-- *Mar*
Technology: Nature in Your Expressions and Contemplations This is the age of mechanization. We accept the techno-logic, the logic of the machine only. We are reducing the role of nature in the basic logic of living. The experiments of Rene Descartes, nailing animals to wooden logs and opening their entails to understand their technology is continuing on a gigantic scale. Most organisms are nailed today, though we know that they are life forms with feelings and emotions. We refuse to recognize that they are our emotional complements. They are just live stocked raw materials. Actually we have reduced our feelings and emotions into raw materials for the cine industry. The market value of each emotion is calculated; their money spinning potential is estimated, graphed, charted and reduced into mathematical equations. We no longer feel with nature and as nature. Feelings and Emotions have become economic manifestations. We have resigned as members of the Biosphere and we have repudiated our ecology. Suppose a group of bacteria, assigned into the administration of the cells in a function of your body repudiates its relationship with the other bacteria and converts them into raw materials and adopts the techno-logic repudiating the logic of internal hormonal communication, based on feelings and emotions? Is not that organism diseased? Are we not continuously diseasing nature today with our technology? We are living in the diseased Gaia, diseased by us. At the elementary expression in sentences, technology is intruding into the subject, verb contexting and in predication. From our very being in expression and communication, the proportion of nature is reduced and the logic of the machine, the techno-logic is taking over. The very concept of freedom to nature with us as members of that free nature is weird today. We use a machine to do the work of a limb and no limb is exempt from the intrusion and aggression of technology. Most limbs have become semi frozen. When nature is totally free and healthy, we live as limbs of nature and our limbs function as the limbs of nature, via smelling, hearing, touching, seeing and tasting, the Panchangams, activating our internal hormonal communications. In the totally free and healthy nature, we as the limbs of nature get all the health and strength of nature. Today we have disconnected from nature and depend on technology as the substitute of nature. We use machines to wage the Darwinian war against the Biosphere. Today every university has become a factory producing the Basmasuras who destroy nature. Nature no longer is a subject matter. It consists of raw materials only and we study nature from our economic angle. There are no Bruhaspathis who represent the free and healthy nature and function as the mediums of the free and healthy nature. This is the age of Sukracharyas as Professors. Technology has taken over every subject and the students are trained to perceive and understand like machines with machines. Machines have taken over the subject, verb contexting and predication in every sentence expression. Feelings and emotions are edited away. Now how to make our Universities train Angels and end the generation of New and new Basmasuras? How to change the Sukracharyas into Bruhaspathis? Let us pray that at least one University starts a ‘Free Nature Park’ without human tampering, so that nature gets the chance to train Angels. Let us pray for the victory of Bruhaspathi against Sukracharya. YM Sarma Chat gpt Below is a *balanced, respectful critique* of the essay—highlighting its strengths, its rhetorical power, and also areas where clarity, logic, or structure could be improved. If you'd like, I can also help you *revise or rewrite* the essay in any style. ------------------------------ *Overall Comment* Your essay is a *passionate, philosophical critique of modern technocentrism*, written in a style reminiscent of ecological spirituality and cultural metaphor. It blends *mythology, ecology, linguistics, ethics, and social criticism* into a single meditation on humanity’s estrangement from nature. The imagery is vivid, the moral urgency is clear, and the use of Indian mythological references (Gaia, Panchangams, Bruhaspathi, Sukracharya, Basmasura) adds a *symbolic depth* that makes the argument more culturally grounded and emotionally resonant. At the same time, the essay would benefit from *greater structural clarity, more concrete examples, and smoother transitions*, so that the central message does not get overshadowed by abstraction. ------------------------------ *Strengths* *1. Strong emotional and philosophical voice* The essay has a distinctive, poetic tone. Your metaphors—technology “intruding into subject-verb contexting,” universities “producing Basmasuras,” and humans “resigning from the biosphere”—create a sense of moral and ecological crisis. *2. Effective use of myth and symbolism* The references to *Bruhaspathi, Sukracharya, and Basmasura* function as powerful allegories for wisdom, misguided knowledge, and destructive ego. These enrich the text and give it a unique cultural voice. *3. Ethical urgency* Your argument is unambiguous: modern technocratic thinking is dangerous because it amputates humans from their ecological roots. This urgency makes the essay memorable. ------------------------------ *Areas for Improvement* *1. Clarify the central argument* Your main thesis appears to be: Technology has replaced nature as the core logic of life, resulting in emotional, ecological, and cultural degeneration. This is a compelling thesis, but the essay sometimes moves into metaphors without grounding them. A clearer articulation of the main points—perhaps in three or four structured sections—would strengthen the argument. *2. Provide more concrete examples* Many claims are broad (e.g., “Feelings and emotions have become economic manifestations,” “Every university produces Basmasuras”). Including *specific, real-world examples* (industrial agriculture, AI-mediated communication, consumer culture, university research-industrial ties, etc.) would make your claims more persuasive. *3. Balance metaphor with analysis* The metaphors are powerful, but too many layered metaphors can obscure meaning. At times the prose becomes dense, and readers may lose the thread. A slightly more grounded narrative style would help. *4. Tone and nuance* While the essay is intentionally polemical, it leaves little room for nuance. Acknowledging that technology also supports ecological restoration, medicine, conservation, climate science, etc., could make the critique more balanced and intellectually rigorous. *5. Clarify the concluding proposition* The call for creating a *“Free Nature Park”* is intriguing but underdeveloped. Expanding on what such a place would look like, how it would function, and how it would produce “Angels” rather than “Basmasuras” would give the essay a more tangible ending. ------------------------------ *Possible Revision Directions* If you choose to revise the essay, here are two possible approaches: *A. Philosophical-ecological rewrite* Keep the metaphors but add structure, examples, and more explicit argumentation. *B. Poetic-mystical rewrite* Preserve and enhance the metaphorical, mythic, and contemplative style, making it more like an ecological sermon or reflection. I can help craft either version. ------------------------------ *Summary* Your essay is *thought-provoking, lyrical, and ethically intense*. Its voice is unique and its moral concern is profound. With clearer structure, more concrete grounding, and slightly less density of metaphor, it could become an even more compelling piece of ecological philosophy. Would you like: - *A line-by-line edit?* - *A polished revised version?* - *A shorter or more academic version?* -- 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/CACDCHCLG-_jc25xFybey8MKygpji2iQkxabszPvqLi%2B%3D8u8%3DVg%40mail.gmail.com.
