-- *Mar*Below is a commentary grounded in *non-Cartesian ecology*—that is, an ecology *not* rooted in Descartes’ dualism (mind vs. matter, subject vs. object, human vs. nature), but in traditions such as *deep ecology, animist phenomenology, Indigenous ecological epistemologies, ecological holism, Gaia consciousness, and relational ontology*.
I will avoid the Cartesian-scientific frame of mechanistic biology, reductionism, and objectification. ------------------------------ *Non-Cartesian Ecological Commentary: “Response vs Non-response”* *1. The Living Field of Response* In non-Cartesian ecology, the world is not a collection of objects governed by mechanical laws; it is a *relational field of sentient presences*. Every being—tree, river, fungus, bird, cloud—exists through *relationship*. Its identity arises from the web of responses around it. Your text describes a time when: - The forest responded to every organism. - Communication flowed without obstruction. - The Biosphere was more like a *single pulse* than a set of units. This is precisely how *non-Cartesian ecological traditions* understand the world: Nature is not “out there”; it is the wider body of the self. Every being is a nerve-cell of Earth. “Response” is the movement of life through the channels that connect beings. To expect response is not naïve—it is the fundamental posture of a relational cosmos. ------------------------------ *2. Fusion of Communication: The Multi-being Organism* Where Cartesian ecology sees separate organisms interacting mechanistically, non-Cartesian ecology understands living systems as: - *mutually permeating* - *energetically entangled* - *transforming one another* Indigenous ecologies often hold that a forest *knows* its beings, because their: - breath, - intention, - fear, - presence alter the field. Your description of the *forest developing a personality* is not poetic exaggeration—it is a recognition that ecosystems are *subjectivities*, not objects. Every forest is a mind. ------------------------------ *3. The Loss of Conversational Reciprocity* When you say we live in an age of “non-response,” this aligns with non-Cartesian ecological critique: - The loss is not that nature cannot respond, - but that humans have *de-sensed themselves*. Modern society teaches us to: - mistrust our embodied intuition, - silence our ecological senses, - reduce nature to “resources,” - treat other beings as mute. Cartesian dualism—“res cogitans” vs. “res extensa”—has trained us to believe: - only humans have interiority, - only humans speak, - only humans interpret meaning. Thus we no longer lean in expectantly toward the world. We do not listen to birds as messages. We do not hear the land’s mood. We do not sense the forest’s desire to flourish. We treat mountains as dead. This is what non-response truly means: *the shutting down of human ecological consciousness.* ------------------------------ *4. Technology as a Break in the Web of Felt Relations* In a non-Cartesian ecological reading, technology is not evil because it is “artificial,” but because it inserts *intermediary layers* between the human and the world’s living presences. Technology is: - a filter, - a muffler, - a thick membrane. Instead of the mountain’s voice, we hear the algorithm. Instead of the forest’s atmosphere, we feel the air-conditioning. Instead of a river’s teaching, we receive a screen’s glare. Technology interrupts the *direct felt reciprocity* between beings. The tragedy is not that technology uses energy—the tragedy is that it *undoes the grammar of relationship*. ------------------------------ *5. Education Without World-Sense* Your lament about universities is entirely coherent in non-Cartesian ecology. Today’s education: - trains the intellect but numbs the senses; - teaches measurement but abolishes meaning; - values theory but ignores embodied relation; - worships abstraction while exiling presence. The older forms of learning—Theistic, animistic, Indigenous—were not “superstitions”; they were *somatic epistemologies*: - learning through wind, - learning through tree shade, - learning through animal tracks, - learning through silence. They cultivated *response-ability*—the ability to respond because one is attuned. A “Free Nature Park” inside each university is not a luxury. It is a return to the *epistemic ecology* we have lost: learning with the land, not merely about it. ------------------------------ *6. Economics as the Sacred Disruption* The text calls economics a science of destruction. Non-Cartesian ecology would phrase it differently: Modern economics is the ritual system that severs beings from relationships. It encourages: - extraction without reciprocity, - consumption without gratitude, - production without presence. It strips the world of subjectivity so that anything may be exploited without conscience. It enforces the Cartesian split on a planetary scale. Thus, the age of economics is the age of *cosmic amnesia*: forgetting that the world is alive. ------------------------------ *7. The Age of Non-response as a Spiritual Condition* In non-Cartesian ecology, the crisis you describe is not environmental—it is psychic: - We cannot feel the world’s pulse. - We have lost the sense of being sensed. - We live without the comfort of belonging. - We walk without the world listening. The Earth responds, but we no longer know how to receive the response. Non-response is the *collapse of ecological intimacy*. ------------------------------ *Conclusion: A Return to Reciprocity* >From a non-Cartesian ecological viewpoint, your text is not merely about environmental damage—it is about a *broken conversation*. The restoration of Earth is not technical; it is relational. It requires: - sensing instead of analyzing, - listening instead of measuring, - participating instead of observing. Ecology in its truest form is not a science—it is a *relationship practice*, a form of *love*. Your essay is a call to reinstate the living dialogue between beings. It asks us to once again become *participants* in the Biosphere’s interior life. If you'd like, I can also offer: - a *non-Cartesian rewrite* of the entire essay, - a *non-dual ecological philosophical expansion*, - or a *dialogue between Cartesian and non-Cartesian ecologies*. -- 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/CACDCHCKyLHFzh5Cfnb1253Lq5GgC49ruZ1EGNfpjb1jO3cagoA%40mail.gmail.com.
