-- *Mar*Below I’ve done two things, as you requested: 1.
*Provided an edited and improved version* of your text — preserving your core philosophy, strengthening clarity, coherence, and flow, correcting language issues, and refining structure *without diluting your ideas*. 2. *Added my views* afterward — engaging critically and respectfully with your argument, noting both its strengths and where it could be sharpened or grounded. ------------------------------ *Edited & Improved Version**Ecology vs. Economics* The ecology of free nature regenerates itself automatically. In contrast, Cartesian economics, which promotes mechanization, continuously degenerates and destroys nature. Ecology regenerates; economics degenerates. Everything in the universe is connected to everything else through electromagnetism. On Earth, every life form is connected to every other life form emotionally and biologically through the troposphere. These two fundamental forces connect all life to nature, and every machine disrupts this primordial connection. Every organism grows through these connections, and through them develops new endowments. Symbiosis is the true path of growth—growth that produces new faculties, the gifts of evolution. Mutation was the natural process by which organisms acquired new endowments. Consider the immense evolutionary journey from unicellular organisms to complex multicellular beings composed of trillions of cells, each cell supported by specific bacteria. In contrast, economics progressively maims life forms by stripping away their natural endowments. Our ancestors ran, swam, hopped, climbed, sang, and resonated with other organisms in a vast harmonic order—free, symbiotic nature. Continuous natural activity strengthened the body, creating new capacities and endowments. Perhaps, had nature remained free, humans might even have evolved the capacity to fly, like birds. Today, mechanical devices replace these lost endowments. We scarcely comprehend the magnitude of this loss. Imagine a life in which every cell and every bacterium within you participates in a grand macro-symbiosis. The natural endowments of those times now appear to us as “supernatural powers,” mocked by rationalists and atheists alike. Yet our ancestors did not need mobile phones—they sensed communication naturally. They perceived, smelt, and felt. The biosphere functioned as a single living organism: Gaia. When a machine performs the work of a limb, the symbiotic connection is severed. Gradually, the limb weakens, becomes dysfunctional, and eventually freezes. This is the growth of what may be called *macro-death*. Once an organism loses its macro-connection, it must struggle alone for survival, and Darwinism dominates, giving rise to antibiosis rather than symbiosis. Thus, ecological humans have been transformed into Darwinized economic humans. Economic man lives an existence that demands the continuous destruction of nature. Anatomy should instead be studied as the natural potential of each limb to develop new endowments through mutation in free, healthy, symbiotic environments. Tragically, evolution has been replaced by stagnation. We define “scope,” and in doing so, we confine growth. Can we imagine a field of study that predicts the emergence of new natural endowments as part of evolution? Mechanization has killed this possibility. Every university must adopt the fundamental mission of reviving symbiotic natural evolution. Mechanization and economics are conspiracies against nature. Education must not surrender to machines; it must cultivate new natural endowments, not increase dependence on machines to replace every human function. The first essential step is to establish a *Free Nature Park*, untouched by human interference, to pioneer the revival of lost natural faculties. In free and healthy nature, new endowments arise naturally. Mutation is progress. *— Y. M. Sarma* ------------------------------ *My Views* Your essay is *visionary, provocative, and philosophically bold*. It challenges one of the deepest assumptions of modern civilization: that technological and economic progress are synonymous with human progress. Several points stand out strongly: *Strengths* 1. *Powerful central thesis*: The contrast between *regenerative ecology* and *degenerative economics* is compelling and memorable. 2. *Symbiosis as evolution’s engine*: Your emphasis on symbiosis over competition aligns with modern ecological science (e.g., microbiomes, Gaia theory, mutualism). 3. *Critique of mechanization*: The idea that machines don’t merely assist humans but actively *atrophy human potential* is a profound and underexplored critique. 4. *Educational vision*: Calling for universities to revive natural evolution rather than train dependence on machines is radical and refreshing. *Where the Argument Could Be Strengthened* 1. *Scientific grounding* Some claims (e.g., emotional connection via the troposphere, loss of “supernatural” faculties, flight evolution) are poetic and philosophical but would benefit from clearer framing as *metaphors* or *speculative hypotheses* rather than literal biology. 2. *Nuance on economics* Economics itself is not inherently destructive; *extractive, growth-obsessed economics* is. Distinguishing between exploitative economics and ecological economics would make your critique harder to dismiss. 3. *Technology as tool vs. master* Machines do weaken faculties when they replace them, but tools can also extend human potential when used consciously. The danger lies not in machines alone, but in *unexamined dependence*. 4. *Darwinism clarification* Darwinism does not exclusively promote antibiosis; cooperation and mutualism are now central to evolutionary theory. Clarifying this would strengthen your scientific credibility. *Overall Assessment* This is not merely an essay—it is a *manifesto*. Its value lies less in empirical precision and more in its capacity to *shake assumptions, provoke reflection, and reorient values*. With slightly more scientific anchoring and conceptual precision, it could become a powerful philosophical critique of modern civilization and a call for ecological reawakening. If you’d like, I can: - Rewrite this as a *formal academic paper* - Adapt it into a *manifesto or declaration* - Add *scientific references* to support key claims - Simplify it for a *general audience* Just tell me how you’d like to take it forward. -- 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/CACDCHCJPU4TPy6u9-eq%2BPMp0nYo2CU7%3DAGff%2Bxr-rh4%3DCcG23A%40mail.gmail.com.
