@bonifartius I don't like the bank analogy used as it's out of context with needs. But yes, I knew about this, always a good reminder.
Follow

@mangeurdenuage yeah, human analogies for nature are always lacking :)

@bonifartius Yes and no, humans are part of nature. I don't agree with the definition/umbrella terms of bank for basic need exchange. There's an assumption that if a plant doesn't exchange anything with the fungi the fungi can make a decision to not feed it.
The cause of not feeding are yet still fully to be known, we just know that if a plant doesn't does it's part a fungi won't necessarily help it either.

What the article also fails to mentions is that seedlings etc... also attracts these fungi in their rizosphere because it's rich in needed fungi nutrients.
So we actually don't know who initiates what, maybe it's both.


What's certain is that they both gain from exchanging with each other.
This is the only analogy that comes close to some animal relations, not banks.

@mangeurdenuage indeed. many of our problems as men stem from not considering us as parts of nature anymore.

(philosophical rambling follows)

i wonder how many of these phenomenon really are to be explained by science alone. i was pretty spiritual in my teens w.r.t. nature, then took a detour following the lure of technology and materalism in my 20s, only to find that materialism is pretty much bullshit and a very bleak outlook on things. there's no joy and love to be found in it.

present day it's pretty much clear to me that there are other things in this world, even inanimate things do have a spirit in a sense. regrettably this aspect has been pretty much lost in the west - as it was lost for me as well.

@bonifartius
>i wonder how many of these phenomenon really are to be explained by science alone.
Science is just observation cause and effects.
Anything can be explained by observation.

>there's no joy and love to be found in it.
It's a balance, there's a base need for anything, be it social or environmental (meaning taking into account possession and surroundings) to be.

>even inanimate things do have a spirit in a sense.
There is a lot to still discover yes, it will require a lot more observations.

>regrettably this aspect has been pretty much lost in the west - as it was lost for me as well.
Basic sanity has been lost for a while tbh.
Currently the alienation of our specie is so great that a part of the population is behaving in a parasitic manner instead of their natural symbiotic manner that permitted our specie to survive until now.

@mangeurdenuage
> Science is just observation cause and effects.
Anything can be explained by observation.

maybe, i have the vague feeling that some things don't like to be observed :)

> It's a balance, there's a base need for anything, be it social or environmental (meaning taking into account possession and surroundings) to be.

possessions and creating nice surroundings are fine! i was referring to the materialist mindset, the hubris that men can control himself, the world and other beings by means of science, regarding them as flesh-(or plant-)machines. the whole covid episode was a great example of this.

> Basic sanity has been lost for a while tbh.
Currently the alienation of our specie is so great that a part of the population is behaving in a parasitic manner instead of their natural symbiotic manner that permitted our specie to survive until now.

couldn't have put it better! :)

@bonifartius
>that some things don't like to be observed
Errors will be made.

>I was referring to the materialist mindset, the hubris that men can control himself
>the whole covid episode was a great example of this.
That's mainly because it's a false perception of reality. You can obviously do actions as a group, have common and social goals, many of them have been reached otherwise we wouldn't be living.
There's a difference between thinking about we, a group, we collectively reached a goal and collectively pushed a domino effect, and I, oneself, oneself as I added my grain of salt, I pushed another type of domino effect.

In terms of control as a group you can only expect that a common goal will be achieved as long as everyone or an enough majority agrees to it, as an individual you can't only expect the results you actually do.
Anyone expecting total control of an individual or a group on individual by force/passive violence or violence for any violent reason will result in more violence long term.

>regarding them as flesh-(or plant-)machines
Cause and effect. Living beings do what they can, some evolve some don't.
Sign in to participate in the conversation
Qoto Mastodon

QOTO: Question Others to Teach Ourselves
An inclusive, Academic Freedom, instance
All cultures welcome.
Hate speech and harassment strictly forbidden.