The Ethos of the Predator, At War with
Both Mother Nature and Human Civilization, Is a “No Win” Phenomenon.
The ethos of “winning and losing” is a “No Win” proposition. Its manifestation is deeply engrained within the habit patterns of modern Humanity for one reason only: the habit of predation upon other willful lives for human nourishment has made the morally offensive and socially unacceptable prerogatives of predatory will into apparently irrefutable axioms for the instinctive level of awareness within all of Humanity that still partakes of the aforementioned pattern of nourishment. The discongruity of the “I win, you lose” ethic with the “We are All One!” affirmation that maintains the cohesion of the identity of the human species sets off strident alarms that must be heeded today.
The “winner-loser” archetype is the context of the experience of the prevailing majority of modern people currently engaged in commercial, industrial and governmental careers. Continual pressure to maintain the competitive edge gives rise to the “to fight is to exist” personality types, and the resultant hyper-competitive sub-culture is clearly antithetical to essential human principle. It is actually diametrically opposed to the associative paradigm, typified by the “We are all One” realization which brought forth and which maintains human society. The frame of reference that is implicit to the conqueror, the super competitor, and the aggression-worshipping personality types was formulated not to become an identity principle at all, but to serve as an alter-ego that our courageous protectors could put on to transform or destroy genuine threats to the life and culture of Humanity.
Because men have identified the slaughter of animal life with provision of sustenance for themselves and their families, callousness has tacitly been cultivated as a virtue for its correlation with the quick cruelty that enabled men to kill abundant supply for their tables. Callousness is inimical to the sublime virtues of our civil ideals: either one can exist or the other. A society with a unified continuity of identity cannot simultaneously culture the ideals of caring-ness and of callousness: they are mutually exclusive. Of course, men who expect to raise families are steeped in the respect for the practical imperatives, and in fact value practicality itself as an unassailably integral constituent to the cultivation of the genuine father manifestation. Thus, on the assumption that slaughter of animals was necessary for a strong, healthy life, the ways of normal men and the ways of “spiritual” or “idealistic” people have inevitably had to disagree and diverge with the approach of the practical challenges of adulthood. Thus, the “aggressive edge”, and the “killer instinct”, and similar callous attitudes are implicitly worshipped, even to profligate excess, in the high-budget Hollywood movies of recent decades. Accommodation to violence and the use of force and fear are celebrated as the pinnacle of the practical reality of adulthood in our day. The “spiritual Ideals” are granted a sequestered refuge in the temples of contemporary worship, but they are subtly scoffed as the fantasy-land for mama’s boys, for “idealists” (as opposed to realists), and as a pleasantry for women’s minds and an acceptable baby food for children. And thus, the core values and ideals issuing from the exhalted unity of Culture are indulged as only a boring decoration, a superficial necessity, or a “nicety”, by the vast majority of the notably “successful” practical men of our contemporary culture.
This pattern has repeated as a cycle of conflict between idealism and realism over the ages that has always resulted in the annihilation of the culture once the populace reached the point where there was little or no respect remaining for the unitive “We Are All One” source of the civilized ideals and laws. The culture of lawless liars is thrown down either by another sub-group who adhere still to the unitive ideals of culture, or by the powers of Life Itself, in response to the inevitable abuses of the callous people.
The ethos of the predator, who needs somebody to serve as the “loser” if his personality is to experience fulfillment, has to be disallowed if the core principle of unity is not to suffer degradation and corruption from within. The shared identity issuing from the group experience of all-inclusive mutual affirmation is a resonance with the core of Life that gives assurance that the given intellectual species is on track for the further unfoldment of the identity principle that serves as the focus of rational cognition for the sustaining Life System as a whole. As much as Humanity maintains continuity within the Unity of our originating realization, the Unity of Life Itself cultures and protects the precious Light of the intellectual species. As much as human thoughts and feelings diverge from the all-inclusive Unity of our origin, un-reason, ill health, and disenchantment with the ideals of civilized culture precipitate chaos, self-negation, and the eventual dissolution of the given human society.
Humanity, in the age of nuclear power, cannot afford to ignore irrefutable recognition of the source of self-negation within the human psyche and society. The evidence upon healthy nutrition coming forth from technological medicine amplifies the guidance from inspired luminaries from all times within Humanity’s experience: “Treat others (including Life Itself) as you yourself would like to be treated”. Today it is not ethereal or theoretical wisdom that is recommending the fruitarian-vegetarian pattern of nutrition; it is simple and eminently practical logic guiding such decision. I believe that it is time that such logic find its way into the legislative processes that protect Humanity’s health of body and stability of culture, for the sake of the dignity of the present generation, and the generations to come.