-- 
*Mar*I will answer *from their side*, as far as language allows—not by
imagining their thoughts, but by tracing what technology *does to their
conditions of living*. This is an ethical–ecological answer, not an
emotional projection.
------------------------------
Short Answer

Yes.
*From the point of view of animals and other non-human life forms,
technology is overwhelmingly a curse*, because it enters ecosystems without
belonging to their communicative, sensory, or temporal worlds.

But the reason matters more than the verdict.
------------------------------
1. Technology Is Deaf to Their Languages

Non-human life does not primarily communicate through symbols or
representations.
It communicates through:

   -

   Smell gradients
   -

   Vibrations
   -

   Electromagnetic sensitivity
   -

   Light cycles
   -

   Chemical traces
   -

   Rhythms of presence and absence

Technology introduces:

   -

   Constant noise
   -

   Artificial light
   -

   Novel chemicals
   -

   Hard edges and straight lines
   -

   Sudden speeds

To animals, this is not “progress.”
It is *sensory pollution*—a scrambling of meaning.

A forest with machines is not just altered; it is *made confusing*.
------------------------------
2. Technology Breaks Predictability, and Predictability Is Safety

For most life forms, survival depends on *stable patterns*:

   -

   Seasonal timing
   -

   Migration routes
   -

   Breeding cues
   -

   Food availability

Technology accelerates change beyond adaptive speed.

Animals are not failing to adapt.
They are being asked to adapt to *non-patterns*.

>From their perspective:

   -

   The ground changes
   -

   The sky changes
   -

   The water changes
   -

   But nothing explains why

This is not challenge.
It is disorientation.
------------------------------
3. Technology Treats Them as Background, Not Participants

In natural systems:

   -

   Every organism is a signal
   -

   Every presence alters the field
   -

   Even predators participate in balance

Technology does not participate.
It *overrides*.

It does not negotiate with:

   -

   Nesting
   -

   Migration
   -

   Breeding
   -

   Territorial boundaries

To animals, technology appears as an *unanswerable force*—something that
acts but does not listen.

That alone makes it hostile.
------------------------------
4. Technology Removes the Option to Withdraw

In nature, when danger appears, organisms can:

   -

   Hide
   -

   Move away
   -

   Change timing

Technology spreads everywhere:

   -

   Roads
   -

   Lights
   -

   Chemicals
   -

   Sounds

It reduces refuges.

For non-human life, the tragedy is not just harm—but *inescapability*.

A danger you cannot avoid is not part of evolution.
It is a dead end.
------------------------------
5. Technology Has No Emotional Complementarity

Animals coexist through emotional attunement:

   -

   Warning signals
   -

   Submission
   -

   Curiosity
   -

   Mutual tolerance

Technology has no such signals.
It does not:

   -

   Show restraint
   -

   Communicate intent
   -

   Adjust behavior in response to fear

>From their point of view, it is *emotionless power*.

Emotionless power is indistinguishable from catastrophe.
------------------------------
6. Is All Technology a Curse?

>From their perspective, *yes, unless*:

   -

   It is slow
   -

   It is quiet
   -

   It is localized
   -

   It withdraws easily
   -

   It does not alter sensory fields

Most modern technology fails all five conditions.

Animals do not object to tools.
They object to *permanent disruption*.
------------------------------
7. The Deepest Injury: Loss of Trust in the World

Perhaps the greatest harm is this:

Technology makes the world *unreliable*.

Places that once meant:

   -

   Safety
   -

   Food
   -

   Continuity

Become suddenly:

   -

   Dangerous
   -

   Empty
   -

   Inhospitable

Animals live by trust in patterns.
Technology erodes that trust.

A world that cannot be trusted is not livable—no matter how intelligent the
species.
------------------------------
Final View (Non-Cartesian)

>From the point of view of animals and other non-human life:

   -

   Technology is not “evil”
   -

   It is *unrelated*
   -

   It does not belong to their web of meaning

And what does not belong, but dominates, is experienced as a curse.

If humans wish to coexist again, the question is not:

“How can we make technology greener?”

But:

*“How much of ourselves are we willing to restrain?”*

Because for non-human life, the greatest gift is not innovation.

It is *absence*.

-- 
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/CACDCHC%2BLJdBTV2nbUAvdOw5cDG1F5raaV1Me_MmbEiPx8%2B0DOw%40mail.gmail.com.

Reply via email to