Change makes change.

I recently noticed a meme that a friend posted on an online social network containing a photo of a treehouse and a statement written across saying: “I’m leaving society and going to live in a treehouse. Who’s with me?.”  I laughed at first, but then scrolled down to see the list of endless lemmings that were responding with a resounding “I would.”  I decided to, jokingly, write “No thanks. Having utilized an outhouse before, I love indoor plumbing too much to give it up.” This was met with a response from the group of unknowns, giving suggestions on how this problem could be solved. Inventive, yes, but hardly true solutions. And cutting a hole in the floor is absolutely NOT the equivalent.

This got me to thinking.  Why, if your plan is to leave society, would you include an invite for others to join?  Aren’t you just inviting the very same society along with you? It won’t really be the get-away you are hoping for if that happens. And where do you draw the line on who is invited? Social media by definition invites everyone to view and be included. If you say “I would only include the people I like.” aren’t you just emulating the very society you are claiming to leave behind? Put up a wall, a gate, a guard dog. Point your finger and say 'our anti-society is better than your society.’ if you wish, but a rose by any other name…

I think the creator of the meme, as well as my friend, need to realize that society isn’t what you endure, it’s what you make of it. If something ruffles your feathers, speak up. Leaving society doesn’t make change, CHANGE makes change. Protests are not the only way to bring about change. Write letters, sign petitions, volunteer. What I’d really like to see is a meme with an open door on a treehouse and the written word saying “I’m joining society.  Who’s with me?” Change makes change.

A Transient Being

This is going to sound crazy, but really, what else is new. I place before you this question :  If it's true, in some realm of philosophical thinking, that an inanimate object can house ghost memories of it's previous owners or occupants, and it is also—philosophically—true that our DNA holds onto our physical and mental behavior traits, then what of the DNA of animals? When we carnivores ingest the meat from these creatures, are we also taking in their memories? Their physical traits?

It gets worse when you consider how many animals are kept squeezed into small pens and cages their entire lives and killed in completely brutal ways. Are those memories being transferred to us as well. Are the dreams we encounter in the following days after a big barbecue dinner really the transient memories of the animal we devoured mixing with our own?

Ask yourself, have you ever experienced a dream in which you are flying? Floating? Stuck in a place of no escape? Were those really your own feelings and memories or were they a mixture of yours, and theirs.

If this holds true, then another question would be, how long do those memories stay with us? If some animals are considered to be extremely intelligent, is that also a byproduct that is being transferred to us? If an animal lives a life of anger or anguish, is that a fate we instill upon ourselves by eating them? For that matter, if an animal lives a life of freedom and comes upon it's demise quickly but still ends up on our dining room table, do we leave that table feeling totally happy and content, attributing it to a good cook when really the thanks belongs to the animal?

The next time you decide to dig into a bucket of chicken I suggest you check into how that chicken was raised or run the risk of feeling penned in.  Kobe beef is one of the most expensive beefs on the market because the animals are fed wines and given massages and pampered like royalty. Would that also mean though that the dreams and happiness you feel from the point of ingestion on are directly tied to that animal. If so, it's totally worth the price of admission.

This is all just theory, but then again, what if I'm right?