Before
the onset of the industrial revolution, agrarian cultures produced hardened
individuals and families who gathered their crops from dusk to dawn, History
101. Later, authors, D.H. Lawrence and Willa Cather, conveyed a more rounded
portrayal of country people and the threat of progress. Their characters had a connection
to the land that many modernists could not and cannot fully grasp, English 101.
Farmers then, and in isolated areas now, could sense a shift in the weather by
watching migratory birds. Hence the eventual publication of the Farmer’s Almanac, History of Agriculture
101. These lessons have become lost in our “have or have not” society.
Americans often live caged lives, whether urban, suburban or rural and have
lost their roots. People of the land do exist, today. But like our evolving
society “touch,” that ability to connect to the land has morphed or been
suppressed.
Books,
film, music, news and so on remind us that we cannot live in our world without
being tough or inured to the challenges most face daily. The word “sensitive”
continues to be a threat to a man’s masculinity and as of late, a woman’s
upward mobility in business. The perceived meeker people, from a child mindlessly
bullied in a playground to a college student being harassed by his roommate for
being gay are regularly called “too sensitive” by their hardened adversaries. “Why
don’t they get over it?” I’ve heard mentioned. Judgmental observers use a more
derogatory term “neurotic” when they meet or see sensitive people. I argue that
those who maintain their sensitivity lead a life filled with riches unseen.
More importantly, activists whose sensitivity compels them to preserve and protect
Mother Earth our only salvation from chaos. And, in the not so distant future, may
insure that our descendants will not become extinct.
Let me
clarify what I mean by “sensitive” in this ecological context. I’m referring to
the definition derived from the word, “sensory,” or “receptive to sense
impressions,” according to Webster’s dictionary. We’ve often heard of how
domesticated or wild animals can detect natural disasters, e.g. earthquakes, before
they happen or how dogs can anticipate an epilepsy attack. There is no artifice attached to these observations.
But should humans express the same sensory ability, as with some skiers
detecting an approaching avalanche under their feet faster than others , or “I’m
getting that sinking feeling!” when hapless victims intuit their home is about
to be swallowed by a sink whole, the immediate reaction from detractors is:
“They were lucky,” or “Just a coincidence.”
I’ll let
the researchers who gather data regarding these incidents, mainstream
scientists or curious advocates, provide the numbers. (Go to the Association of
Psychological Science, link below, for more information.) http://www.psychologicalscience.org/index.php/news/releases/new-research-on-sensation-and-perception-from-psychological-science.html
Instead, I’d rather use sociological and nature vs.
nurture rationale to support my opinion. Men for eons and women for decades have
been told that reacting to unforeseen signals such as our gut or intuition is
no substitute for empirical observation. Recently, I heard on a major network
news station a woman psychologist argue that to trust your intuition is to
often make the “wrong” decisions. “Stop and Think” is the motto of the moment.
That position, however, dismisses the existence of sensory capabilities. Why
not use, “Stop, Sense and Think?”
We have heard
about sensory challenged people, e.g. the blind, being able to hear more
acutely than a seeing person. Keen observers, such as mentalists, can see what
many of us can’t see. Then there are those who hear what others cannot: for
example my boyfriend’s hearing is so sharp he can hear the ocean from a mile
away when I cannot. Lastly, a mother can feel her child’s head for a fever. All
of these are heightened sensory tools. These basic skills have been stored in our
memory attic and rarely unpacked, let alone utilized. Moreover, if we could
have walk barefoot through the forests across the United States, as John
Chapman did (a.k.a. Johnny Appleseed) for months at a time, wouldn’t we have a
better sense of the earth and the predictive signals it sends? Aboriginals have
understood these warnings exist. In time, we could resurrect our natural instincts.
Well,
folks, the earth has been sending signals louder than any brass band and few
are listening, seeing, touching, i.e. sensing the messages. On Twitter yesterday,
an activist, Green Bean, tweeted: “Monarch Butterflies have lost 167 million
acres of habitat across North America since 1996.” Source: Yale University -
Should
Monarch Butterflies disappear, frogs become extinct, song birds stop singing,
and our oceans become uninhabitable for sea life, there is no doubt homo sapiens will follow. Science
fiction has become fact. We are already on the brink, but our wings are being
pinned. The majority of the world’s inhabitants have to live their lives in a
cocoon as they try to eek out a living and survive. Giving money toward related causes
helps, as does fund raising, other financial injections and volunteering;
however, I am certain that the best answer remains the simplest: in our mindset, we
must remember from whence we came.
Centuries
before when our ancestors worked the farms and tended the land, when explorers
learned from the indigenous people, when hunting was for food, not for sport,
and when fresh water could be found in streams and aquifers (wells), reverence for
Mother Nature held a completely different meaning. Only a blink of an eye in
our nation’s history, in our world’s history, still one moment that must not be
forgotten.
Therefore,
should you decide to become actively aware or in some way involved in
preserving our planet, now, and a
colleague, friend or a family member were to comment,
“You’re too sensitive,” an appropriate response could be: “I hope so. Before
it’s too late.”
No comments:
Post a Comment