Charles Darwin did well to publish 'On The Origin Of Species'
before his many rivals published similar ideas.
By it's behavior the publishing industry proved
that competitiveness was more integral to evolution
than Darwin's readers like to think.
Though evolution requires at least much mutualism
for life to work, and for evolution to be credible theory.
Some folks see nature's competitive disharmony
as proof that there is no life beyond this.
With utopian pseudo-scientific sophistry
they reason that a God who made animals
and insects for them to be cruel to one other,
in order for some of them to survive, as others don't,
is not worth the effort He would take to believe in.
They vehemently deny the very idea of any judgement,
final or other, upon them for anything they merely might have done.
How conveniently they forget that we don't need
an all knowing deity supporting a flawed nature
to have proper and enduring reasons for shame.
However much animals and insects torture each other
the suffering they inflict is nothing, the bat of eyelid,
as compared with how human intelligence destroys nature.
Where human intelligence has multiplied through technology,
so have human numbers, and our combined capacity
for indifference and cruelty has gone through the ozone layer.
Our capacity for destruction is now so vast
that it has to be beyond our maths.
Human beings don't know what they do in this life,
never mind what might be done to them in the next,
and with the knowledge of of our power of destruction
Blaise Pascal's game theory around faith seems weak,
beyond belief. But I firmly accept the judgement of the earth
upon my life and body, for my efforts towards it's suffering.