The foregoing discussion calls in the question as to who then establishes this law if it «may» or must not be established by human beings. Who disciplines the «wrongdoers»? This question is all the more interesting because we all presumably violate this law several times a day. Let us leave open this question of a judge and consider what happens when a being violates this law:
In observing the needs of people we have seen that first we try to safeguard our physical existence and only at the highest level do we seek total happiness, self-fulfilment, internal harmony and peace – or whatever one may consider the highest objective of all. We can probably assume that there is an analogous needs hierarchy amongst animals and plants, in other words that they too aim for a state of total fulfilment.
Now comes a very decisive thought: Let’s assume that we find ourselves within a system where certain rules exist which we cannot change. We also cannot leave this system and are simply there inside this system.
How can I have a feeling of well-being within such a system, in which I either follow the rules or resist them – but which I cannot change? Naturally I will only be able to feel good in this system if I follow its irreversible rules as rigorously as possible1. If I accept these rules, if I «play along» with them.
This really does make sense since we have of course made the assumption that we cannot change the rules. Why therefore fight against something which we cannot change? Lets look at this with the aid of two examples:
- If I wish to feel good in the «water system» as a human being, I must be able to follow the rules of water for better or worse. I am free to assert: «I can also breathe under water, I don’t need to learn to swim.» When I actually breathe in the water, the consequent choking will sooner or later lead me to the realization that I must accept that I am subject to certain natural laws. I simply have to accept them and can for example learn to swim, then it will be much better for me in the water system!
- As our next example let’s assume that I would like to feel joy and satisfaction in playing football. This is possible if I keep to the rules of football. If on the other hand I violate these rules, sooner or later I will be whistled back by the referee, maybe even sent off.
Its easy to find other examples. It is thereby quite clear that the respective rules must be followed if someone wishes to feel good within a given system.
The basic rights of existence behave in just the same way at a global level: If we want to have a feeling of well-being on the earth – if we wish to achieve lasting harmony and calmness, peace and happiness, we simply have to abide by the rules. The better we follow these rules the closer we will find ourselves to our objective.
This possibly leads us back to our original question as to whether the basic rights of existence are actually valid. As already indicated many times: You have to make this decision for yourself personally using your own intuition.
We can also ask ourselves the question whether the law upon which our earth system is based can, for example, be changed by us human beings in our favour. Here is a brief suggestion for thought on this:
The rules governing a system are established by whoever founded the system or set it up. Whoever it was who created the earth system – it certainly wasn’t us human beings since we didn’t arrive until very late in the day! It would therefore be extremely contrary to believe that we can change the rules of the earth system ourselves.
Measured against the age of the earth and nature we human beings correspond with a baby which is still in nappies. Perhaps this comparison is not at all bad: Whoever has brought up children will certainly remember that the children in the family also want to dictate the rules of living together. During their upbringing however we force them to follow the rules of play which already exist: One eats from a plate, uses a knife and fork, dresses neatly when going out etc. Perhaps therefore the time has now come for us humans to accept the rules of play of the earth system – the basic rights of existence – and to attempt no longer to unsuccessfully try, like a child, to dictate the rules of the system.
Whoever still unshakeably believes that it is we human beings who determine or can change the foundation of existence on the earth system, must at least admit that our effect on the earth when looked at globally has so far not been very positive. The signs in fact point more to increasing problems in the future: So far we have not been able to stop environmental catastrophes, volcano eruptions, earthquakes, whirlwinds etc. any more than epidemics, sickness, hunger and war. On the contrary many of these things seem to be even worse!
1 By the irreversible rules, we mean those rules which form the basis of the system being considered and which must be obeyed by all inhabitants: In the earth system these are the basic rights of existence and the laws derived from this. This must never be confused with maintaining the laws which people have set up. We have of course drawn up these laws ourselves and consequently we can also change them at any time.