Pay To Get Esl Personal Essay On Civil War, Buy Essay Online -. For the last eht years it has been possible for most people (at least in the relatively privileged classes) to believe that society is sound, that the system, though creaky, basiy works, and that the progressive deterioration of everything from ecology to economy is a temporary deviation from the evolutionary imperative of progress. A Clinton Presidency would have offered four more years of that pretense. A woman President following a black President would have meant to many that things are getting better. Best expository ghostwriters for hire for school popular critical writers sites us professional essays editing for hire for. site pay for my ecology.
Ecology essay - Essay Writing Service Worth Your Attention - History and Development Agriculture has been around for millenniums. It has been around since the beginning of time and has undergone snificant developments since the time of the earliest cultivation. It was first thought of in the Fertile Crescent of the Middle East and later spread to northern and southern China, Africa’s Sahel, New Guinea and several regions of the Americas. Study of energy through the winning essays not be visible to an ecology for background on future directions in pdf. write my essay generator
Custom Essay Writing Services - Custom Essays Just .95/page We value excellent academic writing and strive to provide outstanding essay writing services each and every time you place an order. We write essays, research papers, term papers, course works, reviews, theses and more, so our primary mission is to help you succeed academiy. Most of all, we are proud of our dedicated team, who has both the creativity and understanding of our clients' needs. Best Custom Essay Writing Service! Order essay with 15% First Time Discount. PayPal & Credit Cards are Accepted! Free Revisions & reference pages!
Pay For My Cheap Best Essay On Civil War, Buy Essay Online -. With the rise of social media as the interface for social and professional life, and the proliferation of channels, streams, and texts clamoring to be consumed, many have heralded the rise of the “attention economy,” in which views, clicks, and readers are not only integral to measuring consumption but also generate revenue with each hit or viewer. But can attention even be understood in terms of an economy? Does it make sense to conceive of attention functioning like currency, or like a scarce resource? More important, do these ways of thinking about attention indicate that we have entered a new phase of capitalism in which attention itself produces value? Both books work from the central provocation that we are living through a profound mutation in the nature of attention, snaled by the unprecedented number of devices and distractions soliciting it. It is easy, and common, to speak of attention as something that is “paid” or even invested, but does that mean that it is possible to speak, as Georg Franck does, of a new economy in which attention is both the central productive force and product? Yves Citton, a literary critic, philosopher, and editor of the journal Multitudes, addresses these questions in Pour une Écologie de l’Attention, something of a companion volume to L’Économie de l’attention. But as the question mark in edited collection’s title suggests, the books diverge over whether this transformation is best understood in economic terms. In Citton considers multiple perspectives on an economics of attention, including the more or less neoclassical one in which attention registers as scarce and increasingly finite as dital goods and resources become plentiful. (Of course, market-based scarcity still applies to the physical world, 3-D printers notwithstanding.) To challenge the notion of an attention economy is not to say that attention is without economic effects. The attempts at standardizing attention and the battle over what one pays attention to are central to the struggles to extract wealth from attention’s flows. Citton outlines two extraction strategies of the “vectorial class” — the class that controls the means of combining and displacing attention, the conditions of its centralization and reorganization. The first is to own the icons and images that attract attention: Disney’s buying the Marvel and Star Wars universes is, in this regard, a kind of primitive accumulation of attention. The second is to control the platforms that measure and standardize attention. ’s and Google’s attempts to insert themselves as the interface for everything from researching an essay to sharing pictures of grandkids can be considered the real subsumption of attention, transforming its very relations. As with Marx’s real subsumption of labor by capital, the subsumption of attention constantly transforms attention’s conditions and relations to make it more and more measurable, quantifiable, and “actionable.” Opinions and points of views about brands, political parties, and products have always been the stuff of daily life, but social media render the inchoate mass of opinion into data. The “like” button compresses so many responses (love, friendship, support) into an easily quantifiable data point. But do such extraction strategies amount to a form of labor exploitation? Citton considers 19th century sociologist Gabriel Tarde’s view (later adopted by the postautonomist theorist Maurizio Lazzarato) that attention drives the consumer society, in which desire must be produced and reproduced. While the work of producing attention and the myriad ways for securing interest are no doubt central to contemporary capitalism, inverting the edifice and placing attention rather than labor at the base serves only to underscore key differences between labor and attention. Unlike labor, attention is difficult to render “abstract,” in Marx’s sense. While capital is utterly indifferent to the individuals underlying labor power, buying their time and not their individual personalities, pays attention matters as much as clicks or time on site to those who track it, making it difficult to impose the sort of standardization of attention that any abstracting and quantifying requires. Various apparatuses of capture monitor and record clicks, searches, and even glances, but these don’t congeal into a uniform measure. The quantifying difficulties are intensified when it comes to possibility of “accumulating” attention. Attention can’t passively pile itself up in a bank account. Though there are ways to hold attention, trending topics and memes have broken the old 15 minutes of fame down to the microsecond. Attention must be constantly reconstituted in the present. Standard accounts of an attention economy vacillate between individualistic neoliberal dogma (“Invest in your attention capacity”) and moralizing nostalgia (“Pay attention to the world around you”). These take it for granted that “paying attention” is a faculty that individuals intrinsiy possess rather than the contingent product of changing relations between individuals, collectivities, technological conditions, and social habits. Against this, given attention’s nonfungibility, Citton proposes a different way to conceptualize it, as an ecology rather than economy. In this, he follows thinkers such as Gregory Bateson, Félix Guattari, and Spinoza (especially as he has been read by philosopher Hasana Sharp), who understand thought itself as an activity always dependent on other conditions and relations. To posit an ecology of attention is to see it as situated within its constitutive conditions. This allows it to escape the individualistic bias built into the economic metaphor that treats attention as a fixed resource to be saved or spent however one chooses. Instead, Citton suggests that attention is best understood in terms of constituent asymmetries, asymmetries between who pays attention to whom. These asymmetries reterritorialize verticality in the midst of social media’s horizontal platforms, accumulating and reinforcing points of focus, creating common objects from the statistical aggregates of habits — something that can be seen in every sidebar of “trending topics.” Older forms of media were explicitly and transparently hierarchal — the directors of radio and TV channels dictated content — but the new forms of media create feedback loops in which the processes of selection are largely invisible, concealed behind the algorithms that determine our newsfeed. In this way, the attention of others becomes the basis of what we pay attention to, and we in turn reinforce the attention of others. So, against the fantasy of a fungible, abstract attention, Citton argues that attention must be understood as transindividual: neither individual nor collective but manifest at the point where both the individual and the collective are constituted. What I pay attention to, like what I feel and what I desire, defines my sense of my existence, but it does not do so without also forming and intersecting with various collectivities — everything from the fan bases for shows to nations and social classes. Attention, like affect or desire, is a point where the most intimate individuation intersects with collective conditions and relations. Part of attention’s transindividuality is in how we pay attention to another’s attention. Sometimes I pay attention to a collective and anonymous subject of attention — the “trending topics” of various social-media sites, for example. At other times I focus on the specific attention of another person, following the point of view of a writer, a camera, or the curator of an exhibit. Attention is always the attention of, and with others. Sometimes these others pass beneath our notice; other times this meta-attention — what Citton s “reflective attention,” defined as “the individual paying attention to the dynamics, constraints, and apparatuses, and, most of all, the valorizations that condition his or her attention” — is our explicit focus. But it is always structuring our attentional field. The different modes of transindividuality underscore the diversity of forms and types of attention. Far from attention being uniform — capable of being spent or invested, wasted, or saved in the same measure — there are instead diverse ways of paying attention. We read and watch different formats, consume different forms of media differently. By displacing the individualistic and monolithic conception of attention, the ecology view allows for a different kind of sense to be made of the intersection between attention and contemporary capitalism, pointing to a broader set of concerns regarding activity and passivity in attention. The key question, Citton suggests, is how to attention, not how to pay it. As Citton argued in his book on mythocracy (which I discuss here), attention manifests itself as softer form of power, one that shapes individuals as active participants. Whereas the old media maintained attention by its monopoly — three channels to watch, and so on — new media must constantly solicit us as subjects of attention. Work, entertainment, and social life converge in a state of constant semi-attentiveness, Citton argues. It is hard to tell if the person obsessively checking their phone is waiting to hear back from work or following the latest twitter meown of a celebrity. Updates and alerts define our work life, social life, and define what remains of politics. To transform this would require the cultivation of new habits and new, transformative ways to use the existing technologies of attention. How, then, can we construct the possible conditions for that? Aside from the usual hand wringing about distraction and wasted attention, the question is ultimately Spinozist: It is a matter of constructing common notions against the singular points of wonder and fascination. The first act of collective intellence, and collective action, is breaking with the constant breaking news, the latest scandal, or think piece, that demand immediate attention keeping us in a state of constant awareness. Constructing collective intellence entails grasping the commonalities that pass beneath the headlines and scandals, seeing the commonalities that define our collective existence. Doing so passes through the same networks and technologies but assembles them differently. Twitter can circulate articles and analysis as much as jokes about the latest scandal. An attention ecology, Citton argues, can create the conditions for a new collective intellence, developing the points of echo and connection that constitute “an accord of certain priorities and a certain alnment of comportments.” The basis of this collective intellence is already there in the connected and interlinked minds and eyes but lacks the conditions of its own production, what he s a “politics.” Citton is rht to suggest that new practices of attention are necessary for different politics and ethics. But his notion of an ecology of attention overlaps other “ecologiy” oriented projects that seek to transform our relations to time, technology, and social relations, without directly transforming capital or the state. I am thinking of such practices as local food movements, which risk being, at best, rear-guard actions or, at worst, lifestyle choices. Just as the transformation of attention is an effect of the transformation of work, consumption, and the media, so our ecological salvation must necessarily transform those structures as well. Cheap research proposal ghostwriters website for masters custom school editor websites au custom presentation writer sites gb pay for my. popular essays.
Pay For My Custom University Essay On Pokemon Go, Buy Essay Online. Contemplative ecology is my attempt to communicate the most vital experiences of my life, and the meaning I have derived from those experiences. Bringing contemplation and the natural world together offers a unique and valuable perspective on the ecological crises of our times. It mht even offer some part of a solution to those crises. Contemplative ecology lies pretty far outside the main stream, so trying to explain it presents several challenges. The first challenge is the meaning of contemplation. The word is used in different contexts to refer to different traditions and practices. It is often used to refer to the Christian tradition of monasticism or the more modern practice of centering prayer. Sometimes it is used synonymously with meditative practices such as Buddhist mindfulness. Sometimes it refers to a more intellectual inclination toward a studious life - a life devoted to books and the mind. So to understand what I mean by contemplative ecology, we have to understand what I mean by contemplation. Contemplation is the art of "listening," through all the senses, to the entire range of experience, inner and outer. A contemplative is one who takes the time to observe herself and the world around her closely and sensitively, with openness and without making demands. He observes his own thoughts and feelings and patterns of behavior. She actively observes herself, others, the plants, the animals, the wind, the rain, the streams and rivers. Contemplation honors the world with open, undivided, undemanding attention. But contemplation is more than just paying attention. The world that presents itself in consciousness is just the tip of the iceberg. Reality, the living world, never reveals itself completely. At its core, contemplation is an encounter with unfathomable reality and our essential emptiness. It is a widely used word but I am not sure it is well understood. It is a contested word: different people use it to mean different, sometimes competing, things. It has scientific, philosophical and sociopolitical meanings that do not entirely aln with each other. So, to understand what I mean by contemplative ecology, we need to understand what I mean by ecology. Very briefly and inadequately, the central insht of ecology is this: There is no such thing as a separate thing. Life is a complex system of both spontaneous and conditioned interactions with permeable boundaries. Everything belongs to and contributes to and derives its essential existence from this system of interrelated systems. Nothing can be understood outside of its context, outside of its relationships, outside of its interdependencies. Ecology involves observing everything in context and beginning to understand the intricacies of interrelationship that make things what they are. [For more on what contemplation and ecology mean to me, see Contemplation for a World in Crisis.] The third challenge is that we have to understand what it means to bring these two together. Ecology and contemplation are usually held in separate realms. We mht have a glimpse that we are part of that world, but it is studied as something separate from "me." Contemplation is usually about the inner world of the mind. It involves taming the passions, or trying to silence the chatter of the mind, or trying to achieve union with God. A further problem is that contemplation is seen as essentially spiritual and ecology as essentially physical (again belonging in separate realms). The body is seen at best as a vehicle for the essential person, or at worst an enemy to be conquered, and almost always as completely separate from the essential "me." You are not your body. This mind-body or spirit-body separation runs very deep in our culture and in both eastern and western relions. So what can contemplation and ecology have to do with each other? What do the mind and spirit have to do with the functioning of ecosystems? Contemplative ecology is also challenging because, if fully understood and embraced, it is radiy different from the familiar social and psychological landscapes most of us inhabit. It poses a direct challenge to the exploitative norms of human civilization. And since we prefer to live in a familiar world, and we resist the unfamiliar, when trying to understand contemplative ecology we will inevitably run into our own resistance to it. At some point we must let go of our commitment to the familiar, and enter a trackless land, the wild multiplicity of reality, a land of inner emptiness and the unpredictable, untameable movement of life. Finally, contemplative ecology is challenging to communicate because it hinges on very personal experiences, and everyone must discover them for themselves in their own way. The meaning is not in the descriptions but in the unmediated encounter with reality. I do believe there is an essential core to contemplative ecology that anyone can find for themselves, so my work in contemplative ecology is my attempt to point the way toward those vital experiences and the understanding that accompanies them. Contemplative ecology is not a plan or a program or a practice or a path or a belief system. It is not a prescription for something that has to be done or achieved. It is not an attempt to bring about psychological or social change, although it may effect change at the deepest levels. Paying attention and seeing things as they are is at the core, without any attempt to move away from that, no matter how uncomfortable it mht be. Reality is whole, but we divide it into external and internal parts, and we tend to emphasize one and nore the other, so practiy speaking, a commitment to reality means paying attention to both the external and the internal and the dynamic interface where they meet and create each other. Contemplative ecology means different things to different people. For me, contemplative ecology is about honoring and serving the whole movement of life. It is dedicated to whatever it takes to get past our self-centered nature so we can pay attention to and live in support of and care for the whole of life. We humans devote much of our life energy to our own perceived wants and our own perceived needs, and we force everything else to serve us as well. Can we, instead, honor and serve and see that we are members of the whole movement of life: the plant communities, the animal communities, the communities of microbes, the lichens and mosses, the insect communities, the river and lake and pond communities, the ocean communities, the soil communities, all the many and varied communities of Earth and all the many and really incomprehensible ways they interact? It's not a simple matter of choice, as if we could just decide to do this, and it would be done. The internal and external obstacles to such a reorientation are formidable. What would it actually take for us to so change our orientation? That is the question that contemplative ecology tries to answer. Contemplative ecology is an encounter with the unfathomable wholeness of the living world, and the essential emptiness of the separate self. It is a stick in the spokes of everything the human mind desires for itself and projects onto the world. Humans have unleashed a destructive force that is consuming the planet, destabilizing life systems at the deepest levels. Our ways of living and working, of growing and catching food, of making things, of gathering the materials to make things, and our ways of disposing of those things are destabilizing the atmosphere, the soil, the hydrosphere, the oceans and many individual species of animal and plant: the entire biosphere. Many solutions have been proposed for addressing the ecological crisis, especially global warming. Most of these involve new applications of technology and are attempts to keep the current system intact while finding new ways to fuel it. In my view, all of these solutions fail because they do not address the root causes of the crisis. We cannot begin to address the ecological crisis if we do not understand its roots, and its roots lie both in the mind and in society, the one reflecting the other. The mind and society form a system that is both internal and external. It is a psycho-social system that is fundamentally out of alnment with the living world. Externally - where we are more familiar with it - this psycho-social system takes the form of economic systems that depend on infinite growth and the turning of everything, people and animals and plants and minerals, into commodities to be sold and bought and discarded. It takes the form of political systems that favor those with money and power and exclude everyone else. It takes the form of technologies that consume vast quantities of Earth materials: minerals and water and soil and ancient sunlht buried in coal and oil and gas deposits. It takes the form of educational systems that stifle creativity and demand conformity to the data-driven, commodifying economy. It takes the form of endless wars over ideology and access to resources. It takes the form of an agricultural system that is more and more dependent on external inputs of fertilizer, herbicides and insecticides, destroying soil fertility, disrupting the natural balance of predators and pollinators and inflicting suffering on many animal species who are seen as nothing but raw material to feed the system. And it takes the form of a culture of mobility, of leisure and business air travel and global shipping that is spreading invasive animals, plants and disease organisms -- and lots of noise -- into environments unequipped to deal with them. And, as we all know by now, it takes the form of vast quantities of carbon being transferred from the Earth's crust into the atmosphere and the oceans, with myriad destructive effects that will last thousands of years. Agro-Civilization requires the importation of material resources and the concentration of those resources in relatively few hands. Exploitation is the norm: exploitation of Earth, exploitation of all living beings, exploitation of each other. A genuinely sustainable human presence on Earth requires a new type of social and political organization; new but also old, more like the other animals. We take only what we need from the local landscape, and everything taken is given back in a form that life can use for the creation of more life. Internally, this destructive system exists as the desire for infinite expansion of the self. It lives as the desire for more things, more wealth, more power, more exciting experiences in more exotic locations. It exists as the desire to be in charge, to feel in control. It exists as the fear and avoidance of discomfort and death and weakness and vulnerability and loss of status and possessions. It exists as the constant noise of the inner monologue that sorts and categorizes and divides and blames and rationalizes. It exists as unconscious perceptual and mental filters and biases that prevent us from seeing and hearing and feeling what we do not want to see and hear and feel. It exists as our perceptual preference for anything that confirms what we already believe, which is ed confirmation bias. It exists as our preference for the familiar and habitual over anything unfamiliar or different. It exists as the internalization of social norms that wield tremendous influence over our behavior. It exists as our prejudices, our habits, our mindset, our likes and dislikes. It exists as our sense of who we are, our sense of what the world is, our sense of what we expect the world to give us, our sense of self. It exists as our beliefs about the nature of our essence, whether we are mortal or immortal, whether we are essentially a body or essentially a disembodied spirit, whether death is final or whether our essence continues after the body dies, whether we essentially belong to the Earth or are essentially separate from it. These are examples of the internal aspect of the psycho-social system that is destroying the Earth. The internal and the external are intimately connected. The demand for infinite economic growth and the infinite desire for more possessions are intimately interconnected. Perhaps not so obvious is how our feeling of separation from the natural world and our belief in a disembodied spirit-self are intimately related to the commodification and exploitation of other lives. We exploit others, and we create enemies, in order to reinforce our sense of self. Or how the ways we lie to ourselves are mirrored by the many ways that social media and commercial media and really all of our institutions propagate lies and distortions and prejudices of every kind. The mind develops and adapts in relationship with the world it encounters. If we exclude the internal and focus only on the external, we nore half of the picture. Therefore, the mind reflects that world and the world reflects the mind. If we exclude the external and focus only on the internal, we exclude the other half. If you want to know the state of the mind, look at the world. Look at the impulse to destruction and exploitation and prejudice. You want to bring order to a confused and conflicted mind? If we bring them together into one interactive system, we shake the foundations of many of our most cherished beliefs and behaviors and traditions. That conflict lives in the mind as well as in the world. The boundary of inclusion and exclusion is the boundary of the self. The boundary of acceptance and rejection is who we think we are. Total acceptance and total inclusion mark the end of the sense of being a separate self. Will I ever take care of something or someone if I believe I am essentially separate from them? Will I care for the Earth if I am separate from it, if I believe I will continue in a nonphysical realm after the body dies? Will I care for the other animals if I think I am above them, better than they are, more important than they are, essentially different from them, essentially separate from them? Contemplative ecology, then, reunites these two domains, which are really one domain in the first place: the inner and the outer, the psychological and the social, the spirit and the body, the human and the natural, the self and the world, desire and economics, cognitive bias and politics, the way the mind works and the way all natural systems work. The ways in which mind and society and the natural world are interrelated and mutually dependent. Contemplative ecology includes everything, and therefore has a chance of addressing a problem that also includes everything, but it challenges our sense of who we are and what we think the world is and how power operates in society. It threatens our belief in the true nature of our selves. Contemplative ecology is founded upon an encounter with a realm that is difficult to talk about, the core realm of the contemplative life: the realm of emptiness or silence or stillness. Contemplation is a way of facing oneself at the deepest levels, and perhaps to see through all in the human mind that is illusory, destructive and life-defeating. Without society's distractions, we come face to face with ourselves in our actuality, including those unappealing aspects of ourselves and our culture that our busyness, our compulsiveness, our conformity to social norms, and our immersion in entertainment usually obscure. We face all of the ways in which we have unconsciously internalized our culture's norms of belief and behavior. Emptiness is the essential nonexistence of the self that believes it is separate from everything else, but it is also much more than that. Emptiness often comes as the encounter with something you cannot fully comprehend: a deep love, or a terrible loss; the arrival or departure of another life; or the inscrutable nature of your own mind. Emptiness is the visceral recognition that your existence is not separate from the existence of everything else, that everything exists in interrelationship and interdependence, and that reality cannot be controlled or managed or experienced or understood in its vital actuality. It's too b; it's too complex; it's too dynamic; it's too alive. Emptiness is the encounter with the unfathomable, living presence of everything. Touched by the infinitely unknowable, nothing can ever be the same. The power of the encounter with reality is not in the description. The attempt to describe it usually requires negative terms like silence, emptiness, nothingness, stillness. These are entirely inadequate words to describe the whole of unfathomable reality. Discovering the hollowness or emptiness of the self--and the futility of a society devoted to augmenting the self--collapses the foundation of the exploitative psycho-social system and reorients life toward life itself, the whole movement of life. Emptiness is what is, regardless of what we think about it or how we experience it, or how we describe it. Nothing belongs to you, not even your self, not even your life." And civilization crumbles, founded as it is on the belief that treasures can be stored up and kept safe for the all-important and immortal self. What they point to is that we are filled with our beliefs and memories and worldviews, and usually need to be emptied of them in order to come into contact with the reality of the living world. What emptiness emphatiy is not, is some kind of esoteric experience that comes as the result of years of spiritual training. It does not mean having a quiet mind or being "in the flow." It is not spaciousness or openness. We can aln with reality or we can try, and ultimately fail, to insist upon our separation from it. Emptiness--unfathomable reality--undoes everything we try to do. It is everywhere and everywhen and everything, yet when it reveals itself, it comes like a thief saying, "Nothing persists. Emptiness is a direct and immediate affront to the feeling that I exist, that I can be protected, that I can be perfected. The self is like a dream character: it eats and eats and never gets filled. That living world is always rht at hand, but it remains eclipsed by the mind's ideas about it. It is not a hehtened state of awareness or consciousness. Emptiness contradicts all of the stories we tell about the self and the other. Minute by minute we reinforce the feeling of being a separate self (the words "separate" and "self" come from the same root) through our mental and physical activity. Thus it consumes the whole world without ever finding satisfaction. Those who do go there, even briefly, will also know about emptiness. The encounter with emptiness reorients the organism. Emptiness takes everything away from us that we wish to possess, including our sense of identity. When we stop and listen, and especially when we listen to the natural world, emptiness is rht here. It is very simple, but because most of us never stop, it's revolutionary when we do. It does not deserve the commitment of our life energy to its maintenance and enlargement. Nor does society deserve that devotion, nor any , nor any belief system. The life devoted to the whole movement of life (which, make no mistake, includes every individual) is a rare and beautiful thing. Like the outer and the inner, wholeness and emptiness travel together. Much more needs to be said about emptiness - what it is, what it means, why encountering it turns our lives upside down and inside out, why we fear it - but there is little that can be said. They are the yang and the yin of the way of existence. Many people find the idea of emptiness frhtening or depressing. We do not want to know that all of our striving is for nothing. We are tuned, not to hear each other, but to hear the voices of the birds. Contemplation is bad news for the separate self, but good news for life. Listening to the natural world grounds us simultaneously in the reality of the current moment, and in the long history of life on Earth; what it means to be one animal among all of the animals. What one finds when stripped to the core is not evil, but a blessing: the communion of reality beyond words; easing at last the generations of fear and pain we have been inflicting on ourselves and the world. If inner emptiness makes no sense to you, start listening to the birds, not as a means of identifying them but just to listen and begin to appreciate their world. My approach to contemplative ecology places an emphasis on listening. Begin to experience the amazing complexity of the living world and your place within it. The living world is much richer than we are taught to believe. By "listening" I mean paying attention with all the senses to the natural world, the world of the other animals, the wind, the flowing waters, the insects, the soil, the plants, the trees. We give astonishingly little attention to, and have so little respect for, the plants, the animals, the soil, the waters, rock and air. But I also mean particularly listening with the ears. Hearing the world can change how we perceive the world and our place in it. And yet they are part of this amazing new creation every moment. Freedom from the net of our ideas is exactly what we need because we have forced our ways of thinking onto the whole of reality, to the detriment of all. Paying attention, without imposing any agenda, lies at the heart of contemplation. Understanding it all intellectually is extremely complex, impossibly complex, and not the heart of the thing. It is the saddest thing in the world that we can go through an entire life trying to get away from life, trying to be somewhere other than here. Our ideas are too small to encompass the living world. Being with it in stillness is simple, although we create so many mental barriers that it can be hard to get out the door and settle down and sit quietly for a few hours and just observe and be there with the other lives that are going about their business. Trying to be in some state of mind other than the one we are in. We in the civilized world have spent many thousands of years trying to impose our will on the Earth, assuming that we alone are sentient and creative. We are tugged now by so many text messages and and Twitter postings and self-imposed demands that unplugging and getting outside and listening to the world are becoming increasingly difficult. Always thinking there has to be something better than this. Assuming that we are separate from everything else. Always trying to reach some imagined future state of perfection. That is how we miss the beauty and the magic that we already inhabit, that already surrounds us, that we already are. Even now, in the midst of an unprecedented environmental crisis, we are more concerned with imposing our solutions than with listening to what the Earth has to tell us. The plants and the animals, the land and the sea have gifts for us we have lost or forgotten. They have ways of knowing and ways of communicating we do not have. How can we solve a problem if we don't understand its cause? We can learn from them, begin to get a glimpse of their world, if we pay attention to them without imposing our agenda on them. And how can we know the cause if we don't listen, and learn from what we see and hear? Deep listening is a vital part of the re-engagement with the Earth that we so desperately need. In the simplest act of listening, emptiness may also make itself known. In emptiness, the inner voice that judges and categorizes and tries to make sense out of everything is silent. The force that tries to take possession of everything and tries to position the self in relationship to everything, is still. Just listen for a minute, without an agenda, and you are dwelling in emptiness. But notice the difference between listening in emptiness and demanding, complaining, describing or explaining. We move half-blind and sometimes fully blinded by our own unconscious prejudices through a world to which we intimately belong but which we cannot begin to comprehend. We can grant less authority to the inner monologue and the media noise and more to the voices of the Earth. Notice that mental chatter dominates our lives and runs our lives, and is the basis for the whole damned economic and political system. Contemplative attention honors the mystery of the other. We can give less attention to the screen and more to the living world. Notice that listening makes no demands and has no explanations and seeks no power and has nothing to sell and doesn't need to buy anything. It gives others the freedom and respect to express themselves and to be themselves and to reveal themselves in their own time and their own way, or not to reveal themselves at all. The mind creates an image of itself and the world and then it lives in defense of that image, to the exclusion of reality. And in this listening we mht be touched by that emptiness that changes everything, that reminds us of who and what we really are: the whole movement of life, the presence of everything. Emptiness without attention to the natural world leads to a disembodied spirituality. But to realize the presence of everything, we have to be emptied. But attention without emptiness continues to make demands upon the living world and force experience into the mind's template of the familiar. Listening, paying attention from emptiness, undermines the very foundation of our psycho-social-political-economic systems. With empty listening comes a simple sense of belonging. Very simple, and completely threatening to our sense of self and all of the systems that reinforce our sense of self and feed on our sense of self. Top reflective writers website for university best custom writer service for mba best dissertation chapter ghostwriters service us pay for my. ecology.
Pay for my ecology essays:
Rating: 94 / 100
Overall: 95 Rates