL ,HEGELIAN 0,ABSOLUTE0 JU/ AS DEM&S = COH]5CE 9 A BODY ( VIEWS MU/ BE DI/+UI%$ FROM ! WOR%IP ( SU* AN 0,ABSOLUTE0 & JU/ AS ! CAPACITY ( SPECULATIVE REASON TO $UCE 9 A DIALECTICALLY LOGICAL MANN] ! V]Y REAL POT5TIALITIES ( HUMANITY = FRE$OM IS NEI!R TELEOLOGICAL NOR ABSOLUTI/1 MU* LESS 0TOTALIT>IAN40.<#i#b.> ,!RE IS NO?+ TELEOLOGICAL1 MY/ICAL1 OR ABSOLUTI/ AB\T ,HI/ORY4 0,:OL5ESS0 IS NO TELEOLOGICAL REF]5T1 :OSE EVOLV+ COMPON5TS >E M]ELY P>TS ( A PR$ET]M9$ 0,ABSOLUTE40 ,NEI!R ! RATIONAL UNFOLD+ ( HUMAN POT5TIALITIES NOR !IR ACTUALIZATION 9 AN ET]NALLY GIV5 0,TOTALITY0 IS PR$E/9$4 

,NOR IS ! WORK+ \T ( \R POT5TIALITIES SOME VAGUE SORT ( SUPRAHUMAN ACTIVITY4 ,HUMAN BE+S >E NOT ! PASSIVE TOOLS ( A ,SPIRIT 7,GEI/7 ?AT WORKS \T ITS COMPLETE & F9AL SELF-REALIZATION & SELF-CONSCI\SNESS4 ,RA!R1 !Y >E ACTIVE AG5TS1 ! AU!NTIC 0CON/ITU5TS0 ( ,HI/ORY1 :O MAY OR MAY NOT ELABORATE !IR POT5TIALITIES 9 SOCIAL EVOLUTION4 ,ABORT$ ! REVOLUTION>Y TRADITION HAS BE5 H]E1 & DISCONT9U\S IT HAS BE5 !RE -- & = ALL WE KN[ IT MAY ULTIMATELY BE ABORT$ = HUMANITY AS SU*4 ,:E!R AN 0ULTIMATE0 RATIONAL SOCIETY WILL EV5 EXI/ AS A LIB]ATORY 05D ( HI/ORY0 IS BEYOND ANYONE'S PR$ICTIVE P[]S4 ,WE CANNOT SAY :AT ! SCOPE ( A RATIONAL1 FREE1 & COOP]ATIVE SOCIETY W\LD BE1 LET ALONE PRESUME TO CLAIM KN[L$GE ( ITS 0LIMITS40 ,9DE$1 9S(> AS ! HI/ORICAL PROCESS EFFECT$ BY LIV+ HUMAN AG5TS IS LIKELY TO EXP& \R NOTIONS ( ! RATIONAL1 ! DEMOCRATIC1 ! FREE1 & ! COOP]ATIVE1 IT IS UNDESIRABLE TO DOGMATICALLY ASS]T ?AT !Y HAVE ANY F9ALITY4 ,HI/ORY =MS ITS [N IDEAL ( !SE NOTIONS AT V>I\S TIMES1 :I* 9 TURN HAVE BE5 EXP&$ & 5RI*$4 

,EV]Y SOCIETY HAS ! POSSIBILITY ( ATTA9+ A REM>KABLE DEGREE ( RATIONALITY1 GIV5 ! MAT]IAL1 CULTURAL1 & 9TELLECTUAL CONDITIONS ?AT ALL[ = IT OR1 AT LEA/1 >E AVAILABLE TO IT4 ,)9 ! LIMITS ( A SLAVE1 PATRI>*AL1 W>RIOR1 & URBAN WORLD1 = EXAMPLE1 ! ANCI5T ,A!NIAN POLIS FUNCTION$ MORE RATIONALLY ?AN ,SP>TA OR O!R ,GREEK POLEIS4 ,IT IS PRECISELY ! TASK ( SPECULATIVE REASON TO $UCE :AT %\LD EXI/ AT ANY GIV5 P]IOD1 BAS$ ON ! V]Y REAL POT5TIALITIES = ! EXPANSION ( !SE NOTIONS4 ,TO CONCLUDE ?AT 0! 5D ( HI/ORY0 HAS BE5 ATTA9$ 9 LIB]AL CAPITALISM W\LD BE TO JETTISON ! HI/ORICAL LEGACY ( !SE MAGNIFIC5T EF=TS TO CREATE A FREE SOCIETY -- EF=TS ?AT CLAIM$ C\NTLESS LIVES 9 ! GREAT REVOLUTIONS ( ! PA/4 ,= MY P>T1 ,I & PROBABLY MANY REVOLUTION>IES TODAY WANT NO PLACE 9 SU* AN 05D ( HI/ORY02 NOR DO ,I WANT TO =GET ! GREAT EMANCIPATORY MOVEM5TS = POPUL> FRE$OM 9 ALL !IR MANY =MS ?AT OCCURR$ OV] ! AGES4 

,HI/ORY1 ,CIVILIZATION1 & ,PROGRESS >E ! DIALECTICALLY RATIONAL SOCIAL DISP5SATIONS ?AT =M1 EV5 ) ALL ! IMP$IM5TS !Y FACE1 A DIALECTICAL LEGACY ( FRE$OM4 ,! EXI/5CE ( ?IS LEGACY ( FRE$OM 9 NO WAY D5IES ! EXI/5CE ( A 0LEGACY ( DOM9ATION10.<#i#c.> :I* REMA9S )9 ! REALM ( ! IRRATIONAL4 ,9DE$1 !SE 0LEGACIES0 9T]TW9E ) & CONDITION EA* O!R4 ,HUMAN IDEALS1 /RUGGLES1 & A*IEVEM5TS ( V>I\S APPROXIMATIONS TO FRE$OM CANNOT BE SEP>AT$ FROM ! CRUELTIES & B>B>ITIES ?AT HAVE M>K$ SOCIAL DEVELOPM5T OV] ! C5TURIES1 (T5 GIV+ RISE TO NEW SOCIAL CONFIGURATIONS :OSE DEVELOPM5T IS HI<LY UNPR$ICTABLE4 ,BUT A CRUCIAL HI/ORICAL PROBLEMATIC REMA9S1 TO ! EXT5T ?AT REASON CAN =ESEE A GIV5 DEVELOPM5T3 WILL IT BE FRE$OM OR DOM9ATION ?AT IS N\RI%$8 ,I SUBMIT ?AT ,PROGRESS IS ! ADVANCE -- & AS EV]YONE PRESUMABLY HOPES1 ! ASC5DANCY -- ( FRE$OM OV] DOM9ATION1 :I* CLE>LY CANNOT BE CONCEPTUALLY FROZ5 9 AN AHI/ORICAL ET]NITY1 GIV5 ! GR[+ AW>5ESS ( BO? HOPES & OPPRESSIONS ?AT HAVE COME TO LI<T 9 ONLY A FEW REC5T G5]ATIONS4 ,PROGRESS ALSO APPE>S 9 ! OV]ALL IMPROVEM5T1 H[EV] AMBIGU\S1 ( HUMANITY'S MAT]IAL CONDITIONS ( LIFE1 ! EM]G5CE ( A RATIONAL E?ICS1 ) 5LI<T5$ /&>DS ( S5SIBILITY & CONDUCT1 \T ( UNREFLEXIVE CU/OM & !I/IC MORALITY1 & SOCIAL 9/ITUTIONS ?AT FO/] CONT9UAL SELF-DEVELOPM5T & COOP]ATION4 ,H[EV] LACK+ \R E?ICAL CLAIMS 9 RELATION TO SOCIAL PRACTICE MAY BE1 GIV5 ALL ! B>B>ITIES ( \R TIME1 WE N[ SUBJECT BRUTALITY TO MU* H>%] JUDGM5TS ?AN WAS DONE 9 E>LI] TIMES4.<#i#d.> 

,IT IS DIFFICULT TO CONCEIVE ( A RATIONAL E?ICS -- AS DI/+UI%$ FROM UN?9K+ CU/OM & M]E COMM&M5TS ( MORALITY1 LIKE ! ,DECALOGUE -- )\T REASON$ CRIT]IA ( GOOD & EVIL BAS$ ON REAL POT5TIALITIES = FRE$OM ?AT SPECULATIVE REASON CAN $UCE BEYOND A GIV5 REALITY4 ,! 0SUFFICI5T CONDITIONS0 = AN E?ICS MU/ BE EXPLICAT$ RATIONALLY1 NOT SIMPLY AFFIRM$ 9 PUBLIC OP9ION POLLS1 PLEBISCITES1 OR AN 09T]SUBJECTIVE0 CONS5SUS ?AT FAILS TO CL>IFY :AT CON/ITUTES 0SUBJECTIVITY0 & 0AUTONOMY0 ,ADMITT$LY1 ?IS IS NOT EASY TO DO 9 A WORLD ?AT CELEBRATES VAPOR\S WORDS1 BUT IT IS NECESS>Y TO DISCOV] TRU? RA!R ?AN WORK ) NOTIONS ?AT /EM FROM ! CONV5TIONAL 0WISDOM0 ( \R TIMES4 ,AS ,HEGEL 9SI/$1 EV5 COMMONPLACE MORAL MAXIMS LIKE 0,LOVE ?Y NEI<BOR AS ?YSELF0 RAISE MANY PROBLEMS1 SU* AS :AT WE REALLY MEAN BY 0LOVE40 

,I,I,I 

  

,I BELIEVE ?AT WE LACK AN ADEQUATE ,LEFT CRITIQUE ( ! !ORETICAL PROBLEMS RAIS$ BY CLASSICAL ,HEGELIANISM1 ,M>XISM1 AN>*ISM1 SOCIAL DEMOCRACY1 & LIB]ALISM1 ) ! RESULT ?AT !RE >E S]I\S LACUNAE 9 ! CRITICAL EXPLORATION ( !SE 0ISMS40 ,A COMPREH5SIVE CRITICAL EXPLORATION W\LD REQUIRE AN ANALYSIS NOT ONLY ( ! FAIL+S ( ! SUBJECT MATT] UND] DISCUSSION1 BUT ( ! HIDD5 PRESUPPOSITIONS ( ! CRITIC4 ,! CRITIC W\LD BE OBLIG$ TO CLE>LY DEF9E :AT HE OR %E MEANS BY ! CONCEPTS HE OR %E IS US+4 ,?IS SELF-REFLEXIVE OBLIGATION CANNOT BE BYPASS$ BY SUB/ITUT+ UND]!ORIZ$ T]MS LIKE 0CREATIVITY10 0FRE$OM10 & 0AUTONOMY0 = 9-DEP? ANALYSIS4 ,! COMPLEXITY ( !SE IDEAS1 !IR SWEEP1 ! TRADITIONS ?AT UND]P9 & DIVIDE !M AGA9/ ONE ANO!R1 & ! EASE ) :I* !Y CAN BE ABUS$ &1 9 ! ACADEMIC MILIEUX 9 :I* !Y >E B&I$ >\ND1 DETA*$ FROM ! LIV$ MAT]IAL & SOCIAL CONDITIONS ( LIFE -- ALL REQUIRE CONSID]ABLE EXPLORATION4 

,AMONG ! IMPORTANT CONCEPTS & RELATION%IPS ?AT REQUIRE ELUCIDATION IS ! T5D5CY TO R$UCE OBJECTIVITY TO ! NATURAL LAW0 ( PHYSICAL SCI5CE4.<#i#e.> ,9 ! CONV5TIONAL SCI5TIFIC S5SE ( ! T]M1 0NATURAL LAW0 PREORDA9S ! K9ETIC FUTURE ( OBJECTS COLLID+ ) EA* O!R4 ,IT MAY EV5 PREORDA9 :AT AN 9DIVIDUAL PLANT WILL BECOME UND] ! NORMAL CONDITIONS REQUIR$ = ITS GR[?4 ,OBJECTIVITY1 H[EV]1 HAS A MULTIPLICITY ( MEAN+S & DOES NOT NECESS>ILY CORRESPOND TO ! 0LAWS0 ?AT ! NATURAL SCI5CES SEEK TO =MULATE4 ,IT 9VOLVES NOT ONLY ! MAT]IALITY ( ! WORLD 9 A BROAD S5SE BUT ALSO ITS POT5TIALITIES1 AS V]Y REAL BUT AS YET UNREALIZ$ =M /RUCTUR$ TO UND]GO ELABORATION4 ,! EVOLUTION ( KEY LIFE-=MS T[>D EV]-GREAT] SUBJECTIVITY1 *OICE1 & BEHAVIORAL FLEXIBILITY -- REAL POT5TIALITIES & !IR DEGREES ( ACTUALIZATION -- & T[>D HUMAN 9TELLECTUALITY1 LANGUAGE1 & SOCIAL 9/ITUTIONALIZATION1 IS TRANSP>5TLY CLE>4 ,AN OBJECTIVE POT5TIALITY IS ! IMPLICIT ?AT MAY OR MAY NOT BE ACTUALIZ$1 DEP5D+ UPON ! CONDITIONS 9 :I* IT EM]GES4 ,AMONG HUMANS1 ! ACTUALIZATION ( POT5TIALITY IS NOT NECESS>ILY RE/RICT$ BY ANY?+ BESIDES AG+ & DEA?1 AL?\< IT IS NOT FREE TO UNFOLD UNCONDITIONALLY4 ,M9IMALLY1 ! ACTUALIZATION ( HUMANITY'S POT5TIALITIES CONSI/S 9 ITS ATTA9M5T ( A RATIONAL SOCIETY4 ,SU* A SOCIETY1 ( C\RSE1 W\LD NOT APPE> AB NOVO4 ,BY ITS V]Y NATURE IT W\LD REQUIRE DEVELOPM5T1 MATURATION1 OR1 MORE PRECISELY1 A ,HI/ORY -- A RATIONAL DEVELOPM5T ?AT MAY BE FULFILL$ BY ! V]Y FACT ?AT ! SOCIETY IS POT5TIALLY CON/ITUT$ TO BE RATIONAL4 ,IF ! SELF-REALIZATION ( LIFE 9 ! NONHUMAN WORLD IS SURVIVAL OR /ABILITY1 ! SELF-REALIZATION ( HUMANITY IS ! DEGREE ( FRE$OM1 SELF-CONSCI\SNESS1 & COOP]ATION1 AS WELL AS RATIONALITY 9 SOCIETY4 ,R$UC$ M]ELY OR PRIM>ILY TO SCI5TIFIC 0NATURAL LAW10 OBJECTIVITY IS HI<LY ATT5UAT$4 ,IT DOES NOT 5COMPASS POT5TIALITY & ! WORK+ ( ! DIALECTIC 9 EXI/5TIAL REALITY1 LET ALONE ITS PRES5CE AS A /&>D = GAUG+ REALITY AGA9/ ACTUALITY 9 ! UNFOLD+ ( HUMAN PH5OM5A4.<#i#f.> 

,M>X'S CLAIM TO HAVE UNE>!D 0! NATURAL LAWS ( CAPITALI/ PRODUCTION0 WAS ABSURD1 BUT TO ADVANCE RELATIVISM AS AN ALT]NATIVE TO IT IS EQUALLY ABSURD4 ,A Y\NG]1 MORE FLEXIBLE ,M>X 9SI<TFULLY CLAIM$1 0,IT IS NOT 5\< ?AT ?\<T %\LD SEEK ITS ACTUALIZATION2 ACTUALITY ITSELF MU/ /RIVE T[>D ?\<T40.<#i#g.> ,?\<T1 QUA DIALECTICAL REASON1 BECOMES TRANS=MATIVE 9 %AP+ ! PRES5T & ! FUTURE 9S(> AS HUMAN RATIONAL PRAXIS OBJECTIVELY ACTUALIZES ! IMPLICIT4 ,TODAY1 :5 SUBJECTIVISM REIGNS SUPREME & ! COMMON RESPONSE EV5 TO SIGNIFICANT EV5TS IS TO ]ASE ANY MEAN+ & COH]5CE FROM ,HI/ORY1 ,CIVILIZATION1 & ,PROGRESS1 !RE IS A DESP]ATE NE$ = AN OBJECTIVITY ?AT IS IMM5SELY BROAD] ?AN NATURAL SCI5CE & 0NATURAL LAWS10 ON ! ONE H&1 & AN EMPHASIS ON ! IDIOSYNCRATIC1 0IMAG9>Y10 & ADV5TITI\S1 ON ! O!R4 ,IF VULG> ,M>XI/S US$ 0SCI5CE0 TO TURN ! E?ICAL CLAIM ?AT 0SOCIALISM IS NECESS>Y0 9TO ! TELEOLOGICAL ASS]TION ?AT 0SOCIALISM IS 9EVITABLE10 TODAY'S 0PO/-,M>XI/0 CRITICS REPEAT A SIMIL> VULG>ITY BY MORDANTLY CELEBRAT+ 9COH]5CE 9 ! REALM ( SOCIAL !ORY4 ,! CLAIM ( SOCIALISM'S 9EVITABILITY WAS CRUDELY DET]M9I/IC2 ! CLAIM ( ITS NECESSITY WAS A RATIONAL & E?ICAL EXPLICATION4 

0,9T]SUBJECTIVITY0 & 09T]SUBJECTIVE RELATIONS10 = !IR P>T1 CANNOT EXPLA9 9 ANY MEAN+FUL WAY H[ HUMANITY IS ROOT$ 9 BIOLOGICAL EVOLUTION1 OR :AT WE BROADLY CALL 0,NATURE10 LEA/ ( ALL BY DEFTLY US+ ! PHRASE 0SOCIAL CON/RUCTION0 TO BYPASS ! V]Y OBJECTIVE EVOLUTION>Y REALITY ?AT 0,NATURE0 CONNOTES4 ,JU/ AS A SUBJECTIVIZ$ NEXUS ( 09T]SUBJECTIVE RELATIONS0 DISSOLVES ! OBJECTIVITY ( SOCIAL PH5OM5A1 SO A SUBJECTIVIZ$ NEXUS ( 0SOCIAL CON/RUCTION0 DISSOLVES ! OBJECTIVITY ( NATURAL EVOLUTION1 AS IF NEI!R SOCIAL PH5OM5A NOR NATURAL EVOLUTION HAD ANY ACTUALITY1 ASIDE FROM BE+ A PAIR ( SIMPLI/IC EPI/EMOLOGICAL CATEGORIES4 ,H]E ,KANT REAPPE>S ) A V5GEANCE1 ) ! POSSIBLE DIFF]5CE ?AT EV5 HIS N\M5AL OR UNKN[ABLE EXT]NAL REALITY HAS DISAPPE>$4 

,DIALECTIC1 IT %\LD BE EMPHASIZ$1 CANNOT BE R$UC$ M]ELY TO A 0ME?OD0 ON ! GR\NDS ?AT SU* DISP>ATE DIALECTICAL ?9K]S AS ,>I/OTLE1 ,JOHN ,SCOTUS ,]IUG5A1 ,HEGEL1 & ,M>X COMPREH5D$ DIFF]5T REALMS ( KN[L$GE & REALITY 9 DIFF]5T WAYS & P]IODS4 ,HUMANITY'S KN[L$GE ( DIALECTIC  
HAS ITSELF BE5 A PROCESS1 & DIALECTICAL ?9K+ HAS ITSELF UND]GONE DEVELOPM5T -- A CUMULATIVE DEVELOPM5T1 NOT A SO-CALL$ 0P>ADIGM %IFT0 -- JU/ AS SCI5TI/S HAVE BE5 OBLIG$ 9 ! GIVE-&-TAKE OR SUBLATION ( IDEAS TO RESOLVE ONE-SID$ 9SI<TS 9TO ! NATURE ( REALITY & ITS BECOM+4.<#i#h.> 

,AL?\< ! BROAD] OBJECTIVITY ?AT DIALECTICAL REASON+ $UCES DOES NOT DICTATE ?AT REASON WILL PREVAIL1 IT IMPLIES ?AT IT  
%\LD PREVAIL1 !REBY MELD+ E?ICS ) HUMAN ACTIVITY & CREAT+ ! BASIS = A TRULY OBJECTIVE E?ICAL SOCIALISM OR AN>*ISM4 ,AS SU*1 DIALECTIC IS NOT SIMPLY AN ONTOLOGICAL CAUSALITY2  
IT IS ALSO AN E?ICS -- AN ASPECT ( DIALECTICAL PHILOSOPHY ?AT HAS NOT BE5 SUFFICI5TLY EMPHASIZ$4 ,DIALECTICAL REASON P]MITS AN E?ICS 9 HI/ORY BY UPHOLD+ ! RATIONAL 9FLU5CE ( 0:AT-%\LD-BE0 AS AGA9/ 0:AT-IS40 ,HI/ORY1 QUA ! DIALECTICALLY RATIONAL1 EX]CISES A PRESS+ CLAIM1 SO TO SPEAK1 ON \R CANONS ( BEHAVIOR & \R 9T]PRETATION ( EV5TS4 ,)\T ?IS LIB]ATORY LEGACY & A HUMAN PRACTICE ?AT FO/]S ITS UNFOLD+1 WE HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO BASIS = EV5 JUDG+ :AT IS CREATIVE OR /AGNANT1 RATIONAL OR IRRATIONAL1 OR GOOD OR EVIL 9 ANY CON/ELLATION ( CULTURAL PH5OM5A O!R ?AN P]SONAL PREF]5CE4 ,UNLIKE SCI5CE'S LIMIT$ OBJECTIVITY1 DIALECTICAL NATURALISM'S OBJECTIVITY IS E?ICAL BY ITS V]Y NATURE1 BY VIRTUE ( ! K9D ( SOCIETY IT ID5TIFIES AS RATIONAL1 A SOCIETY ?AT IS ! ACTUALIZATION ( HUMANITY'S POT5TIALITIES4.<#i#i.> ,IT SUBLATES SCI5CE'S N>R[ OBJECTIVITY TO ADVANCE1 BY RATIONAL 9F]5CES DRAWN FROM ! OBJECTIVE NATURE ( HUMAN POT5TIALITIES1 A SOCIETY ?AT 9CREAS+LY ACTUALIZES ?OSE POT5TIALITIES4 ,& IT DOES SO ON ! BASIS ( :AT  
%\LD BE AS ! FULFILLM5T ( ! RATIONAL1 ?AT IS TO SAY1 ON RATIONAL KN[L$GE ( ! GOOD & A CONCEPTUAL CONGRU5CE BETWE5 ! GOOD & ! SOCIALLY RATIONAL ?AT CAN BE EMBODI$ 9 FREE 9/ITUTIONS4 

,IT IS NOT ?AT SOCIAL DEVELOPM5T IS DIALECTICAL BECAUSE IT IS  
NECESS>ILY RATIONAL1 AS A TRADITIONAL ,HEGELIAN MI<T SUPPOSE1 BUT RA!R ?AT :]E SOCIAL DEVELOPM5T IS RATIONAL1 IT IS DIALECTICAL OR HI/ORICAL4 ,WE AV]1 9 %ORT1 ?AT WE CAN $UCE FROM A UNIQUELY HUMAN POT5TIALITY A RATIONAL DEVELOPM5T ?AT ADVANCES HUMAN SELF-REALIZATION 9 A FREE1 SELF-CONSCI\S1 & COOP]ATIVE SOCIETY4 ,SPECULATIVE REASON H]E /AKES \T A CLAIM TO DISC]N ! RATIONAL DEVELOPM5T 7BY NO MEANS IMMUNE TO IRRATIONAL VICISSITUDES7 ( SOCIETY AS IT %\LD BE -- GIV5 HUMAN POT5TIALITY1 AS WE KN[ IT 9 REAL LIFE1 TO EVOLVE FROM A TRIBAL FOLK TO A DEMOCRATIC CITIZ5RY1 FROM MY?OPOESIS TO REASON1 FROM ! SUBMISSION ( P]SONHOOD 9 A FOLKLIKE COLLECTIVITY TO 9DIVIDUALITY 9 A RATIONAL COMMUNITY -- ALL AS RATIONAL 5DS AS WELL AS EXI/5TIAL REALITIES4 ,SPECULATIVE REASON %\LD ALWAYS BE CALL$ UPON TO UND]/& & EXPLA9 NOT ONLY :AT HAS HAPP5$ ) RESPECT TO !SE PROBLEMATICS BUT :Y !Y RECUR 9 V>Y+ DEGREES & H[ !Y CAN BE RESOLV$4 

,9 A V]Y REAL S5SE1 ! PA/ FIFTE5 OR MORE YE>S HAVA BE5 REM>KABLY AHI/ORICAL1 ALBEIT HI<LY EV5TFUL1 9S(> AS !Y HAVE NOT BE5 M>K$ BY ANY LA/+ ADVANCE T[>D A RATIONAL SOCIETY4 ,9DE$1 IF ANY?+1 !Y W\LD SEEM TO BE TILT+ T[>D A REGRESSION1 IDEOLOGICALLY & /RUCTURALLY1 TO B>B>ISM1 DESPITE SPECTACUL> ADVANCES 9 TE*NOLOGY & SCI5CE1 :OSE \TCOME WE CANNOT =ESEE4 ,!RE CANNOT BE A DIALECTIC1 H[EV]1 ?AT DEALS 0DIALECTICALLY0 ) ! IRRATIONAL1 ) REGRESSION 9TO B>B>ISM -- ?AT IS TO SAY1 A /RICTLY NEGATIVE DIALECTICS4 ,BO? ,ADORNO'S BOOK ( ?AT NAME & ,HORKHEIM] & ,ADORNO'S  
,! ,DIALECTIC ( ,5LI<T5M5T1 :I* TRAC$ ! 0DIALECTICAL0 DESC5T ( REASON 79 ,HEGEL'S S5SE7 9TO 9/RUM5TALISM1 W]E LITTLE MORE ?AN MIX$ F>RAGOES ( CONVOLUT$ NEO-,NIETZS*EAN V]BIAGE1 (T5 BRILLIANT1 COLORFUL1 & EXCIT+LY 9=MATIVE1 BUT (T5 CONFUS$1 RA!R DEHUMANIZ+ &1 TO SPEAK BLUNTLY1 IRRATIONAL4.<#a.> ,A 0DIALECTIC0 ?AT LACKS ANY SPIRIT ( TRANSC5D5CE 7,AUFHEBUNG7 & D5IES ! 0NEGATION ( ! NEGATION0 IS SPURI\S AT ITS V]Y CORE4.<#a#a.> ,ONE ( ! E>LIE/ ATTEMPTS TO 0DIALECTICALLY0 DEAL ) SOCIAL REGRESSION WAS ! LITTLE-KN[N 0RETROGRESSION !SIS10 UND]TAK5 BY ,JOSEF ,WEB]1 ! ,G]MAN ,TROTSKYI/ !ORI/ :O WAS ! EXILE LEAD] ( ! ,9T]NATIONALE ,KOMMUNI/5 ,DEUTS*L&S 7,I,K,D74 ,WEB] AU?OR$ ! ,I,K,D'S PROGRAM1 0,CAPITALI/ ,B>B>ISM OR ,SOCIALISM10 PUBLI%$ 9 ,NOVEMB] #aidd 9 ,MAX ,S*A*TMAN'S ,NEW ,9T]NATIONAL DUR+ ! BITT]E/ DAYS ( ! ,SECOND ,WORLD ,W> & POS$ ! QUE/ION ?AT MANY ?9K+ REVOLUTION>IES ( ?AT DI/ANT ]A FAC$3 :AT =MS W\LD CAPITALISM TAKE IF ! PROLET>IAT FAIL$ TO MAKE A SOCIALI/ REVOLUTION AFT] ! ,SECOND ,WORLD ,W>8.<#a#b.> ,AS ! TITLE ( ! ,I,K,D DOCUM5T SUGGE/S1 NOT ALL ,M>XI/S1 P]HAPS FEW] ?AN WE MAY ?9K1 REG>D$ SOCIALISM AS 09EVITABLE0 OR ?\<T ?AT !RE W\LD NECESS>ILY BE A SOCIALI/ 05D TO HI/ORY0 AFT] ! W>4 ,9DE$1 MANY :OM ,I KNEW AS A DISSID5T ,TROTSKYI/ FIFTY YE>S AGO W]E CONV9C$ ?AT B>B>ISM WAS AS S]I\S A DANG] = ! FUTURE AS SOCIALISM WAS ITS GREATE/ HOPE4.<#a#c.> ,! PROSPECT ( B>B>ISM ?AT WE FACE TODAY MAY DIFF] 9 =M FROM :AT REVOLUTION>Y ,M>XI/S FAC$ TWO G5]ATIONS AGO1 BUT IT DOES NOT DIFF] 9 K9D4 ,! FUTURE ( ,CIVILIZATION IS /ILL V]Y MU* 9 ! BALANCE1 & ! V]Y MEMORY ( ALT]NATIVE EMANCIPATORY VISIONS TO CAPITALISM >E BECOM+ DIMM] ) EA* G5]ATION4 

,AL?\< ! 0IMAG9>Y0 & SUBJECTIVE >E C]TA9LY ELEM5TS 9 SOCIAL DEVELOPM5T1 CONTEMPOR>Y CAPITALISM IS /EADILY DISSOLV+ ! UNIQU5ESS ( 0IMAG9>IES0 ( E>LI]1 MORE DIV]SE CULTURES4 ,9DE$1 CAPITALISM IS 9CREAS+LY LEVEL+ & HOMOG5IZ+ SOCIETY1 CULTURALLY & ECONOMICALLY1 TO A PO9T ?AT ! SAME COMMODITIES1 9DU/RIAL TE*NIQUES1 SOCIAL 9/ITUTIONS1 VALUES1 EV5 DESIRES1 >E BE+ 0UNIV]SALIZ$0 TO AN UNPREC$5T$ DEGREE 9 HUMANITY'S LONG C>E]4 ,AT A TIME :5 ! MASS-MANUFACTUR$ COMMODITY HAS BECOME A FETI% MORE POT5T ?AN ANY >*AIC FETI% ?AT E>LY CULTURES 0IMAG9$02 :5 ! GLOSSY TIE & ?REE-PIECE SUIT >E REPLAC+ TRADITIONAL S>ONGS1 CLOAKS1 & %\LD] CAPES2 :5 ! WORD BUS9ESS REQUIRES FEW] & FEW] TRANSLATIONS 9 ! WORLD'S DIV]SE VOCABUL>IES2 & :5 ,5GLI% HAS BECOME ! L+UA FRANCA NOT ONLY ( SO-CALL$ 0$UCAT$ CLASSES0 BUT PEOPLE 9 ORD9>Y WALKS ( LIFE 7NE$ ,I ADD MORE TO ?IS IMM5SELY LONG LI/871 IT IS ODD ?AT ! IDIOSYNCRATIC 9 V>I\S CULTURAL CON/ELLATIONS IS N[ ACQUIR+ A SIGNIFICANCE 9 ACADEMIC DISC\RSE ?AT IT R>ELY ATTA9$ 9 ! PA/4 ,?IS DISC\RSE MAY BE A WAY ( SIDE-/EPP+ A MU*-NE$$ EXAM9ATION ( ! *ALL5GES POS$ BY REC5T CAPITALI/ DEVELOPM5TS1 & 9/EAD MY/IFY+ !M 9 CONVOLUT$ DISCUSSIONS ?AT FILL D5SE ACADEMIC TOMES &1 P>TICUL>LY 9 ! CASE ( ,F\CAULT & PO/MOD]NISM1 SATISFY+ ! 0IMAG9>IES0 ( SELF-C5T]$ 9DIVIDUALS1 = :OM ! SPRAY PA9T CAN HAS BECOME ! WEAPON ( *OICE ) :I* TO ASSAULT ! CAPITALI/ SY/EM & A HAIR/YLE ! BE/ WAY TO AFFRONT ! CONV5TIONAL PETTY B\RGEOISIE4 

,/AT$ BLUNTLY3 NO REVOLUTION>Y MOVEM5T CAN GR[ IF ITS !ORI/S ESS5TIALLY D5Y ,BLO*'S 0PR9CIPLE ( HOPE10 :I* ! MOVEM5T SO NE$S = AN 9SPIR$ BELIEF 9 ! FUTURE2 IF IT D5IES UNIV]SAL ,HI/ORY ?AT AFFIRMS SWEEP+ COMMON PROBLEMS ?AT HAVE BESIEG$ HUMANITY OV] ! AGES2 IF IT D5IES ! %>$ 9T]E/S ?AT GIVE A MOVEM5T ! BASIS = A COMMON /RUGGLE 9 A*IEV+ A RATIONAL DISP5SATION ( SOCIAL AFFAIRS2 IF IT D5IES A PROCESSUAL RATIONALITY & A GR[+ IDEA ( ! ,GOOD BAS$ ON MORE ?AN P]SONALIS TIC 7OR 09T]SUBJECTIVE0 & 0CONS5SUAL07 GR\NDS2 IF IT D5IES ! P[]FUL CIVILIZATORY DIM5SIONS ( SOCIAL DEVELOPM5T 7IRONICALLY1 DIM5SIONS ?AT >E 9 FACT SO USEFUL TO CONTEMPOR>Y NIHILI/S 9 CRITICIZ+ HUMANITY'S FAIL+S72 & IF IT D5IES HI/ORICAL ,PROGRESS4 ,YET 9 PRES5T-DAY !ORETICS1 A S]IES ( EV5TS REPLACES ,HI/ORY1 CULTURAL RELATIVISM REPLACES ,CIVILIZATION1 & A BASIC PESSIMISM REPLACES A BELIEF 9 ! POSSIBILITY ( ,PROGRESS4 ,:AT IS MORE S9I/]1 MY?OPOESIS REPLACES REASON1 & DY/OPIA ! PROSPECT ( A RATIONAL SOCIETY4 ,:AT IS AT /AKE 9 ALL !SE DISPLACEM5TS IS AN 9TELLECTUAL & PRACTICAL REGRESSION ( APPALL+ PROPORTIONS -- AN ESPECIALLY AL>M+ DEVELOPM5T TODAY1 :5 !ORETICAL CL>ITY IS ( ! UTMO/ NECESSITY4 ,:AT \R TIMES REQUIRE IS A SOCIAL ANALYSIS ?AT CALLS = A REVOLUTION>Y & ULTIMATELY POPUL> MOVEM5T1 NOT A PSY*O-ANALYSIS ?AT ISSUES SELF-RI<TE\S DISCLAIM]S = 0BEAUTIFUL S\LS10 IDEOLOGICALLY DRESS$ 9 CLOAKS ( P]SONAL VIRTUE4 

,GIV5 ! DISP>ITY BETWE5 :AT RATIONALLY %\LD BE & :AT CURR5TLY EXI/S1 REASON MAY NOT NECESS>ILY BECOME EMBODI$ 9 A FREE SOCIETY4 ,IF & :5 ! REALM ( FRE$OM EV] DOES REA* ITS MO/ EXPANSIVE =M1 TO ! EXT5T ?AT WE CAN 5VISION IT1 & IF HI]>*Y1 CLASS1 DOM9ATION1 & EXPLOITATION W]E EV] ABOLI%$1 WE W\LD BE OBLIG$ TO 5T] ?AT REALM ONLY AS FREE BE+S1 AS TRULY RATIONAL1 E?ICAL1 & EMPA!TIC 0KN[+ ANIMALS10 ) ! HI<E/ 9TELLECTUAL 9SI<T & E?ICAL PROBITY1 NOT AS BRUTES CO]C$ 9TO IT BY GRIM NECESSITY & FE>4 ,! RIDDLE ( \R TIMES IS :E!R TODAY'S RELATIVI/S W\LD HAVE EQUIPP$ US 9TELLECTUALLY & E?ICALLY TO CROSS 9TO ?AT MO/ EXPANSIVE REALM ( FRE$OM4 ,WE CANNOT M]ELY BE DRIV5 9TO GREAT] FRE$OM BY BL9D =CES ?AT WE FAIL TO UND]/&1 AS ,M>XI/S IMPLI$1 /ILL LESS BY M]E PREF]5CES ?AT HAVE NO /&+ 9 ANY?+ MORE ?AN AN 0IMAG9>Y10 09/9CTS10 OR LIBID9AL 0DESIRES40.<#a#d.> 

,! RELATIVI/S ( \R TIME C\LD ACTUALLY PLAY A S9I/] ROLE IF !Y P]MITT$ ! 0IMAG9ATIVE0 TO LOOS5 \R CONTACT ) ! OBJECTIVE WORLD4 ,= 9 ! ABS5CE ( RATIONAL OBJECTIVE /&>DS ( BEHAVIOR1 IMAG9ATION MAY BE AS DEMONIC AS IT MAY BE LIB]ATORY :5 SU* /&>DS EXI/2 H5CE ! NE$ = 9=M$ SPONTANEITY -- & AN 9=M$ IMAG9ATION4 ,! EXHIL>AT+1 EV5TS ( ,MAY-,JUNE #a#i#f#h1 ) ! CRY 0,IMAG9ATION TO ,P[]60 W]E FOLL[$ A FEW YE>S LAT] BY A SURGE 9 ! POPUL>ITY ( NIHILI/IC PO/MOD]NISM & PO//RUCTURALISM 9 ! ACADEMY1 AN UNSAVORY METAPHYSICS ( 0DESIRE10 & AN APOLITICAL CALL = 0IMAG9ATION0 N\RI%$ BY A YE>N+ = 0SELF-REALIZATION40 ,MORE ?AN EV]1 ,I W\LD 9SI/1 WE MU/ 9V]T ,NIETZS*E'S DICTUM ,ALL FACTS >E 9T]PRETATIONS0 & DEM& ?AT ALL 9T]PRETATIONS BE ROOT$ 9 OBJECTIVITY4 ,WE MU/ SEEK \T BROAD] 9T]PRETATIONS ( SOCIALISM ?AN ?OSE ?AT CA/ SOCIALI/ IDEALS AS A SCI5CE & /RANGL$ ITS MOVEM5TS 9 AU?ORIT>IAN 9/ITUTIONS4 ,AT A TIME :5 WE TEET] BETWE5 ,CIVILIZATION & B>B>ISM1 ! CURR5T APO/LES ( IRRATIONALITY 9 ALL !IR V>I$ =MS >E ! *?ONIC DEMONS ( A D>K WORLD :O HAVE COME TO LIFE NOT TO EXPLICATE HUMANITY'S PROBLEMS BUT TO EFFECT A DISPIRIT+ D5IAL ( ! ROLE ( RATIONALITY 9 ,HI/ORY & HUMAN AFFAIRS4 ,MY DISQUIET TODAY LIES NOT 9 ! ABS5CE ( SCI5TIFIC 0GU>ANTEES0 ?AT A LIB]T>IAN SOCIALI/ SOCIETY WILL APPE> -- ONE ?AT1 AT MY AGE1 IT WILL NEV] BE MY PRIVILEGE TO SEE -- BUT 9 :E!R IT WILL EV5 HE F\<T = 9 SO DECAD5T & DESP]ATE A P]IOD4  
  

-- ,FEBRU>Y #a#e1#a#i#i#d  

O ,NOTES 

.<#a.> ,! NOTION ( A UNIL9E> SOCIAL DEVELOPM5T1 LIKE ! ONE ,FRI$RI* ,5GELS PRES5T$ 9 ,ANTI-,DUHR+1 HAD ALREADY FALL5 9TO CONSID]ABLE DISREPUTE AMONG S]I\S ,M>XI/S 9 ! FIR/ HALF ( ?IS C5TURY1 AS ,I MYSELF RECALL4 ,ONE ( ! MO/ TR\BL+ PROBLEMS ) ?IS NOTION1 ,I %\LD NOTE1 WAS ! 0TRANSITION0 FROM FEUDALISM TO CAPITALISM4 ,= MY [N P>T1 ,I CLE>LY *ALL5G$ ! IDEA ?AT CAPITALISM WAS ! 09EVITABLE0 SUCCESSOR ( FEUDALISM 9 ,URBANIZATION ,)\T ,CITIES4 ,!RE ,I >GU$ ?AT CAPITALISM1 FROM ! F\RTE5? C5TURY UNTIL WELL 9TO ! EI<TE5? & E>LY N9ETE5?1 WAS M]ELY P>T ( 0A MIX$ ECONOMY :I* WAS NEI!R FEUDAL1 CAPITALI/1 NOR /RUCTUR$ >\ND SIMPLE COMMODITY PRODUCTION4 ,RA!R1 IT CONTA9$ & COMB9$ ELEM5TS ( ALL ?REE =MS40 ,ECONOMICALLY AS WELL AS CULTURALLY1 AN OP5 SITUATION1 SO TO SPEAK1 EXI/$ ?AT C\LD QUITE CONCEIVABLY HAVE L$ TO MORE B5IGN SOCIAL ADVANCES & AVOID$ ! HORRORS ?AT CAPITALISM BR\<T 9TO ! WORLD4 ,SEE ,URBANIZATION ,)\T ,CITIES 7ORIG9ALLY PUBLI%$ AS ,! ,RISE ( ,URBANIZATION & ! ,DECL9E ( ,CITIZ5%IP BY ,SI]RA ,CLUB ,BOOKS 9 #a#i#h#g2 PUBLI%$ 9 ,CANADA BY ,MONTREAL3 ,BLACK ,ROSE ,BOOKS1 #a#i#i#b71 PP4 #a#i#h-#b#a4 ,9 ?IS BOOK ,I CONSI/5TLY EMPHASIZE ! SIGNIFICANCE ( LIB]T>IAN MUNICIPALI/ CONF$]ATIONS 9 OPPOSITION TO ! /ATE -- HI/ORICALLY AS WELL AS CONTEMPORANE\SLY4 

.<#b.> ,! REASON = MY *OICE ( ! NAME CONV5TIONAL REASON IS ?AT IT 5COMPASSES TWO LOGICAL TRADITIONS ?AT >E (T5 REF]R$ TO 9T]*ANGEABLY1 AS IF !Y W]E SYNONYMS4 ,!Y >E 9 FACT DI/+UI%ABLE1 ANALYTICAL REASON BE+ ! HI<LY =MALIZ$ & AB/RACT LOGIC ?AT WAS ELABORAT$ \T ( ,>I/OTLE'S ,PO/]IOR ,ANALYTICS1 & 9/RUM5TAL REASON1 ! MORE CONCRETE RATIONALITY DEVELOP$ BY ! PRAGMATIC TRADITION 9 PHILOSOPHY4 ,!SE TWO TRADITIONS MELD1 (T5 UNCONSCI\SLY1 9TO ! COMMONS5SICAL REASON ?AT MO/ PEOPLE USE 9 EV]YDAY LIFE2 H5CE ! WORD CONV5TIONAL4 

.<#c.> ,I WI% TO VOICE A CAVEAT H]E4 ,I MAY BE A DIALECTICIAN1 BUT ,I AM NOT A ,HEGELIAN1 H[EV] MU* ,I HAVE B5EFIT$ FROM ,HEGEL'S WORK4 ,I DO NOT BELIEVE 9 ! EXI/5CE ( A COSMIC ,SPIRIT 7,GEI/7 ?AT F9DS ITS EMBODIM5T 9 ! EXI/5TIAL WORLD OR 9 HUMANITY4 ,>M$ ) A COSMIC ,SPIRIT ?AT ELABORATES ITSELF ?R\< HUMAN HI/ORY1 ,HEGEL T5D$ TO BLUNT ! CRITICAL ?RU/ ( HIS DIALECTIC & BR+ ! 0REAL0 -- ! GIV5 -- 9TO CON=MITY ) ! 0ACTUAL0 -- ?AT IS1 ! POT5TIAL4 ,I FOLL[ \T ! IMPLICATIONS ( ,HEGEL'S DIALECTIC ALONG NATURALI/IC L9ES4 ,H5CE MY VIEW -- OR MY 9T]PRETATION1 IF Y\ LIKE -- ?AT HIS PROJECT1 B]EFT ( A COSMIC ,SPIRIT1 PROVIDES US ) A RI* VIEW ( REALITY ?AT 9CLUDES ! RATIONAL 0:AT-%\LD-BE0 AS WELL AS ! (T5 IRRATIONAL 0:AT-IS40 ,DIALECTICAL REASON IS ?US ONTOLOGICALLY E?ICAL AS WELL AS DIALECTICALLY LOGICAL2 A GUIDE TO RATIONAL PRAXIS AS WELL AS A NATURALI/IC EXPLICATION ( ,BE+4 

.<#d.> ,G4,W4,F4 ,HEGEL1 ,PH5OM5OLOGY ( ,SPIRIT1 TRANS4 ,A4 ,V ,MILL] 7,OX=D3 ,CL>5DON ,PRESS1 #a#i#g#g71 PP4 #b-#c4 

.<#e.> ,G4,W4,F4 ,HEGEL1 ,LECTURES ON ! ,HI/ORY ( ,PHILOSOPHY1 VOL4 #a1 TRANS4 ,E4 ,S4 ,HALDANE & ,FRANCES ,H ,SIMSON 7,NEW ,YORK ,HUMANITIES ,PRESS1 #a#i#e#e71 P4 #b#b4 

.<#f.> ,?IS >TICLE WAS WRITT5 9 ,SEPTEMB] #aihb & PUBLI%$ 9 #aihe 9 ,MI*AEL ,TOBIAS1 $41 ,DEEP ,ECOLOGY 7,SAN ,DIEGO1 ,CALIPH43 ,AVANT ,BOOKS1 #a#i#h#e74 ,IT HAS BE5 CONSID]ABLY REVIS$ = PUBLICATION H]E4 

.<#g.> ,= MY DI/9CTION BETWE5 5VIRONM5TALISM & ECOLOGY -- MORE PRECISELY1 SOCIAL ECOLOGY -- SEE MY 0,T[>D AN ,ECOLOGICAL ,SOCIETY10 9ITIALLY DELIV]$ AS A LECTURE AT ! ,UNIV]SITY ( ,MI*IGAN1 ,ANN ,>BOR1 9 ! SPR+ ( #a#i#g#c4 ,IT WAS PUBLI%$ AS AN ESSAY DUR+ ! SAME YE> 9 ,ROOTS & ,W,9 MAGAZ9ES & IS N[ AVAILABLE AS ! LEAD+ ESSAY 9 ! COLLECTION ( MY #a#i#gS WRIT+S4 ,T[>D AN ,ECOLOGICAL ,SOCIETY 7,MONTREAL3 ,BLACK ,ROSE ,BOOKS1 #a#i#h74 

.<#h.> ,?IS PHRASE IS TAK51 ( C\RSE1 FROM ,MAX ,S*EL]'S ,MAN'S ,PLACE 9 ,NATURE4 

.<#i.> ,JOSEPH ,[5S1 =EWORD TO ,GIOVANNI ,REALE1 ,! ,CONCEPT ( ,FIR/ ,PHILOSOPHY & ! ,UNITY ( 0,! ,METAPHYSICS0 ( ,>I/OTLE 7,ALBANY3 ,/ATE ,UNIV]SITY ( ,NEW ,YORK ,PRESS1 #a#i#h71 P4 XV4 

.<#a.> ,SEE ,M>T9 ,HEIDEGG]1 ,E>LY ,GREEK ,?9K+1 TRANS4 ,D4 ,F4 ,KRELL & ,F4 ,A4 ,CAPUZZI 7,NEW ,YORK3 ,H>P] & ,R[1 #a#i#g#e74 

.<#a#a.> ,SEE ,GREGORY ,VLA/OS1 0,EQUALITY & ,JU/ICE 9 ,E>LY ,GREEK ,COSMOLOGIES10 9 ,/UDIES 9 ,PRESOCRATIC ,PHILOSOPHY1 VOL4 #a1 ,! ,BEG9N+S ( ,PHILOSOPHY1 $4 ,DAVID ,J4 ,FURLEY & ,R4 ,E4 ,ALL5 7,LONDON3 ,R\TL$GE & ,KEGAN ,PAUL2 ,NEW ,YORK3 ,HUMANITIES ,PRESS1 #a#i#g71 PP4 #e#f-#i#a4 

.<#a#b.> ,LAWR5CE ,J4 ,H5D]SON1 ,! ,FITNESS ( ! ,5VIRONM5T 7,BO/ON3 ,BEACON ,PRESS1 #a#i#e#h71 PP4 #a1 #e4 

.<#a#c.> ,VLA/OS1 0,EQUALITY & ,JU/ICE10 P4 #f4 ,H]ACLITUS1 ! LEA/ DEMOCRATIC ( ! ,PRESOCRATICS1 DOES NOT SPEAK ( ISONOMIA BUT ( ! 0,ONE10 :I* WE CAN PROP]LY DI/+UI% FROM ! 0,:OLE40 ,?IS MY/ICAL ?RU/ ALREADY PREFIGURES NEO-,PLATONISM1 :I* W\LD EMPHASIZE ! TRANSC5D5TAL & ! SOCIALLY ELITI/ ELEM5TS 9 ,GREEK PHILOSOPHY4 

.<#a#d.> ,F4 ,M4 ,CORN=D1 ,FROM ,RELIGION TO ,PHILOSOPHY3 ,A ,/UDY 9 ! ,ORIG9S ( ,WE/]N ,SPECULATION 7#a#i#a#b2 ,NEW ,YORK3 ,H>P] & ,R[1 #a#i#e#g71 P4 #f#d4 

.<#a#e.> ,IBID41 P4 #h#d4 

.<#a#f.> ,IBID41 P4 #h#e4 

.<#a#g.> ,K>L ,JASP]S1 ,KANT1 TRANS4 ,RALPH ,MANHEIM 7,NEW ,YORK3 ,H>C\RT1 ,BRACE & ,WORLD1 #a#i#f#b71 PP4 #e1 #e#a4 

.<#a#h.> ,A ,KANTIAN PHILOSOPHY ( SUBJECTIVITY IS C]TA9LY 9ADEQUATE = SOCIAL !ORY4 ,TO CALL = 09T]SUBJECTIVITY10 = EXAMPLE1 AS 9 ,JURG5 ,HAB]MAS'S 0IDEAL SPEE* SITUATION10 )\T SPECIFY+ :AT K9D ( POLITICAL 9/ITUTIONS >E NE$$ TO GIVE ?AT 09T]SUBJECTIVITY0 RATIONAL =M1 TELLS US LITTLE AB\T ! ROLE ( 09T]SUBJECTIVITY0 9 SOCIAL RELATIONS4 ,?AT ,HAB]MAS HIMSELF1 AT ?IS WRIT+ 7#a#i#i#d71 HAS TURN$ TO SOCIAL DEMOCRACY AS ! BE/ R\TE TO SOCIAL RATIONALITY IS EVID5CE ( ! WAYW>DNESS ( 09T]SUBJECTIVITY0 AS A CONCEPTUAL BASIS = SOCIAL !ORY1 ANALYSIS1 & RECON/RUCTION4 

.<#a#i.> ,G4,W4,F4 ,HEGEL1 ,! ,PHILOSOPHY ( ,M9D1 TRANS4 ,A4 ,V4 ,MILL] 7,OX=D3 ,! ,CL>5DON ,PRESS1 #a#i#g#a71 P4 #c#a#e4 

.<#b.> ,GREGORY ,BATESON1 "9,M9D & ,NATURE3 ,A ,NECESS>Y ,UNITY@& 7,NEW ,YORK3 ,E4 ,P ,DUTTON1 #a#i#g#i71 P4 #a#a4 

.<#b#a.> ,IBID41 PP4 #c#a1 #i#c4 

.<#b#b.> ,>?UR ,KOE/L]1 ,JANUS3 ,A ,SUMM+ ,UP 7,NEW ,YORK3 ,R&OM ,H\SE1 #a#i#g#h74 

.<#b#c.> ,I HAVE EXPLOR$ ! ME*ANI/IC ASPECTS ( CYB]NETICS & SY/EMS !ORY 9 0,5]GY1 ',ECOTE*NOLOGY1 & ,ECOLOGY10 9 MY ,T[>D AN ,ECOLOGICAL ,SOCIETY 7,MONTREAL3 ,BLACK ,ROSE ,BOOKS1 #a#i#h74 

.<#b#d.> ,MORRIS ,B]MAN1 AN ADMIR] ( ,BATESON'S WORK1 HAS C>EFULLY EXPLOR$ ! HI<LY AU?ORIT>IAN *>ACT] ( ,BATESON'S SOCIAL \TLOOK 9  
,! ,RE5*ANTM5T ( ! ,WORLD 7,I?ACA1 ,N4,Y43 ,CORNELL ,UNIV]SITY ,PRESS1 #a#i#h#a71 PP4 #b#h-#i#f4 ,I DISAGREE ) ,B]MAN'S VIEW1 H[EV]1 ?AT AN AN>*IC ECOLOGICAL SOCIETY FOLL[S FROM ,BATESON'S CYB]NETIC APPROA*4 

.<#b#e.> ,KOESD]1 ,JANUS1 PP4 #c-#c#d4 ,KOE/L] TRIES TO RESCUE ! WORD HI]>*Y AS AN EXPRESSION ( 0FLEXIBILITY & FRE$OM0 9 C\NT]POSITION TO R$UCTIONISM1 EV5 AS ! T]M HI]>*Y HAUNTS HIM BECAUSE 0IT IS LOAD$ ) MILIT>Y & ECCLESIA/ICAL ASSOCIATIONS 444 .<&.> CONVEYS ! IMPRESSION ( A RIGID1 AU?ORIT>IAN /RUCTURE40 ,I WILL C]TA9LY NOT DISPUTE ?IS LATT] VIEW4 

.<#b#f.> ,BATESON1 ,M9D & ,NATURE1 P4 #a#i#i4 

.<#b#g.> ,LUDWIG VON ,B]TALANFFY1 ,ROBOTS1 ,M5 & ,M9DS3 ,PSY*OLOGY 9 ! ,MOD]N ,WORLD 7,NEW ,YORK3 ,BRAZILL]1 #a#i#f#g71 P1 #i4 

.<#b#h.> ,IBID41 PP4 #f#i1#g#a4 

.<#b#i.> ,GREGOIRE ,NICOLIS & ,ILYA ,PRIGOG9E1 ,SELF-,ORGANIZATION 9 ,NONEQUILIBRIUM ,SY/EMS 7,NEW ,YORK3 ,JOHN ,WILEY1 #a#i#g#g74 ,= MORE ON ,PRIGOG9IAN SY/EMS !ORY1 SEE MY ESSAY 0,?9K+ ,ECOLOGICALLY10 ELSE:]E 9 ?IS BOOK4 

.<#c.> ,BY F> ! BE/ ,5GLI% TRANSLATION ( ,DID]OTIS WORKS IS ,JEAN ,/EW>T & ,JONA?AN ,KEMP'S ,DID]OT3 ,9T]PRET] ( ,NATURE3 ,SELECT$ ,WRIT+S 7,NEW ,YORK3 ,9T]NATIONAL ,PUBLI%]S1 #a#i#c#f71 :I* CAPTURES ! ELEGANCE & RI* NUANCE ( ,DID]OT'S PROSE ?AT >E (T5 LO/ 9 ,5GLI% TRANSLATIONS4 

.<#c#a.> ,G4,W4,F4 ,HEGEL1 ,PH5OM5OLOGY ( ,SPIRIT1 TRANS4 ,A4 ,V ,MILL] 7,OX=D3 ,! ,CL>5DON ,PRESS1 #a#i#g#g71 P4 #d#i4 

.<#c#b.> ,FRI$RI* ,5GELS1 ,FEU]BA* & ! ,5D ( ,CLASSICAL ,G]MAN ,PHILOSOPHY1 9 ,M>X & ,5GELS1 ,SELECT$ ,WORKS1 VOL4 #b1 P4 #c#c2 QUOT$ 9 ,GEORG ,LUKACS1  
,! ,Y\NG ,HEGEL3 ,/UDIES 9 ! ,RELATIONS BETWE5 ,DIALECTICS & ,ECONOMICS1 TRANS4 ,RODNEY ,LIV+/ONE 7,CAMBRIDGE1 ,MASS43 ,M,I,T ,PRESS2 ,LONDON3 ,! ,M]L9 ,PRESS1 #a#i#g#e71 P4 #d#f#h4 

.<#c#c.> ,SEE ,]W9 ,S*ROD+]1 ,:AT IS ,LIFE8 ,M9D & ,MATT] 7,G>D5 ,CITY1 ,N4,Y43 ,D\BL$AY1 #a#i#e#f74 ,= A MORE DETAIL$ ACC\NT ( ! NEW ADVANCES 9 A/ROPHYSICS & BIOLOGY1 SEE MY ,VIE ,ECOLOGY ( ,FRE$OM 7#a#i#h#b2 ,MONTREAL3 ,BLACK ,ROSE ,BOOKS1 #a#i#i71 FROM :I* A NUMB] ( !SE PASSAGES1 G5]ALLY 9 MODIFI$ =M1 >E DRAWN4 

.<#c#d.> ,W4ILLIAM ,TRAG]1 ,SYMBIOSIS 7,NEW ,YORK3 ,VAN ,NO/R& ,RE9HOLD1 #a#i#g71 P4 VII4 

.<#c#e.> ,LYNN ,M>GULIS1 ,SYMBIOSIS 9 ,CELL ,EVOLUTION 7,SAN ,FRANCISCO3 ,W4 ,H4 ,FREEMAN1 #a#i#hL74 ,MY CITATION ( ,M>GULIS APPLIES ONLY TO H] NOTION ?AT LIFE PLAY$ A ROLE 9 CREAT+ ! BIOSPH]E4 ,IT %\LD NOT BE TAK5 AS 5DORS+ EI!R H] R$UCTIONI/ VIEWS ( PROK>YOTIC CELLS OR H] ACCEPTANCE ( ! MY/ICAL ,GAIA ,HYPO!SIS4 

.<#c#f.> ,MANFR$ ,EIG51 0,MOLECUL> ,SELF-,ORGANIZATION & ! ,E>LY ,/AGES ( ,EVOLUTION10 ,QU>T]LY ,REVIEW ( ,BIOPHYSICS1 VOL4 #d 7#a#i#g#a71 P4 #b#b4 

.<#c#g.> ,M>GULIS1 ,SYMBIOSIS1 PP4 #c#d#h-#d#i4 

.<#c#h.> ,ELIZABE? ,VRBA CIT$ 9 ,ROB]T ,LEW91 0,EVOLUTION>Y ,!ORY ,UND] ,FIRE0  
,SCI5CE1 VOL4 #ba 7#a#i#h71 PP4 #h#h#e4 

.<#c#i.> ,HANS ,JONAS1 ,! ,PH5OM5ON ( ,LIFE 7,NEW ,YORK3 ,DELTA1 #a#i#f#f71 PP4 #h#b1 #i4 

.<#d.> ,?IS >TICLE WAS ORIG9ALLY PUBLI%$ 9 ,ALT]NATIVES1 VOL4 #a#c1 NO4 #d 7,NOVEMB] #a#i#h#f74 ,IT HAS BE5 SIGNIFICANTLY REVIS$ = PUBLICATION H]E4 

.<#d#a.> ,DESPITE SOME REC5T NONS5SE TO ! EFFECT ?AT ! ,FRANKFURT ,S*OOL RECONNOIT]$ A NONHI]>*ICAL & ECOLOGICAL VIEW ( SOCIETY'S FUTURE1 9 NO S5SE W]E ITS ABLE/ ?9K]S1 ,MAX ,HORKHEIM] & ,!ODOR ,ADORNO1 RESOLUTELY CRITICAL ( HI]>*Y & DOM9ATION4 ,RA!R1 !IR VIEWS W]E CLE>LY PESSIMI/IC3 REASON & CIVILIZATION1 = BETT] OR WORSE1 5TAIL 0UNCOMPROMIS+ 9DIVIDUALS .<:O.> MAY HAVE BE5 9 FAVOR ( UNITY & COOP]ATION 444 TO BUILD A /RONG HI]>*Y4444 ,! HI/ORY ( ! OLD RELIGIONS & S*OOLS LIKE ?AT ( ! MOD]N P>TIES & REVOLUTIONS TEA*ES US ?AT ! PRICE = SURVIVAL IS PRACTICAL 9VOLVEM5T1 ! TRANS=MATION ( IDEAS 9TO DOM9ATION40 ,SEE ,HORKHEIM] & ,ADORNO1  
,DIALECTIC ( ,5LI<T5M5T 7,NEW ,YORK3 ,H]D] & ,H]D]1 #a#i#g#b2 ORIG9ALLY PUBLI%$ 9 #a#i#d#d71 PP4 #b#a#c1 #b#a#e4 ,! P[] ( !SE ?9K]S LAY 9 !IR OPPOSITION TO POSITIVISM & ! !ORETICAL PROBLEMS !Y RAIS$1 NOT 9 ! SOLUTIONS !Y (F]$4 ,ATTEMPTS TO MAKE !M 9TO PROTO-SOCIAL ECOLOGI/S1 MU* LESS PRECURSORS ( BIOREGIONALISM1 9VOLVE A GROSS MISREAD+ ( !IR IDEAS OR1 WORSE1 A FAILURE TO READ !IR WORKS AT ALL4 

.<#d#b.> ,?IS APPROA* WAS /ILL RA!R NEW SOME TW5TY-FIVE YE>S AGO1 :5 ,I PIONE]$ IT TOGE!R ) R>E COLLEAGUES LIKE ,*>LES ,S4 ,ELTON4 ,TODAY IT HAS BECOME COMMONPLACE 9 ECOLOGICAL & 5VIRONM5TAL ?9K+1 AS HAVE ORGANIC ME?ODS ( G>D5+4 

.<#d#c.> ,D>W9 DID NOT D5Y ! ROLE ( ANIMAL 9T]ACTIVITY 9 EVOLUTION1 P>TICUL>LY 9 ! FAM\S ,*APT] #c ( ,! ,ORIG9 ( ,SPECIES1 :]E HE SUGGE/S ?AT 0EV]-9CREAS+ CIRCLES ( COMPLEXITY0 *ECK POPULATIONS ?AT1 LEFT UNCONTROLL$1 W\LD REA* PE/ PROPORTIONS4 ,BUT HE SEES ?IS AS A 0BATTLE )9 BATTLES .<:I*.> MU/ BE CONT9UALLY RECURR+ ) V>Y+ SUCCESS0 7ON P4 #eh ( ! ,MOD]N ,LIBR>Y $ITION74 ,MOREOV]1 0! DEP5D5CY ( ONE ORGANIC BE+ ON ANO!R0 -- TYPICALLY 0AS ( A P>ASITE ON ITS PREY0 -- IS SECOND>Y TO ! /RUGGLE 0BETWE5 9DIVIDUALS ( ! SAME SPECIES0 7P4 #f74 ,LIKE MO/ ,VICTORIANS1 ,D>W9 HAD A /RONGLY PROVID5TIAL & MORAL SIDE TO HIS *>ACT]3 0WE MAY CONSOLE \RSELVES10 HE ASSURES US1 0?AT ! W> ( NATURE IS G5]ALLY PROMPT1 & ?AT ! VIGOR\S1 ! HEAL?Y1 & ! HAPPY SURVIVE & MULTIPLY0 7P4 #f#b74 ,9DE$3 0,H[ FLEET+ >E ! WI%ES & EF=TS ( MAN6 H[ %ORT HIS TIME6 & CONSEQU5TLY H[ POOR WILL BE HIS RESULTS1 COMP>$ ) ?OSE ACCUMULAT$ BY ,NATURE'S PRODUCTIONS DUR+ :OLE GEOLOGICAL P]IODS6 ,CAN WE WOND]1 !N1 ?AT ,NATURE'S PRODUCTIONS %\LD BE F> 'TRU]' ?AN MAN'S PRODUCTIONS2 ?AT !Y %\LD BE 9F9ITELY BETT] ADAPT$ TO ! MO/ COMPLEX CONDITIONS ( LIFE1 & %\LD PLA9LY BE> ! /AMP ( A F> HI<] WORKMAN%IP80 7P4 #f#f74 ,!SE REM>KS DO NOT MAKE ,D>W9 AN ECOLOGI/ BUT >E M>VEL\S ASIDES TO A !SIS ?AT EMPHASIZES V>IATION1 SELECTION1 FITNESS1 & ABOVE ALL /RUGGLE4 ,YET ONE CANNOT HELP BUT BE 5TRANC$ BY A MORAL S5SIBILITY ?AT W\LD HAVE BE5 MAGNIFIC5TLY RESPONSIVE TO ! MESSAGE ( MOD]N ECOLOGY & ?AT DES]VES NONE ( ! ON]\S RUBBI% ?AT HAS BE5 IMPUT$ TO ! MAN BECAUSE ( SOCIAL ,D>W9ISM4 

.<#d#d.> ,SEE ,MURRAY ,BOOK*91 ,! ,ECOLOGY ( ,FRE$OM 7,PALO ,ALTO3 ,*E%IRE ,BOOKS1 #a#i#h#b2 ,MONTREAL3 ,BLACK ,ROSE ,BOOKS1 #a#i#i#a71 PP4 #f#h-#f#i4 

.<#d#e.> ,AN ECOLOGICAL APPROA* CAN SP>E US SOME ( ! WOR/ ABSURDITIES ( SOCIOBIOLOGY & BIOLOGICAL R$UCTIONISM4 ,! POPUL> NOTION ?AT \R DEEP-SEAT$ 0REPTILIAN0 BRA9 IS RESPONSIBLE = \R AGGRESSIVE1 0BRUTI%10 & CRUEL BEHAVIORAL TRAITS MAY MAKE = GOOD TELEVISION DRAMAS LIKE  
,COSMOS1 BUT IT IS RIDICUL\S SCI5CE4 ,LIKE ALL ! GREAT ANIMAL GR\PS1 MO/ ,MESOZOIC REPTILES W]E ALMO/ C]TA9LY G5TLE H]BIVORES1 NOT C>NIVORES -- & ?OSE ?AT W]E C>NIVORES W]E PROBABLY NEI!R MORE NOR LESS AGGRESSIVE1 0BRUTI%10 OR 0CRUEL0 ?AN MAMMALS4 ,\R IMAGES ( ,TYRANNOSAURUS REX 7A CREATURE :OSE G5]IC NAME IS SOCIOLOGICAL NONS5SE7 MAY BE 9ORD9ATELY FRI<T5+1 BUT !Y GROSSLY DI/ORT ! REPTILIAN LIFE-=MS ON :I* ! C>NIVORE PREY$4 ,IF ANY?+1 ! MAJORITY ( ,MESOZOIC REPTILES W]E PROBABLY V]Y PACIFIC & EASILY FRI<T5$1 ALL ! MORE BECAUSE !Y W]E NOT P>TICUL>LY 9TELLIG5T V]TEBRATES4 ,:AT REMA9S UNACKN[L$G$ 9 ?IS IMAG]Y ( FI]CE1 FIRE-BREA?+1 & 0UNFEEL+LY CRUEL0 REPTILES IS ! IMPLICIT ASSUMPTION ( DIFF]5T PSY*IC S5SIBILITIES 9 REPTILES & MAMMALS1 ! LATT] PRESUMABLY BE+ MORE 0S5SITIVE0 & 0UND]/&+0 ?AN ! =M]4 ,A PSY*IC EVOLUTION 9 NONHUMAN BE+S ?US GOES TOGE!R ) ! EVOLUTION ( 9TELLIG5CE4 ,YET CONFRONT$ ) ! UN/AT$ PREMISES ( SU* EVOLUTION>Y TR5DS1 FEW SCI5TI/S W\LD F9D !M COM=TABLE4 

.<#d#f.> ,?IS PROJECT IS ELABORAT$ 9 CONSID]ABLE DETAIL 9 MY BOOK  
,! ,ECOLOGY ( ,FRE$OM4 

.<#d#g.> ,H5CE FRE$OM IS NO LONG] RESOLVABLE 9TO A /RID5T NIHILI/IC NEGATIVITY OR A TRITE 9/RUM5TAL POSITIVITY4 ,RA!R1 9 ITS OP5-5D$NESS1 IT CONTA9S BO? & TRANSC5DS !M AS A CONT9U+ PROCESS4 ,FRE$OM ?US RESI/S PRECISE DEF9ITION JU/ AS IT RESI/S T]M9AL F9ALITY4 ,IT IS ALWAYS BECOM+1 HOPEFULLY SURPASS+ :AT IT WAS 9 ! PA/ & DEVELOP+ 9TO :AT IT CAN BE 9 ! FUTURE4 

.<#d#h.> ,?IS ESSAY WAS ORIG9ALLY PUBLI%$ 9 ,\R ,G5]ATION1 VOL4 #a#h1 NO4 #b 7,SPR+-,SUMM] #a#i#h#g74 ,IT HAS BE5 REVIS$ = PUBLICATION H]E4 

.<#d#i.> ,?IS BASICALLY ,M>XIAN !SIS1 :I* ALL MEMB]S ( ! ,FRANKFURT ,S*OOL TOOK = GRANT$1 IS REPEAT$LY MIS9T]PRET$1 P>TICUL>LY 9 ! ECOLOGY MOVEM5T1 :5 IT IS DISCUSS$ AT ALL4 ,H[EV] MU* !Y OPPOS$ DOM9ATION1 NEI!R ,ADORNO NOR ,HORKHEIM] S+L$ \T HI]>*Y AS AN UND]LY+ PROBLEMATIC 9 !IR WRIT+S4 ,9DE$1 !IR RESIDUAL ,M>XIAN PREMISES L$ TO A HI/ORICAL FATALISM ?AT SAW ANY LIB]ATORY 5T]PRISE 7BEYOND >T1 P]HAPS7 AS HOPELESSLY TA9T$ BY ! NE$ TO DOM9ATE NATURE & CONSEQU5TLY 0MAN40 ,?IS POSITION /&S COMPLETELY AT ODDS ) MY [N VIEW ?AT ! NOTION -- & NO MORE ?AN AN UNREALIZABLE NOTION -- ( DOM9AT+ NATURE /EMS FROM ! DOM9ATION ( HUMAN BY HUMAN4 ,?IS IS NOT A SEMANTIC DIFF]5CE 9 ACC\NT+ = ! ORIG9S ( DOM9ATION4 ,LIKE ,M>X1 ! ,FRANKFURT ,S*OOL SAW NATURE AS A 0DOM9E]+0 =CE OV] HUMANITY ?AT HUMAN GUILE -- & CLASS RULE -- HAD TO EXORCIZE BE=E A CLASSLESS SOCIETY WAS POSSIBLE4 ,! ,FRANKFURT ,S*OOL1 NO LESS ?AN ,M>XISM1 PLAC$ ! ONUS = DOM9ATION PRIM>ILY ON ! DEM&+ =CES ( NATURE4  

 ,MY [N WRIT+S RADICALLY REV]SE ?IS V]Y TRADITIONAL VIEW ( ! RELATION%IP BETWE5 SOCIETY & NATURE4 ,I >GUE ?AT ! IDEA ( DOM9AT+ NATURE FIR/ >OSE )9 SOCIETY AS P>T ( ITS 9/ITUTIONALIZATION 9TO G]ONTOCRACIES ?AT PLAC$ ! Y\NG 9 V>Y+ DEGREES ( S]VITUDE TO ! OLD & 9 PATRI>*IES ?AT PLAC$ WOM5 9 V>Y+ DEGREES ( S]VITUDE TO M5 -- NOT 9 ANY 5DEAVOR TO 0CONTROL0 NATURE OR NATURAL =CES4 ,V>I\S MODES ( SOCIAL 9/ITUTIONALIZATION1 NOT MODES ( ORGANIZ+ HUMAN LABOR 7SO CRUCIAL TO ,M>X71 W]E ! FIR/ S\RCES ( DOM9ATION1 :I* IS NOT TO D5Y ,M>X'S !SIS ?AT CLASS SOCIETY WAS ECONOMICALLY EXPLOITATIVE4 ,H5CE1 DOM9ATION CAN BE DEF9ITIVELY REMOV$ ONLY BY RESOLV+ PROBLEMATICS ?AT HAVE !IR ORIG9S 9 HI]>*Y & /ATUS1 NOT 9 CLASS & ! TE*NOLOGICAL CONTROL ( NATURE ALONE4 

.<#e.> ,LEON ,E4 ,/OV]1 ,! ,CULTURAL ,ECOLOGY ( ,*9ESE ,CIVILIZATION 7,NEW ,YORK3 ,PICA ,PRESS1 #a#i#g#d74 

.<#e#a.> ,IT IS A COMPELL+ COMM5T>Y ON !IR NAIVETE ?AT ,WE/]N]S CAN SO READILY IGNORE ORI5TAL DESPOTISM 9 FAVOR ( A ROMANTIC REV]5CE = ,ASIAN 0SAGES40 ,*9ESE ELITES P]FECT$ AN EXQUISITELY CRUEL E?OS T[>D ! MASSES1 :OM !Y NOT ONLY EXPLOIT$ PHYSICALLY BUT DEGRAD$ SPIRITUALLY4 ,?AT ?IS PEASANTRY QUIETI/ICALLY B5T ITS HEAD TO ! YOKE DOES NOT SPEAK WELL = ,*9ESE 0SAGES40 ,! ,TAO ,TE ,*+ IS AN EM95TLY POLITICAL COLLECTION ( PASSAGES4 ,FROM ! VIEWPO9T ( SOCIAL ECOLOGY -- :I* PO9T$LY /UDIES ! SOCIAL ORIG9S ( A NATURE IDEOLOGY & EXPLORES ITS LOGIC -- ! PASSIVITY T[>D NATURE ?AT ! ,TAO ,TE ,*+ FO/]$ C\LD EASILY HAVE BE5 TRANSPOS$ 9TO SOCIETY1 JU/ AS NATURE PHILOSOPHY 9 ! ,WE/ HAS S]V$ SOCIAL ELITES 9 ! WOR/ ( CASES1 & REBELS 9 ! BE/4 ,9 ANY CASE1 9 #aihi ,*9ESE /UD5TS EXHIBIT$ MORE 9T]E/ 9 ,WE/]N ?AN ,EA/]N IDEALS3 !Y 9VOK$ IDEALS MORE R$OL5T ( ! ,FR5* ,REVOLUTION ?AN ! ,TAO ,TE ,*+ BY TAK+ TO ! /REETS ) DEM&S = DEMOCRACY & HUMAN RI<TS4 

.<#e#b.> ,FRITJ( ,CAPRA1 ,! ,TURN+ ,PO9T 7,NEW ,YORK3 ,SIMON & ,S*U/]1 #a#i#h#b71 PP4 #b#h#f-#h#g4 

.<#e#c.> ,IBID41 PP4 #b#h#g1#d#a#b4 

.<#e#d.> ,IBID41 P4 #b#h#h4 

.<#e#e.> ,IBID4 

.<#e#f.> ,SEE ,ILYA ,PRIGOG9E & ,ISABELLE ,/5G]S1 ,ORD] ,\T ( ,*AOS 7,NEW ,YORK3 ,BANTAM ,BOOKS1 #a#i#h#d71 PP4 #b#i#a-#c#a4 ,! NOTION ( ! IRREV]SIBILITY ( TIME1 APPROPRIATE AS IT MAY BE = ,PRIGOG9E TO EMPHASIZE IT 9 ORD] TO EXORCIZE A ME*ANI/IC DYNAMICS BAS$ ON TIME'S REV]SIBILITY1 IS NOT CONGRU5T ) PROCESS & EVOLUTION2 IT IS M]ELY ONE PRESUPPOSITION ( !SE PH5OM5A4 

.<#e#g.> ,?AT SU* COSMIC =MULAS CANNOT EXPLA9 ! F\NDATIONS ( EI!R ORGANIC OR SOCIAL DEVELOPM5T IS NOT AN >GUM5T AGA9/ 0F\NDATIONALISM0 -- ?AT IS1 ! VIEW ?AT !RE >E EXPLANATIONS ?AT CAN ACC\NT = DIFF]5TIAE 9 ! BIOLOGICAL & SOCIAL AS WELL AS ! 9ORGANIC PHYSICAL WORLD4 ,\R WORLD HAS MORE COH]5CE ?AN MANY RELATIVI/S TODAY >E WILL+ TO ADMIT1 ) ITS DIFF]5T LEVELS ( UNFOLD+ &1 9 !IR SCOPE1 DIFF]5T F\NDATIONS1 DEGREES ( POSSIBILITY1 SUBJECTIVITY &1 ) HUMANITY1 REASON4 

.<#e#h.> ,CAPRA1 ,TURN+ ,PO9T1 P4 #b#h#h4 

.<#e#i.> ,IBID41 PP4 #c1#c#i#c4 

.<#f.> ,GREGORY ,BATESON1 ,M9D & ,NATURE 7,NEW ,YORK3 ,E4,P ,DUTTON1 #a#i#g#i71 P4 #c#a4 

.<#f#a.> ,= A MORE COMPLETE DISCUSSION ( NATURE'S FECUNDITY & ITS S\RCE 9 SPECIES V>IETY1 SEE MY 0,FRE$OM & ,NECESSITY 9 ,NATURE10 ELSE:]E 9 ?IS BOOK4 

.<#f#b.> ,HUMAN SELF-HATR$1 ,I MAY ADD1 IS NOT A PSY*OLOGICAL PH5OM5ON ALONE2 IT HAS UGLY SOCIAL ROOTS4 ,! PRIVILEG$ HATE NOT O!R PRIVILEG$ BUT ! UND]PRIVILEG$1 G5]ALLY ACCUS+ !M ( 0AN?ROPOC5TRIC0 VICES & SUBJECT+ !M TO ! CON/RA9TS ( 0NATURAL LAW40 

.<#f#c.> #a#f4 ,DAVID ,=EMAN1 9T]VIEW$ BY ,BILL ,DEVALL1 0,A ,SPANN] 9 ! ,WOODS10  
,SIMPLY ,LIV+1 VOL4 #ab 7C4 #a#i#h#f74 

.<#f#d.> ,LET ME MAKE IT CLE> ?AT ,I BELIEVE ?AT NATURE IS NEI!R HI]>*ICAL NOR EGALIT>IAN -- CONCEPTS ?AT >E MEAN+LESS UNLESS !Y >E 9/ITUTIONALIZ$ SOCIALLY1 :I* PRESUPPOSES A HUMAN PRES5CE 9 ! BIOSPH]E1 OR SECOND NATURE4 ,:AT WE 5C\NT] 9 FIR/ NATURE IS COMPLEM5T>ITY1 ! MUTUALI/IC 9T]ACTION ( LIFE-=MS 9 MA9TA9+ A NONHUMAN ECOLOGICAL COMMUNITY4 ,AT ?IS BIOLOGICAL LEVEL1 COMPLEM5T>ITY IS NOT AN E?ICS -- :I* IS ASSOCIAT$ ) REASON$ BEHAVIOR -- BUT A DESCRIPTIVE DATUM RELAT$ TO MUTUALISM4 ,I US$ ! WORD COMPLEM5T>ITY TO D5OTE AN E?ICS 9 ,! ,ECOLOGY ( ,FRE$OM4 ,S9CE ?AT BOOK WAS PUBLI%$1 0NATURAL LAW0 DEVOTEES HAVE PICK$ UP ON IT ) M9IMAL ACKN[L$GM5T & TURN$ IT 9TO A 0LAW ( COMPLEM5T>ITY0 -- A REGRESSIVE USE ( ! CONCEPT IF !RE EV] WAS ONE4 

.<#f#e.> ,I AM NOT SPEAK+ AB\T 0DIALECTICAL MAT]IALISM10 :I*1 :ATEV] ! 9T5TIONS ( ,M>X & ,5GELS1 US$ ,HEGELIAN T]MS & CONCEPTS TO =MULATE :AT WAS LITTLE MORE ?AN A SCI5TI/IC 0DIALECTICAL0 ME*ANISM4 ,MY PURPOSE IS NOT TO FLE% \T ! SKELETON ( DIALECTICAL PHILOSOPHY ) 0MAT]IALISM0 OR A LATT]-DAY NOM9ALI/ PHYSICALITY1 BUT TO BR+ NATURE 9TO ! =EGR\ND ( DIALECTICAL ?\<T 9 AN EVOLUTION>Y & ORGANISMIC WAY4 

.<#f#f.> ,G4,R4,G4 ,MURE1 ,>I/OTLE 7,NEW ,YORK3 ,OX=D ,UNIV]SITY ,PRESS1 #a#i#f#d71 P4 #g4 

.<#f#g.> ,IT IS >GUABLE :E!R ,HEGEL SAW TELEOLOGY AS AN 9FLEXIBLE PR$ET]M9ATION ( ! DEVELOPM5T ( ! 0REAL0 9 ITS BEG9N+S4 ,HEGEL'S ,LOGIC EXI/S ON A DIFF]5T LEVEL FROM ! EXI/5TIAL REALITY WE EXP]I5CE 9 HI/ORY & EV]YDAY LIFE4 ,ITS 0PURIFI$0 CATEGORIES >E DEVELOP$ FROM EA* O!R ) A 0LOGICAL NECESSITY0 &1 9 A METAPHORIC S5SE1 C\LD BE SE5 AS A RATIONAL LEVEL P>ALLEL TO ! EXI/5TIAL LEVEL FROM :I* !Y >E AB/RACT$4 ,?IS LOGOS1 AS IT W]E1 C\LD BE TAK5 AS AN EXEMPL>Y & ?US 9H]5TLY CRITICAL VISION ( ! WORLD 9 A HI<LY SUBJECTIVIZ$ =M :OSE 0LOGIC0 YIELDS A DI/9CT RATIONAL CONCLUSION1 JU/ AS ,PLATO'S DOMA9 ( =MS HAS BE5 REG>D$ BY MANY ,PLATONI/S AS EXEMPL>Y 9 A NORMATIVE S5SE1 AS DI/+UI%$ FROM ! FLAW$ WORLD ?AT WE EXP]I5CE >\ND US4 

.<#f#h.> ,RESPONSIBILITY = ! CONFUSION AB\T ! MEAN+ ( ! WORDS REAL & ACTUAL IS BY NO MEANS ,HEGEL'S BUT RA!R ?AT ( SOME ( HIS TRANSLATORS ,! ,G]MAN WORD WIRKLI* HAS A FAMILY ( ,5GLI% MEAN+S ?AT 9CLUDE 0REAL0 AS WELL AS 0ACTUAL40 ,HEGEL WAS QUITE SCRUPUL\S 9 DI/+UI%+ ! 0REAL0 FROM ! 0ACTUAL0 9 HIS ,SCI5CE ( ,LOGIC1 :]E 0REALITY10 AS HE PUT IT 9 HIS DISCUSSION ( 0,DET]M9ATE ,BE+10 SEEMS 0TO BE AN AMBIGU\S WORD10 :ILE 0,ACTUALITY IS ! UNITY ( ,ESS5CE & ,EXI/5CE4 ,SEE ! ,JOHN/ON & ,/RU!RS TRANSLATION1 ,SCI5CE ( ,LOGIC 7,NEW ,YORK ,MACMILLAN1 #a#i#b#i71 VOL4 #a1 P4 #a#b#d1 & VOL4 #b1 P4 #a#f4 ,! PROBLEM >OSE :ET ,HEGEL'S FAM\S MAXIM1 ,WAS V]NUNFTIG I/1 DAS I/ WIRKLI*2 UND WAS WIRKLI* I/1 DAS I/ V]NUNFTIG1 WAS MI/RANSLAT$ AS 0,:AT IS RATIONAL IS REAL1 & :AT IS REAL IS RATIONAL40 ,! CORRECT & PHILOSOPHICALLY MEAN+FUL TRANSLATION IS 0,:AT IS RATIONAL IS ACTUAL1 & :AT IS ACTUAL IS RATIONAL40 ,! MI/RANSLATION1 :I* R5D]$ REAL & ACTUAL SYNONYMS1 CONCEIV$ ! ,HEGELIAN REAL AS ! ACTUALIZATION ( ! POT5TIAL4 ,! MIS*IEF ?IS MI/RANSLATION PRODUC$ 9 ! 9T]PRETATION ( ,HEGEL'S IDEAS IS MAT*$ ONLY BY ! CONFUSION IT PRODUC$ 9 ! 9T]PRETATION ( ! MAXIM ITSELF4 ,5GELS1 IRONICALLY1 CL>IFI$ ,HEGEL'S MEAN+ WOND]FULLY -- ALBEIT US+ REAL RA!R ?AN ACTUAL4 ,SEE HIS ,LUDWIG ,FEU]BA* & ! ,5D ( ,G]MAN ,PHILOSOPHY1 9 ,M>X & ,5GELS1 ,SELECT$ ,WORKS 7,MOSC[3 ,PROGRESS ,PUBLI%]S1 #a#i#g71 VOL4 #c1 PP4 #c#c#g-#c#h4 ,I AM NOT NITPICK+ H]E3 ! ODIUM ?AT ,HEGELIAN PHILOSOPHY ACQUIR$ AS AN APOLOGIA = ! ,PRUSSIAN /ATE RE/S 9 NO SMALL P>T ON ! FAILURE TO PROP]LY 9T]PRET -- & TRANSLATE -- ?IS FAM\S MAXIM 9 ,HEGEL'S ,5CYCLOP$IA ,LOGIC & ,PHILOSOPHY ( ,RI<T4 

.<#f#i.> ,G4,W4,F4 ,HEGEL1 ,LECTURES ON ! ,HI/ORY ( ,PHILOSOPHY 7,NEW ,YORK3 ,HUMANITIES ,PRESS1 #a#i#e#e71 VOL4 #a1 P4 #bb 7MY EMPHASIS74 ,H]E ,HEGEL IS DESCRIB+ ! DIALECTIC 9 UNKN[+ NATURE4 0,9 ,M9D IT IS O!RWISE10 HE IS QUICK TO ADD2 0IT IS CONSCI\SNESS & !RE=E IT IS FREE1 UNIT+ 9 ITSELF ! BEG9N+ & ! 5D -- ?AT IS TO SAY1 9T5TION1 /RIV+1 & PR$ET]M9ATION0 7P4 #b#b74 ,9 FACT1 FROM MY VIEWPO9T ! CONCLUSION ?AT 0,M9D0 IS 0FREE0 C\LD ALSO MEAN ?AT KN[+ BE+S CAN BE WAYW>D1 IDIOSYNCRATIC & ONE-SID$1 & -- UNLIKE NONHUMAN BE+S -- CRUEL &1 PUT BLUNTLY1 EVIL4 

.<#g.> ,UN=TUNATELY1 ?IS HAS NOT BE5 NOTIC$ 9 MO/ COMM5T>IES ON ,HEGEL'S OEUVRE1 MU* LESS 9 PHILOSOPHY G5]ALLY1 :I* SEEMS MORE OCCUPI$ ) E/ABLI%+ :AT ,HEIDEGG] MEANS BY 0,BE+0 ?AN ) O!R CONCEPTS ( ,BE+ 9 ,WE/]N ?\<T4 

.<#g#a.> 0,:AT-C\LD-BE10 9S(> AS IT 9VOLVES ORGANIC SUBJECTIVITY & FLEXIBILITY1 D]IVES FROM ! NATURAL REALM ( POT5TIALITY4 0,:AT-%\LD-BE10 ! UNFOLD+ ( ! RATIONAL1 IS AN E?ICAL EXTRAPOLATION ( 9DIVIDUAL & SOCIAL POT5TIALITIES1 ( ATTRIBUTES ( ! TRULY SELF-DET]M9+ P]SON & SOCIETY4 

.<#g#b.> ,VIEW$ FROM ?IS /&PO9T1 !RE IS A S5SE 9 :I* ,HEGEL'S 0OBJECTIVE IDEALISM0 WAS MORE OBJECTIVE ?AN HIS MAT]IALI/ CRITICS REALIZ$4 ,POSSIBILITIES -- ?AT IS1 ! ACTUALIZATIONS ( EXI/5TIAL POT5TIALITIES -- >E AS OBJECTIVE AS ! 9H]5CE ( AN OAK TREE 9 AN ACORN4 ,E?ICALLY1 ?IS HI<LY ILLUM9AT+ APPROA* E/ABLI%ES A /&>D ( FULFILLM5T -- AN OBJECTIVE GOOD1 AS IT W]E -- ?AT LIT]ALLY 9=MS ! EXI/5TIAL ) A GOAL ( OBJECTIVE FULFILLM5T1 JU/ AS WE SAY 9 EV]YDAY LIFE ?AT AN 9DIVIDUAL :O DOES NOT 0LIVE UP0 TO HIS OR H] CAPABILITIES IS AN 0UNFULFILL$0 P]SON &1 9 A S5SE1 A LESS ?AN 0REAL0 P]SON4 

.<#g#c.> ,ANTIHUMANI/ 0E?ICI/S0 ACTUALLY TAKE ?IS >GUM5T S]I\SLY1 ,I HAVE BE5 />TL$ TO LE>N4 ,9 BIOC5TRIC E?ICS1 REPORTS ,B]N>D ,DIXON1 NO 0LOGICAL L9E CAN BE DRAWN0 BETWE5 ! CONS]VATION ( :ALES1 G5TIANS1 & FLAM+OES ON ! ONE H& & ! CONS]VATION ( PA?OG5IC MICROBES LIKE ! SMALLPOX VIRUS ON ! O!R1 :I*1 ACCORD+ TO ONE ANTIHUMANI/ WAG 7,DAVID ,EHR5FELD71 IS 0AN 5DANG]$ SPECIES40 ,LOGICAL CONSI/5CY REQUIRES ?AT WE TRY TO RESCUE ! SMALLPOX VIRUS ) ! SAME E?ICAL D$ICATION ?AT WE BR+ TO ! SURVIVAL ( :ALES4 ,SEE ,B]N>D ,DIXON1 0,SMALLPOX -- ,IMM95T ,EXT9CTION1 & AN ,UNRESOLV$ ,PROBLEM10 ,NEW ,SCI5TI/1 VOL4 #fi 7#a#i#g#f74 ,= AN ANTIHUMANI/ POSITION ?AT V]GES ON %E] MISAN?ROPY1 SEE ,DAVID ,EHR5FELD1 ,! ,>ROGANCE ( ,HUMANISM 7,NEW ,YORK3 ,OX=D ,UNIV]SITY ,PRESS1 #a#i#g#h74 

.<#g#d.> ,BILL ,DEVALL & ,GEORGE ,SESSIONS1 ,DEEP ,ECOLOGY 7,SALT ,LAKE ,CITY3 ,P]EGR9E ,SMI? ,BOOKS1 #a#i#h#e71 P4 #f#g4 

.<#g#e.> ,OR ELSE BY REG>D+ ! HUMAN CONDITION ) UGLY 9DIFF]5CE4 ,MISAN?ROPY1 9DE$ AN 9HUMANITY1 LABEL$ BIOC5TRISM1 0DEEP ECOLOGY10 OR POPULATION CONTROL1 C\LD PROVIDE A BRUTAL M&ATE = HUMAN SUFF]+ & AU?ORIT>IAN /ATE CONTROL4 ,ECOLOGY1 ON !SE T]MS1 ?REAT5S TO BECOME AN IDEOLOGY ?AT IS CRUEL1 NOT %>+ OR COOP]ATIVE4 

.<#g#f.> ,! MORE ONE EXAM9ES ! LIT]ATURE ( BIOC5TRI/S1 ANTIHUMANI/S1 & 0DEEP ECOLOGI/S10 ! MORE ONE S5SES MANIPULATION4 ,!IR APPEALS TO HUMAN FEEL+S LIKE EMPA?Y & ID5TIFICATION >E TRANSLAT$ 9TO 0RI<TS0 ?AT RE/ HEAVILY ON ! HI/ORICAL DEVELOPM5T ( HUMANISM4 ,HUMANISM 9VOLVES NOT SIMPLY A CLAIM TO HUMANITY'S 0SUP]IORITY0 OV] ! NONHUMAN WORLD BUT1 SIGNIFICANTLY1 AN APPEAL TO HUMAN REASON & A SOCIAL E?ICS ( COOP]ATION4 ,GREAT SOCIAL MOVEM5TS1 UPRIS+S1 & IDEOLOGIES1 NOT TO SPEAK ( SELF-SACRIFIC+ 9DIVIDUALS1 W]E COMMITT$ TO ! A*IEVEM5T ( !SE MONUM5TAL GOALS -- A HI/ORY ?AT IS SIMPLY EFFAC$ FROM MU* ( ! BIOC5TRI/1 ANTIHUMANI/1 & 0DEEP ECOLOGY0 LIT]ATURE4 ,(T51 !IR PLACE IS TAK5 BY A NAGG+ D5IGRATION ( ! HUMAN SPIRIT1 DECORAT$ ) METAPHORS LIFT$ FROM ,EA/]N PHILOSOPHY4 ,SOCIAL ANALYSIS T5DS TO BE M9IMIZ$ & EV5 DEFLECT$ BY A PRIVILEG$ & 9W>D CONC]N ) AB/RACTIONS LIKE 09T]CONNECT$NESS0 & 0ON5ESS0 -- 9 A SOCIETY RIV5 BY G5U9E CONFLICTS BETWE5 RI* & POOR1 PRIVILEG$ & D5I$1 & MAN & WOMAN1 NOT TO SPEAK ( 0DEEP10 0DEEP]10 & ! 0DEEPE/0 ECOLOGI/S4 

.<#g#g.> ,MOREOV]1 DESPITE ?IS T5D5CY TO BIFURCATE OBJECTIVITY & SUBJECTIVITY1 ! TWO DO NOT EXCLUDE EA* O!R4 ,!RE IS ALWAYS A SUBJECTIVE DIM5SION TO OBJECTIVITY1 BUT IT IS PRECISELY ! RELATION%IP BETWE5 ! TWO ?AT REQUIRES EXPLICATION4 

.<#g#h.> ,MORAL RELATIVISM HAS REC5TLY BE5 ! BRE$+ GR\ND ( A PURELY FUNCTIONAL OR 9/RUM5TAL =M ( RATIONALITY1 :I* 9 MY VIEW IS ONE ( ! GREATE/ IMP$IM5TS TO S]I\S SOCIAL ANALYSIS & A MEAN+FUL E?ICS4 0,SUBJECTIVE REASON10 TO USE ,MAX ,HORKHEIM]'S PHRASE FROM  
,! ,ECLIPSE ( ,REASON1 ON :I* A RELATIVI/IC APPROA* RE/S1 HAS BE5 ONE ( ! MAJOR AFFLICTIONS ( ,ANGLO-,AM]ICAN ?9K+1 NOT M]ELY )9 ! ACADEMY BUT )9 ! G5]AL PUBLIC4 

.<#g#i.> ,PR$ICAT$ AS !IR SELF-REALIZATION IS 9 !IR [N POT5TIALITIES1 HUMAN BE+S NEV]!LESS CANNOT DO AS !Y PLEASE1 DESPITE ! ASS]TIONS ( 0BEAUTIFUL S\LS10 TO USE ,HEGEL'S PHRASE1 :O LIVE 9 AN A]IE ( P]SONAL LIB]ATION & SELF-CONTA9$ 0AUTONOMY40 ,H]E1 ,M>X WAS A GOOD DEAL AHEAD ( TODAY'S 9DIVIDUALI/IC AN>*I/S :O HAVE A BAD HABIT ( DISRUPT+ S]I\S ATTEMPTS AT ORGANIZATION & !ORETICAL 9QUIRY ) SIMPLI/IC CRIES ( 0,FRE$OM N[60 

.<#h.> ,NO?+ IS EASI]1 MORE MY/IFY+1 & MORE SMUG !SE DAYS ?AN TO ADVANCE SWEEP+1 AHI/ORICAL G5]ALIZATIONS AB\T FIGURES LIKE ,HEGEL1 ,M>X1 & ,L594 ,IT IS EVID5CE ( ! UGLY 9TELLECTUAL DEGRADATION ( \R TIME ?AT PEOPLE :O %\LD KN[ BETT] MAKE !M SO FLIPPANTLY4 ,ONE MI<T AS WELL CLAIM ?AT ,/AL9'S TOTALIT>IANISM HAD ITS ROOTS 9 ,MA*IAVELLI'S SO-CALL$ 0,ATLANTIC ,REPUBLICAN ,TRADITION0 S9CE ! LATT] WAS ! AU?OR ( ,! ,PR9CE2 OR 9 ,PLATO1 AS ,K>L ,POPP] SO NOTORI\SLY DID4 ,YET ,HEGEL W\LD UND\BT$LY HAVE RESOLUTELY OPPOS$ ,M>X'S VIEW ( ! DIALECTIC2 ,M>X MI<T V]Y WELL HAVE DIS[N$ ,L591 AS ! ,M>XI/ ,ROSA ,LUXEMBURG & ! C\NCIL COMMUNI/S ,GORT] & ,PANNEKOEK DID2 & ,/AL9 W\LD C]TA9LY HAVE IMPRISON$ ,L591 AS ,L59'S WID[ BITT]LY REPROA*$ ,TROTSKY 9 #a#i#b#e1 AFT] ! =M] ,R$ ,>MY COMM&] BELAT$LY BEGAN TO ATTACK ,/AL94 

.<#h#a.> ,MANY ( !SE =M] ,M>XI/S 7P>TICUL>LY 0,NEW ,LEFT0 /UD5TS & !IR PR(ESSORS7 POLLUT$ ! SIXTIES ) !IR PET DOGMAS1 ONLY TO 0GR[ UP0 AFT] !Y HAD 0HAD !IR FUN0 7TO REPHRASE A CYNICAL EXPRESSION ( MANY ,P>ISIAN VET]ANS ( #a#i#f#h7 & >E N[ POLLUT+ ! N9ETIES ) SKEPTICISM1 NIHILISM1 & SUBJECTIVISM4 ,! MO/ S]I\S OB/ACLES TO ! DEVELOPM5T ( AN AU!NTIC ,NEW ,LEFT TODAY >E ! ,ALA9 ,T\RA9ES1 ,&R,G,B,P ,GORZES1 & ,MI*AEL ,WALZ]S :O HAVE RALLI$ V>I\SLY TO 0M>KET SOCIALISM10 0M9IMAL /ATISM10 OR PLURALIZ$ CONCEPTS ( JU/ICE & FRE$OM ?AT >E P]FECTLY COMPATIBLE ) MOD]N CAPITALISM4 ,! WOR/ FATE ?AT AN IDEA CAN MEET IS TO BE KEPT >TIFICIALLY ALIVE1 LONG AFT] IT HAS DI$ HI/ORICALLY1 9 ! =M ( GRADUATE C\RSES AT ! ,NEW ,S*OOL = ,SOCIAL ,RESE>* 9 ,NEW ,YORK ,CITY4 

.<#h#b.> ,IT IS EASY1 :5 CRITICIZ+ SCI5TISM AS AN IDEOLOGY1 TO =GET ! ROLE ?AT ! NATURAL SCI5CES !MSELVES PLAY$ 9 SUBV]T+ BELIEFS 9 WIT*CRAFT & SUP]/ITION1 & 9 FO/]+ A SECUL> & NATURALI/IC APPROA* TO REALITY4 ,I W\LD LIKE TO ?9K ?AT WE NO LONG] BELIEVE 9 ,DRACULA1 OR 9 ! P[] ( ! CRUCIFIX TO F5D (F VAMPIRES1 OR 9 ! OCCULT P[] ( WOM5 TO COMMUNICATE ) DEMONS -- OR DO WE8 

.<#h#c.> ,SEE MY 0,9TRODUCTION3 ,A ,PHILOSOPHICAL ,NATURALISM10 ELSE:]E 9 ?IS BOOK4 

.<#h#d.> ,9DE$1 !RE MAY BE A 0LOGIC TO EV5TS10 BUT IT W\LD BE ! LOGIC ( CONV5TIONAL REASON1 BAS$ ON M]E CAUSE-&-EFFECT & ! PR9CIPLE ( ID5TITY1 ,A EQUALS ,A1 NOT DIALECTICAL REASON4 

.<#h#e.> ,SEE ,JAMES ,MILL]1 ,! ,PASSION ( ,MI*EL ,F\CAULT 7,NEW ,YORK3 ,SIMON @& ,S*U/]1 #a#i#i#c74 

.<#h#f.> ,SEE MY =?COM+ BOOK ,RE-,5*ANT+ ,HUMANITY 7,LONDON3 ,CASSELL1 #a#i#i#e71 = A MORE DETAIL$ DISCUSSION ( !SE ISSUES4 

.<#h#g.> ,IRONICALLY1 IT EV5 VITIATES ! MEAN+ ( SOCIAL AN>*ISM AS AN E?ICAL SOCIALISM4 

.<#h#h.> ,I F9D NO SOLACE 9 ! NOTION ?AT PRELIT]ATE PEOPLES 05JOY$0 AN 0AFFLU5T SOCIETY10 AS ,M>%ALL ,SAHL9S W\LD HAVE IT4 ,!IR LIVES W]E ALL TOO (T5 %ORT1 !IR CULTURES BURD5$ BY SUP]/ITION & B]EFT ( A SYLLABIC SY/EM ( WRIT+1 & !Y NORMALLY W]E AT W> ) EA* O!R1 TO CITE ONLY !IR MAJOR AFFLICTIONS1 PA/ORAL ,NEW ,AGE IMAGES ( !IR LIVES TO ! CONTR>Y4 

.<#h#i.> ,9DE$1 EV5 NOM9ALI/IC HI/ORIANS :O SEE ,HI/ORY AS A S]IES ( ACCID5TS (T5 TACITLY PRESUPPOSE ! EXI/5CE ( ! 0NONACCID5TAL0 7P]HAPS EV5 ! RATIONAL7 9 A SOCIAL DEVELOPM5T4 

.<#i.> ,SEE *APT] #aa ( MY ,! ,ECOLOGY ( ,FRE$OM 7#a#i#h#b2 REPR9T$ BY ,MONTREAL3 ,BLACK ,ROSE ,BOOKS1 #a#i#i#b74 

.<#i#a.> ,I F9D NO VIEW MORE ONE-SID$ & NOXI\S ?AN ,!ODOR ,ADORNO'S DICTUM1 0,NO UNIV]SAL HI/ORY LEADS FROM SAVAG]Y TO HUMANIT>IANISM1 BUT !RE IS ONE LEAD+ FROM ! SL+%OT TO ! MEGATON BOMB40 ,?IS 9FLAT$1 LESS ?AN ?\<T-\T PRON\NCEM5T1 TAK5 TOGE!R ) ,ADORNO'S COMMITM5T TO A NEGATIVITY ?AT REJECT$ SUBLATION 7,AUFHEBUNG71 OR SOCIAL & IDEOLOGICAL ADVANCES1 WAS A /EP T[>D NIHILISM1 9DE$1 AN UGLY DEMONIZATION ( HUMANITY1 ?AT BELI$ HIS AFFIRMATIONS ( REASON4 ,SEE ,NEGATIVE ,DIALECTICS1 TRANS4 ,E4 ,B4 ,A%TON 7,NEW ,YORK3 ,SEABURY ,PRESS #a#i#g#c71 P4 #c#b4 

.<#i#b.> ,I DELIB]ATELY ES*EW ! WORDS ,TOTALITY & ,SPIRIT TO PRECLUDE ANY SU* SUGGE/ION4 

.<#i#c.> ,! NAME ( ANO!R *APT] 9 ,! ,ECOLOGY ( ,FRE$OM4 

.<#i#d.> ,G4,W4,F4 ,HEGEL1 0,REASON AS ,LAWGIV]10 9 ,PH5OM5OLOGY ( ,SPIRIT1 TRANS4 ,A4 ,V4 ,MILL] 7,OX=D3 ,OX=D ,UNIV]SITY ,PRESS1 #a#i#g#g71 PP4 #b#e#b-#e#f4 

.<#i#e.> ,HEGEL = ALL HIS 5TANGLEM5TS ) ! NOTION ( ,GIE/ OR 0,SPIRIT0 & DESPITE HIS CONCEPTION ( A PR$ET]M9$ 0,ABSOLUTE10 AT LEA/ HAD ! GOOD S5SE TO DI/+UI% ! SELF-DEVELOPM5T ( NONHUMAN LIFE-=MS1 = 9/ANCE1 FROM ! SELF-DEVELOPM5T ( HUMANITY OR1 = ?AT MATT]1 SOCIETY4 ,SEE ,G4,W4,F4 ,HEGEL1 0,9TRODUCTION10 ,LECTURES ON ! ,HI/ORY ( ,PHILOSOPHY1 VOL4 #a1 TRANS4 ,E4 ,S4 ,HALDANE & ,FRANCES ,H4 ,SIMSON 7#a#h#i#b2 ,LONDON3 ,R\TL$GE & ,KEGAN ,PAUL1 & ,NEW ,YORK3 ,! ,HUMANITIES ,PRESS1 #a#i#e#e1 #a#i#f#h71 PP4 #b#b-#b#c4 

.<#i#f.> ,PRES5T-DAY COSMOLOGY & BIOPHYSICS1 H[EV]1 >E COM+ UP AGA9/ PH5OM5A :OSE EXPLANATION REQUIRES ! FLEXIBLE CONCEPTS ( DEVELOPM5T ADVANC$ BY DIALECTICAL NATURALISM4 

.<#i#g.> ,K>L ,M>X1 0,T[>D A ,CRITIQUE ( ,HEGEL'S ,PHILOSOPHY ( ,LAW3 ,9TRODUCTION10 ,WRIT+S ( ! ,Y\NG ,M>X ON ,PHILOSOPHY & ,SOCIETY1 TRANS4 ,LLOYD ,D4 ,EA/ON & ,KURT ,H4 ,GUDDAT 7,G>D5 ,CITY1 ,N4,Y43 ,D\BL$AY & ,CO41 #a#i#f#g7 P4 #b#e#i4 

.<#i#h.> ,W4 ,T4 ,/ACE'S ,CRITICAL ,HI/ORY ( ,GREEK ,PHILOSOPHY1 = EXAMPLE1 %[S H[ A S]IES ( ANCI5T ,GREEK ?9K]S R\ND$ \T 9CREAS+LY FULL BUT /ILL ONE-SID$ VIEWS TO PRODUCE ! MO/ ADVANC$ DIALECTICAL PHILOSOPHY ( !IR TIME1 P>TICUL>LY ?AT ( ,>I/OTLE4 ,C]TA9LY ! DEVELOPM5T ( 9SI<T 9TO ! DIALECTICAL NATURE ( REALITY DID NOT 5D ) ! ,GREEKS4 ,NOR WILL IT 5D ) ?9K]S 9 \R TIME1 ANY MORE ?AN SCI5CE 5D$ 9 ! N9ETE5? C5TURY1 :5 SO MANY PHYSICI/S ?\<T LITTLE MORE C\LD BE ADD$ TO COMPLETE ,NEWTONIAN PHYSICS4 ,9 HIS HI/ORY ( PHILOSOPHY1 ,HEGEL PO9T$ \T NOT ONLY DIFF]5T DEGREES ( DIALECTICAL REASON1 :I* APPROXIMAT$ DIFF]5T DEGREES ( TRU? 7:I* 9 NO WAY MEANS ?AT HE WAS A 0RELATIVI/071 BUT DIFF]5T K9DS ( RATIONALITY -- 0,UND]/&+0 OR ,V]/&1 ( ! COMMONS5SICAL K9D1 & 0,REASON0 OR ,V]NUNFT1 ( ! DIALECTICAL K9D4 

.<#i#i.> ,REC5TLY1 DIALECTICAL NATURALISM HAS BE5 CRITICIZ$ = COMMITT+ ! 0EPI/EMOLOGICAL FALLACY10 9 :I* A PRIORI CONCEPTS BECOME !IR [N CONDITIONS ( VALIDITY1 R5D]+ DIALECTICS AS SU* A SELF-VALIDAT+ SY/EM4 ,?IS1 AS IF DIALECTIC NATURALISM W]E NOT /RUCTUR$ >\ND ! REALITY ( POT5TIALITY & W]E PURELY AN A PRIORI SPECULATIVE =M ( REASON4 ,YET !SE CRITICS !MSELVES USUALLY USE ! K9D ( LOGIC ?AT EMPLOYS ! MO/ A PRIORI1 9DE$ TAUTOLOGICAL ( ALL CONCEPTS1 ! PR9CIPLE ( ID5TITY1 ,A EQUALS ,A1 9 PREF]5CE TO DIALECTICAL REASON4 

.<#a.> ,?IS VIEW IS NOT NEW = ME4 ,9 ,! ,ECOLOGY ( ,FRE$OM1 COMPLET$ 9 #aih & PUBLI%$ 9 #a#i#h#b1 ,I WAS AT PA9S TO 9DICATE ?AT 0! ,DIALECTIC ( ,5LI<T5M5T IS ACTUALLY NO DIALECTIC AT ALL -- AT LEA/ NOT 9 ITS ATTEMPT TO EXPLA9 ! NEGATION ( REASON ?R\< ITS [N SELF-DEVELOPM5T0 7P4 #b#g#b74 ,MY RESPECT = ! ,FRANKFURT ,S*OOL RE/$ L>GELY ON ITS 9SI<TFUL CRITIQUE ( POSITIVISM1 :I* WAS ! DOM9ANT PHILOSOPHICAL FAD 9 ,AM]ICAN UNIV]SITIES & SOCIAL !ORY 7SO-CALL$ 0SOCIOLOGY07 9 ! #a#i#dS & #a#i#eS1 & ON ITS V>I\S 9SI<TS 9TO ,HEGELIAN PHILOSOPHY4 ,TODAY1 !SE VALUABLE CONTRIBUTIONS >E F> \TWEI<$ BY ! EASE ) :I* ! ,FRANKFURT ,S*OOL'S WORK HAS FO/]$ PO/MOD]N VIEWS 9 ! ,UNIT$ ,/ATES & ,G]MANY & BY ! EXT5T TO :I* ITS PRODUCTS1 ESPECIALLY ,ADORNO'S WRIT+S1 HAVE BECOME ACADEMIC COMMODITIES4 

.<#a#a.> ,NOR DOES A V]BAL P>ADOX ?AT CONTRA/S SEEM+LY RELAT$ BUT OPPOS+ IDEAS1 OR COLORFUL EXPRESSIONS ( ALT]ITY1 CON/ITUTE A DIALECTIC 9 ! S5SE 9 :I* ,I HAVE DISCUSS$ IT H]E1 H[EV] MU* IT SEEMS TO RESEMBLE =MULATIONS 9 ,HEGEL & ! BE/ ( ,M>X4 ,ADORNO'S PROVOCATIVE 5DEAVORS ( ?IS K9D (T5 TURN \T TO BE LITTLE MORE ?AN ?AT -- PROVOCATIONS4 

.<#a#b.> ,PRES5T$ BY ! ,I,K,D'S ,AUSL&S ,KOMMITEE 7,COMMITTEE ,ABROAD71 ?IS HUGE DOCUM5T LONG PR$AT$ ,SOCIALISME \ ,B>B>IE4 ,! IDEAS ?AT IT AD VANC$1 H[EV]1 >E MOOT TODAY4 ,EXTRAPOLAT+ ,HITL]'S SEEM+ W> AIMS ( ! E>LY #a#i#dS -- TO R$UCE 9DU/RIALIZ$ ,WE/]N ,EUROPEAN C\NTRIES TO M]E SATELLITES ( ,G]MAN CAPITAL & TO AGR>IANIZE & DEPOPULATE ! ,EA/ -- TO ! WORLD AT L>GE1 ?IS !ORY ( IMP]IALISM 7& B>B>ISM7 >GU$ ?AT DE9DU/RIALIZATION W\LD BE EXPORT$ TO UNDEVELOP$ C\NTRIES1 & NOT1 AS OLD ,M>XI/ !ORIES ( IMP]IALISM HAD ASSUM$ 9 ! PREW> P]IOD1 CAPITAL4 

.<#a#c.> ,NOR DID WE1 BY ! LATE #a#i#dS1 REG>D ! WORK]S' MOVEM5T -- 9DE$1 0WORK]S' C\NCILS0 OR 0WORK]S' CONTROL ( 9DU/RY0 -- AS REVOLUTION>Y1 ESPECIALLY ) ! SEQUELAE ( ! GREAT /RIKE MOVEM5TS ( ! LATE #a#i#dS1 :I* DIRECTLY AFFECT$ MY [N LIFE AS A WORK]4 

.<#a#d.> ,! NOTION ( AN 09/9CT = FRE$OM10 T\T$ BY MANY RADICAL !ORI/S1 IS A %E] OXYMORON4 ,! COMPELL+1 9DE$ NECESSIT>IAN *>ACT] ( 9/9CT MAKES IT ! V]Y ANTI!SIS ( FRE$OM1 :OSE LIB]AT+ DIM5SIONS >E GR\ND$ 9 *OICE & SELF-CONSCI\SNESS4 

,*RONOLOGY 3 
,JANU>Y #b1 #bba 3 ,! ,PHILOSOPHY ( ,SOCIAL ,ECOLOGY -- ,ADD$4 
,JANU>Y #d1 #bbb 3 ,! ,PHILOSOPHY ( ,SOCIAL ,ECOLOGY -- ,UPDAT$4 

 FILE G5]AT$ FROM 3  
HTTP3_/_/REVOLTLIB4COM_/