Therefore the force of reality has two static but appreciating/depreciating notions, past and future. Consequently if we wish to affect reality in any way we are forced to take what would otherwise be in future, now, and pass into the past - but our common view of the past is a basis for depreciation rather than appreciation, i.e. we generally reverse the roles of the force of reality and economic force.
If we look at economic force we find that it is the opposite to the force of reality, namely that there are two energetic elements, supply and acceptance of goods, that move towards a static element of price. Price creates a drive of reality towards the past, generally depreciating and a drive of artificiality towards the future which is wealth.
It can clearly be seen that reality and economics are like positive and negative and are truly incompatible with the notion of force of reality which "now" affects by taking away; there is an apparent depredation of the future whilst in economic force there is an unnatural push of value toward the future. In effect the wealth is only compensating for lack of real future but it impossible to push wealth into the future; it can only be carried as a now value toward the future. In the real future natural values of elements only have a notion of an appreciating or constant value in terms of existence. In economic force constant wealth has only a depreciating tendency as invented values rise to meet the wealth.
In order to retain wealth it becomes necessary to invoke the force of reality, ie taking realities that would have existed in the future, turning them into past by way of alteration and use, turning such alteration into a product, selling the product, manufacturing wealth; But as wealth cannot be pushed into the future there is need to continually invoke the forces of reality and economic force in order to maintain the value of wealth and support now.
The main point to consider is that the force of reality and economic force are opposite and in no way sympathetic. Since the force of reality is the overriding force that man cannot do anything about, he is always subliminal to the future meeting the past and the force of that is totally uncompromising and can be seen as a potential weapon the more man becomes dependent upon economic force.
What becomes clear is that although economic force is creative in the sense that it creates wealth its opposite nature to reality means that it has to be controlled because whilst being opposite to the force of reality it is also parasitic upon it and what becomes obviously possible is that at some point in the future, when future meets past, the uncompromising nature of the future will start to affect economics adversely.
In the 20th century we have "rushed towards the future". To create wealth is a statement that could describe activity yet we are incapable of so rushing we have been dependent upon the future meeting the past at the same rate man has always done. What has happened is that we have taken from the future at an ever-increasing price, energised now, and pushed things into the past at an ever-increasing rate, i.e. our activity has become greater.
What I am afraid of is that the future will be increasingly less able to give up of its elemental properties and that we will have uncontrollable economic decline forced
upon us.
The notion of going for growth implies an increasing tendency to apply the opposite. forces of reality and economics, thus putting pressure on both and that by their very nature "now" will crack under the strain.
We are already aware of the environmental and ecological strain that we have created on the earth by economic activity, damaging the elements we do not want to evoke a trend towards Example One that I quoted earlier. We have to be aware that the future is uncompromising.
We have in our minds a concept of how to deal with the future. It could be said that a baby one minute old is one minute near death, but we do not think like that; we regard such a stage in life as being on the verge of opportunity: "the sky's the limit". But we know as we grow and develop the outlook to the future gradually changes from being one of thrust towards the future as to a notion of pushing back the future, creating a notion of defence against the inevitable.
In this century we have developed energies and the capacity to use energies that could not have been foreseen. I believe however that there is no wonder energy that we have yet to find even though there may be different means of utilising energy, i.e. I feel that we have reached a kind of plateau in terms of capability and that from here in we need to be considering forcing back the future rather than trying to rush ever faster towards it.
All this leads to the endorsement of the green philosophy in that in order to preserve the earth in good quality we need to adjust our economic activity to take pressure off the force of reality and produce wealth by putting more input into things and produce things that are inclined-to appreciate or depreciate far more slowly, i.e. we pay far more attention to the force of reality, its properties and potential effects.
We have depicted time as cyclical in nature, therefore we can draw a diagram of real time which looks like the following:
The build-up is in fact a cylinder of cyclical activity
We can also draw a diagram of our notion of time including our notion of future and past.
It can be seen that our notion of future and past in a straight line is latched on to the notion of the cyclical path of the earth towards the sun, as well as the earth turning on its own axis. The result is a picture that resembles wealth creation and market force, but this time with the force-of reality acting as a frame for the model. But it can be seen no matter whether it is wealth, time or thought; it is impossible to escape reality which is sometimes finite/sometimes infinite nature (assuming that thought is not fantasy).
Such is the development of thought in this century that it has now become the central function of being, i.e. thoughts are aimed towards the straight line future, when the body and being which respond to cycle and a need for balance take a back seat, simply there to effect one way thought.
Throughout the plant and animal world there is response to cycle and largely based on the fact that the future is uncompromising; therefore most plants and animals throughout their lives are notionally responding to keeping the future back, i.e. responding to the inevitable by acting quickly, cyclically to the advantage of limited life.
The exception to limited life is the tree, which grows upwards in more or less a straight line and outwards cyclically, but cannot do one without the other. The tree responds to cycle and its self-balancing nature gives it comparatively long life.
The developed human, however, has given the necessity for cyclical nature an increasingly depreciated value in life, placing emphasis on the apparently straight line nature of the future, i.e. he increasingly diminished his response to the value of cycle regarding it simply as an obstacle to be overcome. Consequently there is push towards the future which can never be achieved because we are never in the future, we are always contained, by the force of reality accompanied by a force toward wealth along the same path, using the same distorted principles that apply to our general notion of time.
Below is an example of the power of thrust in thought towards the future in order to escape the cyclical nature of reality.
The refrigerator - the main value of the refrigerator is to enhance the life of food thereby escaping for a limited period the effects of the cyclical nature of reality; however as food is directly responsive to cycle in its regeneration it is always available; consequently the only value that the refrigerator has is in buying more than your immediate needs; therefore the expense of food is greater but nevertheless given time it will only be consumed, only to be replaced by more food, i.e. it is impossible to escape the cyclical need for food whether it is taken from the refrigerator or the shop.
On the one hand the refrigerator is a consumer of reality that cannot be replaced, namely the elements used in generating the electricity to keep the refrigerator constantly working that the elements used in making the fridge that will only depreciate and eventually will become considered worthless, the insulation in the refrigerator that may be CFC based and damage the earth's ozone layer which cannot be replaced.
Therefore man creates elemental destruction in order to try to defy the forces of reality only to impose the forces of reality upon his creation.
What shows up is that it is impossible to escape the forces of reality; consequently whatever man does has to be sympathetic towards it and he has to maintain an overview of what he is doing.
We must, in whatever we do, have an accent towards cycle and recycle and balance and this process can be endorsed by using more human energy in what we create. Human energy is derived from regeneratables, consequently it is far more use and far more value to man than any synthetic power source in the long term.
In this chapter I have generally referred to the future as finite which of course it is not. It is infinite: it is only the past which can successfully be described as finite, i.e. it had to start. The infinite nature of the future makes it even more of a problem because it will always be there and therefore future becoming past (now) will always be there which makes it even more crucial that man recognises the importance and strength of the force of reality, against economic force which can only persist as long as there is reality to support it.
Of course the main element of this chapter is only time. But time is our only base measure of the earth's effort, and the base measure of all other properties that exist in the universe in relation to the earth.
What it is important to recognise is that now is not a time element, simply a movement totally sympathetic to the earth's movement. If the only elements that exist in the earth's force are future and past, then our activity on earth has to reflect this, not undermine it. Consequently we have to build for the future, without actually ever being in the future, which is an implication of placing emphasis on conservation, appreciation and saving in realities.
Concentration on economic force has led us to regard the reality in time as now and the effect of force to take as much from the future as we can, pass it into the past as quickly as we can, and claim some notional now value, such as the improvement in the quality of life.
So doing has disregarded the planet, isolated wealth in a pocket alien to reality, and we carry an artificial notion of wealth toward the future, somehow convinced that money can do anything; i.e. we have become mesmerised by economic force and blinded to the realities of life and the earth.
The real essence of problem for both man and earth comes in the dependence upon science for our life's development. We mentioned before in the chapter that now had become "energised", i.e. what has been created is not an element but change, change in the sense of reaction over commonality. Reaction has changed man's relationship with the earth, man becoming a reactor, using the earth as the source of reaction, creating reaction on the earth to support man's reactionary state. Previously man was common and his commonality existed in sympathy with the general commonality of the earth.
We all know that man's reaction to isolated scientific reaction is one of interest and wonder. Such is the state of man's reaction that such reaction is common in man; but in order to maintain man's reaction and wonder, it is necessary to keep repeating the scientific reaction which also makes it necessary to instantly depreciate the elements to create the reaction. What is set up is chain reaction with the earth's elements supplying the source of reaction and change.
Here we can suggest again the notional difference between tangibility and intangibility because reaction to man's body may be called virus or damage or interference with normal tangibility, i.e. illness.
However, reaction to the mind is greeted by wonder and a desire for more (providing the reaction is pleasant). Consequently in this century man has developed the notion of favourable reaction to the point where developed man "lives for" reaction. Instead of as in previous centuries, man had to survive mainly on commonality with the earth, we now live on reaction with the earth, i.e. man has become a reactor and such is the state of reaction that reaction and a developed need for it means that not only has reaction become a commonality, but it has become the commonality, i.e. man has become dependent upon a continuing dose of reaction "to make life different", ever searching for different reaction to maintain a high degree of awareness. In effect man has become "switched on" and needs a constant fix of differentness to maintain the "quality of life".
Man has fallen victim to himself, lost his sense of balance; unable to balance differentness with commonality he stumbles into the future ever looking for sources of reaction, i.e. man has become his own virus, his commonality overtaken by reaction becoming commonality.
As man has become a virus rather than balanced commonality and reaction, in favour of commonality, his victim is the earth and a fevered effort to maintain reaction.
As a consequence the earth becomes ill as its elements, gases and- chemicals become systematically eroded and damaged, i.e. the green problem is in fact a symptom of a far worse illness, that of man corrupting the balance of his own natural design to the point where he has become a predator on the earth rather than its natural manager.
