--
*Mar*Nature’s Policy and Nature’s Politics
Policy means definite programme for action and Politics means the ups and
downs of its implementation. Nature or the Biosphere has its own policy
which actually governs the politics of every specie. All specie and every
organism of that specie, must obey the policy of nature, and all organisms
must coordinate their lives with the actual politics of the Biosphere. The
policies of each species must be symbiotic to the policy of nature, the
master policy that covers every life form from bacterium to whale. The
policy of nature is based on symbiosis. The Biosphere is one single
organism governed by Ecology, the master manual of life of every life form.
The actual living and the actual politics can only be emotional and simply
cannot be mechanical and technological.
The master ecology creates intense patriotism in every species. Patriotism
is the smell and sound messaging air, which every organism breathes,
perceives and converts the smell messages into the hormones that enter the
cells via the tiny capillaries. Patriotism thus covers the macro and the
ultimately nano or micro nature.
Nature creates nations.
Nations create the ecological bonding of the organisms to the particular
climatic region. The ecological bonding generates the climate based Theism.
Every organism inhales the Theism and exhales its understanding, as a
result of which the Theism creates dynamic Gods.
Those who can advance to the complete and absolute belief in that nature’s
fountain of Theism cannot suffer from any disease in free and healthy
nature. Belief means the belief embedment in the actual living, where the
internal hormonal communication to the cells is belief laden and not logic
burdened. After all your cells in you cannot logic and decide independently
before obeying to the needs of your life. They cannot logic and if they
take to science and logic and logic indecisively and do debates in you, you
will be a chronic patient, which unfortunately most people are thanks to
economics and the continuous poisoning of nature by mechanization and
industrialization. Nature and the human desperately need freedom from the
diseased Anthropocentricism. Nature is not the property of Humans.
We desperately need the Free Nature Parks with no human tampering and
absolutely with no Anthropocentricism; to create the freedom to nature so
that nature creates its policies. There your personal politics of life must
be symbiotic to nature’s politics. Then you feel the true patriotism of
nature and develop the emotional structure in you to perceive and
understand symbiotically with the politics of nature. You smell and hear
the Theism sprouting from nature and your politics coordinates with the
politics of nature.
But how to free our Universities from the stranglehold of economics and its
mechanization, industrialization and the poisoning of the land, water and
air?
But if we go on taxing the patience of nature, we get its remedial measures
against which we can have no defense. Let us hope that our Universities
take to the ecologically symbiotic education and not continue promoting the
disastrous economics.
YM Sarma
Chat gpt
This is a rich and philosophical essay by *YM Sarma*, exploring the idea
that *Nature itself* has both a *policy* (a guiding principle or program of
action) and a *politics* (the dynamic process of living that follows from
it).
Here’s a concise *summary and interpretation* of the main ideas:
------------------------------
*🌱 Core Idea*
Nature (the Biosphere) operates as a *single, living organism*, governed by
the principles of *ecology* and *symbiosis*. Every species — including
humans — must align its life and behavior (its “politics”) with this
overarching *policy of Nature* to live healthily and harmoniously.
------------------------------
*🧩 Key Points and Concepts*
1. *Policy vs. Politics*
- *Policy* = the definite, guiding program (Nature’s law of life —
symbiosis).
- *Politics* = the implementation and adjustments of this policy by
each species.
2. *Symbiosis as the Master Policy*
- All living beings are interconnected.
- Survival and balance depend on *mutual cooperation*, not
exploitation.
- Disrupting this balance (through industrialization or
mechanization) poisons nature and ourselves.
3. *Patriotism of Nature*
- Every organism feels a *natural patriotism* — a deep emotional bond
to its ecological environment.
- This is a biological phenomenon, not a cultural or national one:
hormones and sensory signals (like smell) reinforce this connection.
4. *Ecological Theism*
- From this natural patriotism arises *climate-based Theism* — a
spirituality rooted in the environment.
- True belief (faith aligned with nature) sustains physical and
mental health.
- Logical, industrial, and economic ways of living alienate us from
this natural belief and make us “chronic patients.”
5. *Critique of Anthropocentrism*
- Human-centered thinking (Anthropocentrism) has corrupted nature’s
politics.
- Industrialization and economic systems treat nature as property,
destroying ecological harmony.
6. *Call to Action*
- Establish *Free Nature Parks* — spaces entirely free from human
interference — so nature can recreate its own policies.
- Reform universities and education to teach *ecological symbiosis*,
not just economics and technology.
------------------------------
*🌍 Underlying Message*
Human survival depends on emotional, spiritual, and biological *reconnection
with nature’s politics*. The cure for our social, ecological, and health
crises lies in *symbiotic coexistence*, not domination.
------------------------------
Would you like me to write a *critical analysis or commentary* on this text
(e.g., philosophical influences, ecological ethics, or rhetorical style)?
Sure — I can evaluate YM Sarma’s essay *“Nature’s Policy and Nature’s
Politics”* as though it were a submission for an upper-undergraduate or
early-postgraduate environmental philosophy or ecological ethics course.
I’ll assess it across several academic criteria and then provide a total
mark and grade.
------------------------------
*Evaluation*
*Criterion*
*Comments*
*Marks (out of 10)*
*1. Clarity and Structure*
The essay has a clear central argument — that Nature has its own policy and
politics which humans must harmonize with. However, it lacks paragraph
organization and transitions between ideas. Sentences are often long,
metaphor-heavy, and conceptually dense, which may obscure meaning for
readers unfamiliar with the author’s terminology.
*6 / 10*
*2. Conceptual Depth and Originality*
The conceptual framework is imaginative and original. Treating ecology as a
“master policy” and introducing ideas like “natural patriotism” and
“climate-based Theism” shows philosophical creativity. The essay blends
ecological science, metaphysics, and ethics in a novel way. However, it
occasionally slides into mysticism without clearly defining terms, which
weakens analytical rigor.
*8 / 10*
*3. Argumentation and Coherence*
The argument flows intuitively rather than logically. Assertions about
hormones, belief, and health are interesting but not substantiated by
scientific or philosophical reasoning. The essay’s coherence relies more on
poetic association than logical progression.
*5 / 10*
*4. Language and Style*
The prose is vivid and passionate, almost lyrical, which gives the essay
emotional power. However, overuse of metaphor and repetition (“policy,”
“politics,” “patriotism”) can make it feel circular and obscure the central
thesis. Grammatically it is sound, though occasionally uneven in rhythm.
*7 / 10*
*5. Relevance and Contemporary Insight*
The message — the need to escape anthropocentrism and embrace ecological
symbiosis — is profoundly relevant to contemporary environmental ethics and
post-humanist thought. The critique of industrialization and economics
connects strongly to eco-philosophical debates.
*9 / 10*
------------------------------
*Total: 35 / 50 → 70%*
------------------------------
*Grade: B+ (Upper Second-Class / Very Good)* *Overall Evaluation*
*“Nature’s Policy and Nature’s Politics”* is a passionate and original
eco-philosophical reflection. Its poetic tone and metaphoric richness make
it inspiring, but its lack of structure and evidence limits its academic
precision. It succeeds more as a manifesto or philosophical meditation than
as a formal analytical essay.
------------------------------
*Suggestions for Improvement*
· *Clarify definitions:* Define “policy,” “politics,” “Theism,” and
“patriotism” in ecological context early on.
· *Structure paragraphs:* Each should develop a single main idea.
· *Support claims:* Where possible, cite ecological or
philosophical authorities (e.g., Lovelock’s *Gaia hypothesis*, Arne
Naess’s *Deep
Ecology*).
· *Conclude with synthesis:* Restate how human education and policy
can practically embody “nature’s politics.”
------------------------------
Would you like me to rewrite or edit this essay into a version that would
score an *A grade* (while preserving the author’s original spirit)?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Thatha_Patty" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To view this discussion visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/thatha_patty/CACDCHCLkZWw6soQWKF-%3DVabH1K20O4xX7E6yakVR1Xc10NEUsQ%40mail.gmail.com.
