Show of HandsShow of Hands


Terms of Use | Privacy Policy
eLucidate June 30th, 2013 10:02pm

For technology and science, is there an objective distinction between what is natural and what is not?

of course of course not
9 Liked

Comments: Add Comment

christine1986
07/02/13 3:40 pm

Humans are just animals. Anything we do is still natural and part of nature. I think we give ourselves too much credit.

Reply
mariella9911 Colorado
06/30/13 6:34 pm

I fundamentally think there is a difference... But thinking more I'm not sure where that line would be...

Reply
eLucidate writing
06/30/13 8:22 pm

It's tricky to think about. I'm not sure there is one.

Keldeo Laverre City
06/30/13 3:21 pm

I consider "nature" to be something not created or (drastically) shapes by humans.

Reply
eLucidate writing
06/30/13 3:44 pm

How drastic, would you consider a log cabin natural?

susanr Colorado
06/30/13 3:17 pm

I don't think so. There are different definitions of "natural" for different reasons & purposes, & I don't think any single one would serve for all purposes.

Reply
eLucidate writing
06/30/13 4:36 pm

Well I was thinking about biological human enhancement, and at what point we could draw a line between what is natural and what is not.

susanr Colorado
06/30/13 5:16 pm

I don't see how *any* "inhancement" could be considered "natural."

Natural isn't always good. Unnatural isn't always bad.

eLucidate writing
06/30/13 8:26 pm

I agree with that. I'm just wondering if there is a point between a bionic implant and eating a nutritious diet for example, where the enhancement becomes unnatural or artificial.

commonsense America isnt racist
06/30/13 3:07 pm

Something natural is an item that has not been manipulated by a being?

Wait that means honey is not natural, lol.

I got nothin.

Reply
EarlyBird Portland
06/30/13 3:24 pm

How about not being manipulated by a human being?

commonsense America isnt racist
06/30/13 6:35 pm

Maybe, but you can argue that humans are natural, therefore everything we do is natural.