Hippie Parents, Nature and Civilization
The Romantic-tending parents among the baby boomers - mainly the hippies - glorified nature and raised their children to be natural. But what they glorified is not what they got, and in many situations what they got was quite banal. What they got was based on what all things in nature are based on - survival. The children that they produced were very survival- oriented and as such had no use for the Utopian scenarios of which their parents dreamt. Which is not much more exciting or original than the world of anti-natural Christian strictures which they have left for nature, hoping to find in nature a greater truth.
Their children regained primordial cruelty. Nature is cruel, and if you live in it you may very well want to transcend it as have the Abrahamic-based settled tribes. There are all sorts of hardships in the natural way of life. But as people create a whole different world, while separating themselves from the natural world, their children will always want to have contact with nature. That is because that world is part of what they are, and the more barriers are built between the world of civilization and the world of nature, the more people will want to break these barriers.
The world of nature is based on one set of laws; the world of civilization, on another. The reasons for both are obvious and do not need to be articulated except as to say that both sets of laws are appropriate for their setting but in themselves incomplete. A human being will have orientation both to the world of nature, which he has not created, and to the world of civilization, which he has. That is because the human being is a being of both naturality and volitional consciousness, and his completion comes from doing the most toward both worlds.
For this reason we see the following. The more people find out about civilization, the more they want nature. The more people find out about nature, the more they want civilization. I suggest that both worlds are essential, and that people should have the benefit of both.
With the two incompatible worlds - the world of civilization and the world of nature - being in existence alongside each other, the claims of the anti-natural elements in the civilization seem less credible, and more credible become the statements of those who hold nature in high regard. But the more they actually interact with nature, the more value they see in the civilization. Nature is beautiful, nature is diverse, nature is also highly demanding. What this will mean for majority of the population is that they will want to have contact with nature, but they will also want to live in the civilization. And both of these situations require the following: That both civilization and nature be in the best shape in which they can be.
What this requires from us is a movement toward better technologies. Most people will want to enjoy the benefits of electricity; but that does not mean that these cannot be satisfied in a smarter way. Both the world of nature and the world of civilization being necessary, the smart way is to fulfil the world of civilization in a way that impinges less on the world of nature.
That calculus being taken into account, it will be possible to deliver to people the benefits of both nature and civilization. And then people will gain from both worlds their best qualities instead of fully embracing both the rights and the wrongs of either world and creating a semi-existence for themselves.