Same Old Differences

Why is it that philosophers and scientists, and sometimes even theologians, find healthier and less degenerative ground lies in defining what their loves and great pursuits are not? Positive self-regenerating definitions are what lie within these negative encircling boundaries of what it, whatever "it" may be, is not. Religion is not science and philosophy is no longer scientific and scientific religions are an abomination (too totalitarian, you see) and history is none of the above, but potentially about all of those below, especially if they were men. These traditions born of human experience grow paradigmatic double-binding walls to co-define what's in as what's not yet out. Yet, ecology of natural-spiritual systems respects no such boundaries, where history/herstory is our global story of unfolding experiential reunion with leftbrain scientific and rightbrain religious flow remembering reincarnating reweaving nondual co-arising ecology of karmic grace as climate health defined by encroaching ecopolitical and historical and too-industrial climate pathologies of inhumane competing hubris. Western religious traditions may differ from Eastern through telling an historically embedded tale of co-redemptive grace rather than timeless nondual philosophy of being co-enlighteners, yet both are within one ecological ecopolitical umbrella of love's contenting co-arising regenerativity as climate health co-defining decompositional degenerativity as further Too Busyness hunting and devouring as competitively usual far more than gathering and absorbing could balance and cooperate drawing LeftBrain boundaries around what God/dess Earth has also brought nutritionally absorbingly together. Scientific philosophers, and sometimes even theologians, find healthier and more regenerative grounds defining how our ecological loves are great transitionally storied cooperative pursuits.