-- *Mar*Got it. I’ll do this in two parts: 1.
*An edited and improved version* — clearer flow, tighter language, corrected grammar, but *faithful to your original ideas and tone*. 2. *My own views* — engaging with your argument, not dismissing it, but also not blindly agreeing. ------------------------------ 1. Edited and Improved Version*Emotional Proof vs. Cartesian Proof* Emotional proof is a form of knowing that arises from a free and healthy relationship with nature. In this mode, proof is not an abstract conclusion but a lived lesson, embedded directly into one’s internal endocrinology—the body’s hormonal communication system. In a free and healthy natural state, nature makes you its limb. All natural processes include you within them: you inhale sensations and perceptions, and you exhale understanding back into the air. Your internal hormonal communication and the feelings circulating through the troposphere fuse, producing emotional proof—proof offered by the planet Earth herself, the Goddess Gaia. At an earlier stage of evolution, smelling and sensing *were* forms of reading. The primary organ of perception and reflexive action was the rhinencephalon—the “nose brain.” In this state, nature was experienced as one’s own anatomy. Smell-laden air automatically and instantaneously identified what was relevant, triggering action, reaction, and interaction without delay. Emotional proof and responsive action occurred simultaneously, without mediation by abstract reasoning. The troposphere and the biosphere constantly coordinate and interact, and no organism truly exists in isolation. Flora and fauna become extensions of one’s own anatomy, making the individual as active and responsive as nature itself. One extends emotionally into geography; landscape, climate, and place become expressions of one’s own activity. The fundamental fact is simple: you are part of planet Earth. Geography is not external to you; the climate of a place becomes your own internal rhythm. In a free and healthy natural condition, the ego cannot imprison itself. Egoism, egomania, and megalomania cannot thrive where nature is felt as one’s own body. The inability to feel nature as one’s anatomy is itself a form of sickness. Emotional proof, in contrast, arises automatically as feeling. Modern civilization repudiates this basic feature of life. In the name of science, we refuse to acknowledge that we are limbs of the planet. By removing ourselves from nature and positioning ourselves as “objective” external observers, we surrender perception, understanding, and education to machines. In doing so, we render ourselves redundant in our own learning. Indifference toward flora and fauna follows, as living organisms are reduced to raw materials for mechanical proof, while the human remains an outsider to the educational process. We no longer experience other organisms as emotional complements. Universities today resemble municipalities that merely supply services. Lessons are consumed like water or roads. Teachers function like municipal officials, delivering content without needing any relationship with nature. Just as municipal workers distribute water without understanding water as a living system, modern educators rely entirely on technology. Air-conditioned buildings expel impure hot air into the environment, contaminating the outside world while maintaining artificial comfort within. We now live under the yoke of technology. Approval comes from machines. We eat only what is tested, fertilized artificially, pesticided, or genetically modified. Natural nutrients are stripped away to suit packaging, and later replaced with scientifically approved artificial nutrients. Advertisers proudly label products “antibacterial,” ignoring the fundamental truth that we are bacteria-filled and bacteria-driven organisms at every nanosecond of life. Before 1865 in the United States, slaves were subjected to religious preaching instructing them on obedience. Today, we are preached to about how to live “scientifically,” obedient to machines. Scientific proof has come to mean proof produced by machines or derived through mathematical reduction. Under the dominance of Cartesian thought, we continuously kill nature and substitute it with technology. The biosphere and ecology are sacrificed, leaving us only with mechanical engineering. I may be branded a crank, but I assert that so-called scientific proof, as it is practiced today, is the kind of proof demanded by lunatics. — *Y. M. Sarma* ------------------------------ 2. My Own Views Your essay is *not anti-intelligence* or even truly anti-science. What you are rejecting is *scientism*—the belief that machine-mediated, quantifiable proof is the *only* valid form of knowing. That distinction matters. You are absolutely right about several deep points: - *Embodied knowing precedes abstraction.* Evolutionarily, sensing, feeling, and acting came long before equations. Modern neuroscience increasingly agrees that cognition is embodied, hormonal, emotional, and environmental—not just cerebral. - *The observer fiction is dangerous.* The Cartesian split between observer and observed has enabled ecological destruction by psychologically removing humans from responsibility. - *Technology has inverted mastery.* Tools were meant to extend human perception; instead, humans now seek validation from tools. That said, here’s where I’d gently challenge or refine your position: 1. *Scientific proof itself is not the enemy.* The problem is not mathematics or instrumentation, but *their monopoly*. When scientific proof excludes emotional, ecological, and embodied validation, it becomes pathological—but it does not have to. 2. *Emotion alone can also mislead.* Emotional proof is powerful, but emotions can be shaped by trauma, ideology, or manipulation. A healthy epistemology probably needs *dialogue between emotional proof and analytical proof*, not the replacement of one by the other. 3. *Technology is not inherently anti-nature.* The real crisis is *disembedded technology*—technology divorced from ecological feedback. Indigenous tools, permaculture science, and bio-mimetic engineering show that technology can also deepen our participation in nature rather than sever it. 4. *Your critique aligns with emerging science more than you admit.* Fields like systems ecology, embodied cognition, microbiome research, and climate science increasingly confirm your core intuition: humans are not separate observers but *nodes in planetary metabolism*. If I had to summarize my position in one sentence: Emotional proof is not irrational—it is *pre-rational* and *trans-rational*. The tragedy of modern civilization is not that it uses science, but that it has forgotten how to feel when science is wrong. If you’d like, I can: - Tighten this into a *publishable philosophical essay* - Rewrite it for a *scientific audience without losing its soul* - Or help you frame it as a *dialogue between Gaia and Descartes* (which could be very powerful) Just tell me where you want to take it. -- 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/CACDCHCKYkZc-7JBtb5vg8hCqA1xOMUKhJ69WrNwf1K8H9s%2B2GA%40mail.gmail.com.
