close
more_vert

Absolutely, there's a contradiction but if we're talking about our nature it has to be one or the other and I take the optimistic view that we haven't lost our original nature it just gets twisted by our concrete environment. Of course cities are bad for us, but away from them and the rat race we usually become different, nicer people, more at peace. So the "loss" isn't an absolute one. To me that's different from a true fall.

Right on - now we're finding the common ground!

Yes, I also take the optimistic view. We've not lost our original nature at all, its still there, "beneath the veneer".

"So the "loss" isn't an absolute one. To me that's different from a true fall."

Having fallen doesn't mean that you can't climb back up. Loss doesn't imply no possibility of recovery. To make that implication the word "loss" must be strengthened with "irrecoverable".

Having said that, though: in the Bible the entrance to Eden, once Adam and Eve have been kicked out, is guarded by some angel dude with a whirling sword who is to prevent them ever re-entering. In many ways this is true, psychologically speaking. We have now developed the faculty that distinguishes us from the animals and it is neither possible nor desirable for us to undevelop it. So we can never truly return to what we once were. But we <i>can</i> get back in touch with the parts of what we once were that currently lie dormant, and integrate them with our reason. This, surely, is the way ahead for humanity's psychological development?

It is possible to escape the fall on an individual basis by moving to the country, but can we as a race ever escape it?

That's the question.