“Life is not about God, it is about biology and behavior that is compatible with Nature.”
David Jackson
A solid, self completing statement—like cement. The question that arises is how are we to manage our behavior? In the biological sphere it is a question of where, in the history of our genetic farm, does the character and chaos of our individuality manifest?
What are the elements of reason required to be, and to live, under our own management?
To begin, where do the good ones and the bad ones come from? Then, we need to know if this can be cultivated, regulated, refined, manipulated, governed, and managed?”
This phenomenal mess is huge. Aside from controlling our numbers, there is the question of how to support a rational volume of humans within the context of environmental balance, in the changing organic circumstances of Nature.
This is all attainable, but it’s also a most important and difficult challenge. It requires a coherent social order amidst the limitations of both healthy individuals and collective functioning, communicating rationally in a changing, living flow; in existing in the “verb” of life’s living.
At minimum, what we can do is to determine the basic criteria for a healthy image of functional individuality and its conscious access to the means of its formation, development and application.
The first step is to be rational in our clarity about having some measure and ability in the evaluation of a healthy neural functioning. This is currently available and accessible—evaluating all and everyone.
The image of tracking comes to mind, where all children are evaluated and tracked throughout their childhood and regularly profiled in their neural and psychological health.
This might also be extended to new parents and provide insight into the potential of their hereditary transmissions. This could be tracked in lieu of the character of certain pathologies in behaviors—past and present.
This feels intrusive in regards to false concepts of what is assumed to be ‘the rights of the behaviors of socialized adults’. Most of us know that a significant number of adult humans are not taking responsibility for themselves, and perhaps do not know how to for numerous reasons, including neural chemical imbalance—anger management and emotional issues.
There is at least a quarter of the human population world wide that live with neural deficits. Also, the majority of the human populations know little or nothing of how their behavior is derived from the inherited neural chemistry of their parents and ancestors. Most of us are unaware and unconscious of what it means to take personal responsibility for our thinking, feeling, and believing.
Most who have had children have limited knowledge, skillset, or time, to provide them with what is needed in their biographies of development, in their journey into adulthood.
This deficit is compensated for in other aspects of community life, like schools in most places, but not all. Often it is the grandparents who guide the development, or even brothers or sisters.
If the functional fullness of a community is to rise to the challenge of this development, then it must become a priority in regards to public responsibility and given wholehearted support with generous financial and human resources. Especially, in the respect given to those few who have the knowledge and skillset to provide the necessary training and experience of how to do this.
Some humans are just not fit to be parents and should be restricted in their fertility in breeding for the sake of both the human species and the environment. Pathological humans are a social and ecological liability.
It’s easy to react to, and then reject this kind of thinking and imposition of restraint and control, but the imposition of dysfunctional children growing up to become sociological and pathological monster “citizens” is not their “right”. It is obviously irrational, and becomes another destructive factor in social wellbeing. It’s an imposition on the well being of species and the environment in the lives of all.
Such searching and thinking raises the question of your child, my child, the community’s child, and the child of the species. The future of all our existence is unfairly handicapped with an unregulated and overwhelming population of pathological members.
The question is whether or not a pathological fetus has a right to exist in the theme of an ideal that believes in the right to impose its deficits in behavior on the community and its environment.
An objective, rational adult evaluation provides the only rational answer. The other is a kind of irrational smothering in a false value of a feeling based fantasy of nice.
The heart of eating is in its purpose.