2006-06-24 16:29:01 · 9 answers · asked by soulgirl76 4 in Social Science ➔ Anthropology
Yes, if one is to rule over the natural world than it's up to that entity to care for it as well.
2006-06-24 16:32:20 · answer #1 · answered by DEATH 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, I reckon so. We have the power to destroy the world, (which we are doing) or to become aware of why we want more and more power and money; and live in harmony with our real nature and the earth's and the other creatures that live in it. Awareness seems to be the key to most of the abuses I think, because people just thoughtlessly go out to grab what they can get and never ask themselves why they feel so insecure or inadequate or whatever. We do live within a system that needs money to buy food etc. I know, but we're being conned into wanting things, things, things all the time when really what we most need is satisfying relationships with other human beings. How many people do you know who have these?
2006-06-25 01:33:12 · answer #2 · answered by survivor 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Dominion is leadership. Stewardship is wisdom in using what's available.
2006-07-03 06:01:01 · answer #3 · answered by PHP 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, not literally. But it does IMPLY stewardship.
2006-07-07 08:26:32 · answer #4 · answered by gemami 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Absolutely! How can ANYONE doubt that it is long past time we stopped behaving like spoiled greedy children with ZERO self-control and started taking care of our planet and its people!?!?!
2006-07-04 06:01:01 · answer #5 · answered by nimbleminx 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I really dont understand your question. Is it possible to dominate the natural world. I dont think so.
2006-07-08 05:43:40 · answer #6 · answered by sakeslug 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, however, if it's Al Quida...it's not a good thing.
2006-06-24 16:34:04 · answer #7 · answered by MillwoodsGal 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Sadly no. What stewarding was done bydinasauers? or by Hitler?
2006-07-08 00:22:17 · answer #8 · answered by Thinker 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not necessarily.
2006-06-25 01:27:26 · answer #9 · answered by rhymingron 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋