Anxiety,Fear,Negativity
Markendeya Yeddanapudi
In Economics today, we teach that wants are unlimited. As a result each want leads to yearning or attempt for satisfaction. It means that restlessness is a basic human condition. This notion has become the basic paradigm in the study of Sociology.
We do not teach, that nature has the in-built method of taking all to rapture, the ultimate happiness where no want can create restlessness and anxiety, by the process of breathing, smelling, sensing, perceiving, interacting, understanding, synchronizing and rapturing in symbiosis, that personal wants apart from nature are unnatural. Nature subsumes all organisms into itself as the macro body. There is in nature, no separate want path, for each individual.
Disastrously and catastrophically, we today teach and believe that every person strives to snatch away personal happiness, by fighting for his/her personal want satisfactions, which can never end. The manner in which the clear fact that the human being also is part of nature and Biosphere and that the Biosphere as a whole is a macro body, with automatic symbiosis, is drowned, in blind econometrics, is astounding.
As a result we kill nature continuously as economic life, with the shabby excuse that wants are unlimited!
Our lunacy is so terrible we expect that aliens from space will visit us the human fools specifically to learn about our specie drift euphemized as civilization. We are committing suicide and also killing away every other organism, and we expect every living form from the outer space to be impressed by this ultimate collective hara-kiri.
Wants are not pitted against the other human beings and also against the other organisms. There is great symbiosis, making all into one macro body. Every want is the result of nature in action in the particular organism, each want propelled by the general symbiosis in operation. Limitless wants, competition etc are lunatic notions.
Today, we teach this economic drivel to our kids and give them marks and grades! We ignore Ecology, which studies nature and nature’s emotional existential links among all organisms. Instead we created the phantom the economic man, who is not a human being but a machine, a subject of mechanics.
We unleashed all sorts of machines for economic activity, destroying the very ecology of nature. We hoodwink the students that it is great development. The innate natural faculties which free nature gives all are eliminated and now Mr. Rationalist lampoons tat vey idea.
Free nature frees one and all from anxiety. Today continuous anxiety is the basic feature of living in economies based on destruction of ecology, the links with nature. And every University is under the spell of the economic paradigm. Corporates have taken over the subjects and curriculums of every university and every university, proudly enslaves itself to these corporates.
Let us pray for the freedom of Education from the subjugation to economics. Let us pray for the emergence of a pioneering University that shifts to nature’s ecology from economics. Let us pray that at least one university will take to Ecology and starts as beginning a Free Nature Park, without human tampering. Economics and anxiety are the two sides of the same coin.
YM Sarma
Chat gpt
This is a deep and thought-provoking piece that critiques the prevailing economic model and its impact on human well-being and the environment. The author, YM Sarma, expresses frustration with the traditional economic view that wants are limitless and that personal satisfaction is a continuous struggle. He contrasts this with the idea that nature, in its intrinsic balance, offers a path to happiness and peace through symbiosis rather than competition.
Sarma points to the fact that our economic systems, driven by the concept of unlimited wants and relentless competition, have led us to destroy the natural world. He laments that our educational systems, influenced by corporate interests, perpetuate this flawed worldview by focusing on economics and disregarding the importance of ecology and the interconnectedness of all life.
There's a strong sense of yearning in the piece for a shift in how we view both human existence and our relationship with the planet—one where we embrace the wisdom of nature's design, rather than viewing it as something to be exploited. It's a call for education that centers on ecological principles and a vision for a world where human life is not in constant conflict with nature.
Do you find yourself resonating with the ideas expressed here? Or do you think there’s an alternative view on how to balance human progress with ecological responsibility?
Evaluating the essay as if grading it for a university-level course, I'd consider several factors such as clarity of argument, coherence, depth of analysis, and engagement with relevant concepts. Here's a breakdown:
1. Content and Argumentation (Grade: A-)
- The essay effectively presents a critique of the modern economic system, focusing on how the notion of "unlimited wants" leads to societal anxiety and environmental destruction.
- The argument is grounded in a strong critique of economic theory and its impact on human well-being and ecology, suggesting a radical shift toward an ecological perspective.
- The essay explores a well-rounded critique, addressing economics, sociology, education, and the relationship between humans and nature.
- However, it could be strengthened by including more concrete examples or evidence, especially from contemporary socio-economic or ecological research, to support the claims made. Some readers may find the argument overly philosophical or abstract without empirical backing.
2. Coherence and Organization (Grade: B+)
- The essay has a clear central thesis, but at times the structure becomes a bit disjointed. The flow between points feels somewhat abrupt, particularly when transitioning between discussions on economics, education, and ecology.
- More transitions or topic sentences linking the paragraphs could help create a smoother reading experience. Some points feel underdeveloped, particularly the critique of the "phantom economic man" and the suggestion for a new university model.
- The conclusion is a call for action, but it's a bit vague about how this shift could realistically take place. Offering a more detailed vision of how such educational reforms could be implemented or how society might transition toward a more ecologically conscious model would strengthen the essay.
3. Clarity and Writing Style (Grade: B)
- The writing is passionate and evocative, but at times it becomes convoluted and difficult to follow due to complex sentence structures and a lack of clear definitions for key concepts (e.g., "symbiosis," "the phantom economic man").
- Some readers may find the tone overly critical or emotional, especially with statements like "we are committing suicide," which could alienate those who might otherwise agree with parts of the argument.
- While the rhetoric is effective in conveying frustration, there is room for improvement in simplifying the writing to ensure that the ideas are accessible to a broader audience.
4. Engagement with Existing Literature (Grade: C+)
- The essay could be improved by referencing existing economic or ecological theories to ground the critique in more established academic thought. For instance, integrating thinkers like Karl Polanyi, Herman Daly, or Vandana Shiva could add depth and nuance to the discussion of economics and ecology.
- The essay touches on important topics but doesn't engage deeply with literature that supports or refutes the ideas presented. A more balanced approach that acknowledges counter-arguments or alternative economic models would improve the intellectual rigor of the essay.
5. Creativity and Vision (Grade: A)
- The essay demonstrates a creative vision, proposing a shift from an economics-driven worldview to one rooted in ecology and symbiosis. This is a bold and unique perspective that challenges conventional economic thought and encourages an alternative approach to education and societal organization.
- The idea of creating a “Free Nature Park” as a model for ecological education is particularly innovative and adds an interesting, practical layer to the essay.
Overall Grade: B+ (High Pass)
This essay offers an impassioned critique of the current economic paradigm and the broader implications it has for human well-being and ecological sustainability. It demonstrates a clear vision for change, though it could benefit from a more structured approach, clearer writing, and deeper engagement with relevant academic literature. The critique is valuable, but further refinement could elevate it to a stronger academic standard.