Is Technology just Nature? Are Man Made things really Natural?

[Quixote1818]

This is something I have thought of many times but never got around to bringing it up to anyone. People often think that anything that is made by Man as "Man Made" and not really natural however if Man was developed through nature then isn't anything we do just another part of Nature taken to another level? So many people say chemicals or foods that are processed are not natural and so they cant be good for you. Well I disagree because Science often says otherwise. Some processed foods are good for you and some are bad just like some natural plants are good for you and some are bad. Perhaps Mankind is just speeding up Evolution a million fold! Perhaps those "Man Made" chemicals or foods would eventually be formed in the Amazon Rain forest in ten or twenty thousand years?

Now that being said I still strongly believe in preserving the Natural World as much as possible because it's simply precious and took five billion years to become what it is today but I still see some room for progress in technology and science because as far as I am concerned anything that Mankind does is just evolution. The key is to balance ourselves and progress in a peaceful way that does not fuck up the planet and the way our environment works. Lowering consumption is essential to our preservation and that will take science and research.

[Randi_Listener]

1. The goddamn evidence is mounting.

The fucking natural items of the earth refer to anything that man has not processed in any fucking way.

[ultraist]

3. Not processed in any way?

So, if I boil cocoa leaves right off the plant and drink the tea, it's not natural because I have processed it (boiled it).

What about cooked vegetables that had been organically grown? Cooking is processing.

Point being, I don't think your measure holds water. HOW MUCH processing? Where do you draw the line and why?

[Randi_Listener]

4. Altering it's natural fucking state.

Boiling is just heating the shit up. That's not processing. Adding sodium bicarbonate, pounding it, cooking it, and cutting it into fucking cubes is processing the shit.

[ultraist]

6. Boiling does alter the makeup and it is processing

Why do you think that you obtain more nutrients from cooked carrots than raw carrots, with the exception of 5 minute fresh carrot juice?

Cutting it doesn't alter the chemical makeup. Your measure is not logical.

[Randi_Listener]

13. Adding the fucking chemicals alters the contents of what you eat.

Cutting, boiling, and shit doesn't alter what you slam into your goddamn piehole. Adding the fucking litany of chemical dogshit does.

[Quixote1818]

7. So why is it that as more things have become processed people are

living longer and longer? It's impossible in this day to NOT eat processed foods. Everything is processed in one way or another unless you eat grass that no one fertilized.

[Randi_Listener]

14. People living longer is due to the fucking medical advances.

The fucking food has less to do with the goddamn longevity.

[Quixote1818]

10. Who determines what a natural state is?

Everything is made of Atoms and molecules that are just vibrating energy. If you add sodium bicarbonate to something then all you have done is combine Sodium bicarbonate atoms with the atoms of the original food simply creating something completely natural because it's simply made of natural atoms.

[Randi_Listener]

15. The fucking combination makes the goddamn effect different.

Combining motherfucking coca leaves refined into cocaine and combined with baking soda and some kitchen magic gives you shitty crack cocaine.

[Quixote1818]

19. So then you don't eat cheese do you?

Their is no way Cheese would have happened if Mankind had not carried Milk around in the lining of an animals stomach. Under your reasoning cheese is not natural.

[Randi_Listener]

20. Who the fuck said I don't each cheese?

It loaded with chemicals and shit but I'll still put the goddamn shit on a burger.

Depends on what else is in the fucking cheeese. If it's just milk without a load of chemicals, it's natural. Boiling and combining with natural shit is fine.

[Quixote1818]

23. Milk is a chemical, everything is a chemical. Step away from the cheeze!

[Randi_Listener]

24. Now you're splitting goddamn hairs.

Milk is not a shitty chemical.

[alcibiades_mystery]

30. Jeez, Randi...calm down

fucking goddammit.

Let's get your goddamn fucking opinion on ayahuasca tea: natural or chemical? Here's a link:

http://www.biopark.org/peru/ayarecipe-02.html

[jpgray]

2. Our anthills are just a lot fancier

I bet ants think their monarchies have gotten much more progressive, too.

[Quixote1818]

8. Exactly, thats how I see it. nt

[Kazak]

5. Nature is the body,...

humanity is a cancer.

That's the way I tend to see it anyway.

:shrug:

[Just Me]

9. The capacity to create is an enormous responsibility.

I'm sure Einstein would have a LOT to say about this post.

[Quixote1818]

11. So would Spider Man

With great power comes great responsibility.

[riverwalker]

12. I've been thinking about it all day

A trip to Best Buy for a simple project involving technology (like getting a RF modulator to hook up a DVD player to an old TV) leaves me with a pounding headache and a desire to stick a fork in my eye, rip my clothes off and run screaming out of the store.

A walk in the woods never causes that reaction.

I think on some level, we know all this complicated crap is not a good thing.

This is the same culture where people will circle the parking lot for 30 minutes so they don't have to walk too far into the health club to exercise.

[Quixote1818]

18. Their is no doubt that raw Nature is a calming and spiritual place

I feel the same way. I also worry that the more we cut ourselves off from the natural world the more we forget who we are and where we came from. Falling asleep with the stars in your face is a powerful experience.

This would seem to go against my original argument however those who live in the Wilderness are perhaps even more moved than we are when they come into our world for the first time. Everything is a part of nature regardless of how it makes us feel inside but the first time we experience anything is always the more moving and spiritual regardless of it being Mountains or a stunning city scape. It comes down to balance. Spending time in both places so you understand them both.

[New Earth]

16. everything we create or develop is from nature

which makes everything natural.

all inventions and/or technology is already at our hands, just waiting to be discovered.

even man-made things are of the earth.






Everything I eat is from the Earth, right?
I am what I what I eat - straight up Earth, right?
Nothing but a walking sack of Earth,
nice to meet you, how you do?
That's right, yeah, you're one too.
-311

[Igel]

17. The argument's been made before.

If we evolved in nature, then we're part of nature; we don't call clamshells that otters crack open with rocks "unnatural", and when a chimpanzee strips leaves off a twig to make a tool to snag termits from a rotten log, we don't call it an "artefact". Although in both cases it is.

Most people don't buy this argument. It used to be simple: Man, created in God's image, wasn't part of nature but was made to have dominion over it. Since we usually reject that line of reasoning, it's not simple anymore. Instead we somehow have to draw a fuzzy line between us and "nature", reifying nature in a way that isn't logically quite right. As though anything to the extent a creature has cognition is isn't part of nature, and to the extent a creature is part of nature it cannot possess cognition. I can't get over the logic.

But my gut feeling is they're right. Man's not a part of nature. I suspect that we're actually not being honest with our definitions, but I'm too tired to work it out.

[idlisambar]

21. The concept of "natural" is not at all clear

The distinction between natural and artificial is difficult to define. Our surface intuition provides some context for deciding informally what is natural, but the concept is ambiguous.

[Quixote1818]

22. Ambiguous is a good word, calling something artificial does not make

it unnatural. Artificial just means that something is natural in a different way than those things untouched by man. Since man is part of nature then by man touching or changing something from it's original state only means something very highly intelligent from Nature (Man) effected the Universe in a natural but highly evolved way. This is basically viewing the Universe through existentialist glasses rather than glasses with rules. Labeling something as Artificial only means it's different from the thing it was created to be like but ultimately it was still created by nature in one way or another.

[slaveplanet]

25. Yes , Technology is nature

Everyone knows we couldn't have survived for thousands of years without the Prozac trees...

[immoderate]

26. Allow me to clear it up (somewhat)

In nature, organisms and processes can evolve to create just about any substance. If particularly noxious substances are produced, they will destroy the immediate environment which gives sustenance to the local organisms. Thus nature has a natural feedback loop to prevent dangerous substances from destroying the environment.

Humans have the capacity to break that loop and carry out production of toxic substances far beyond a local threat and create a planetary threat to the entire environment. An obvious example of this is plutonium, which does not exist in (our) nature, and is extremely toxic. Life evolved on earth without this and is unable to readily recover from its effects.

This is based on a system that involves planetary ecology, in the larger picture, we may just be another organism that has bred to sterilize our little corner of space, and of no consequence in the universal sense. Of course, I have different feelings about that.

--IMM

[Quixote1818]

33. I hate to go to the extreme here but I guess I should remain consistent

If mankind were to use Nuclear weapons and end all life on earth it would be tragic but it would still be nature. Their is both chaos and order in the universe. Once all life was gone the earth would likely start over and begin to heal it's self. Then again it could end up like Mars devoid of life. Nature is nature and it can take both beautiful and tragic directions. In five thousand years the earth will be swallowed by our sun and be gone. That is nature.

That being said, if we love our children and love the amazing intricate things that have taken billions of years for Nature to create we should all want to preserve this masterpiece for as long as possible. With a God or Without a God it still the same.

[immoderate]

35. Then, is there anything that is not nature?

As usual, arguments devolve into disputes over how words are used.

--IMM

[Quixote1818]

37. I really don't think so. In a nut shell everything is Natural however

Things that are Man made are certanly different but that does not make them unnatural. Just different from things untouched by man. Check out the post with the George Carlin quote. It's really interesting.

[immoderate]

40. I think Carlin is not above sarcasm.

Really. If you look at the full quote, "I'm a fan of entropy."(?)

Get your entropy T-shirts on fellas.

--IMM

[donsu]

27. technology is not naturally found in Nature, so it is not Natural

nt

[Quixote1818]

31. That depends on the definition of "naturally "

Since mankind is Natural then anything we do is natural no matter how you try to get around it you cant. Under your definition Bees making honey would be natural. OK bees take pollen and chemicals in their body and make honey. What if humans took chemicals from a Bee and added pollen and made Honey? We would have just done the same thing the Bees did yet under your reasoning it would not be natural even though the end result would be absolutely identical!! Who draws the line? In my opinion their is no line and their never has been one.

[donsu]

38. and we could also say that everything is relevent

and anything a man makes is natural but in the here and now a distinction is made because it needs to be made.

[Goathead]

28. Carlin on ecology

"The planet will be here for a long, long, long time after we're gone. It will heal itself. It will cleanse itself, because that's what it does. It's a self-correcting system. The air and the water will recover. The earth will be renewed. And if it's true plastic is not degradable, well then the planet will simply incorporate plastic in a new paradigm, the earth plus plastic. The earth doesn't share our prejudice towards plastic. Plastic came out of the earth. The earth probably sees plastic as just another one of its children. Could be the only reason why the earth allowed us to be spawned from it in the first place is it wanted plastic for itself. Didn't know how to make it, needed us. Could be the answer to our age-old egocentric, philosophical question, why are we here? Plastic asshole."

[Quixote1818]

36. That is Awesome! He is exactly right with only one exception

Their are pockets of chaos in the Universe and so it is possible for mankind to push the delicate balance the world over the brink from order and into the realm of chaos where no life would be able to survive. And even if we don't do it a huge meteor or a supernova could end all life on earth as well. In five billion years we will be eaten by the sun and all become cosmic dust. Still it's all just nature. Everything that happens is Nature!

[immoderate]

39. Carlin gets humor from nihilism, that's OK.

Death ends suffering, I get it. So if everything is natural, then nothing is unnatural.

So maybe we need a new word here. Do we need to solve the world's problems? No. There are no problems. Because we will all be dead, anyway.

So what should I have for dinner?

--IMM

[alcibiades_mystery]

29. Don't you go to the other extreme

when you say

anything that Mankind does is just evolution

Are you presupposing a deterministic worldview, in which human creations are caused by some outside force (i.e., this mysterious evolution) that is secretly considered "good" or "progress" (there is still room for progress BECAUSE anything that mankind does is just evolution).

Perhaps we must give the notion of agency a bit more credit here: some scientific and technological developments are good and some are not. I agree with you there. But we must radically revise what we consider "evolution" so that it does not map on to "innovation" so easily.

On another note, it's been fairly clear for quite some time that distinctions between nature and culture are not so easy to draw, and are more useful in their exceptions than in their rules. Great studies have been done on animal architecture (isn't a beehive a technology akin to a house? do beaver dams change in form over time?) that tend to defy such conventions, for example. It's also interesting to note that anaimals seem to be quite fond of chemical modification themselves, and often use plant adjuncts to alter their mental states.

[rman]

32. I think i'd be arrogant to think

that humanity is somehow outside of nature.

If humans are natural, then what we do is also natural, including technology.
Problems associated with science and technology are not inherent to science and technology, but problems can arise from how it is used. It can be used so that we destroy the world and consequently or own habitat (which is what is often called 'un-natural'), but at least in principal we're smart enough to use technology and not destroy the world.

Is an axe a good thing because it can be used to chop down trees from which we can build houses? Or is an axe a bad thing because it can be used to chop off someone's head?
Or would it be better to just not build houses, given deforestation and such? Would it not be as unnatural for us not to build houses as it would be for a bird not to build a nest? Conceivably we could build houses from trees *and* not chop down to many trees. It is a matter of how we use technology.

No single individual is smart enough to do all the smart things that humans do (for better or for worse). Humanity's cleverness is by and large a result from the fact that we can live in mass-societies, which allows for a very high level of specialization and cooperation. The problem is, mass-society also allows for mass deception. If those who do the deceiving know that, then so can the rest of us, so that we can guard against it. I think that is where the solution for our 'un-natural' behavior lies.

I am thoroughly convinced that we can create a society that is both truly just and civilized (unlike what we have now) and highly technologically advanced at the same time.

[Quixote1818]

34. I agree. Nice post.

I like your final line:

I am thoroughly convinced that we can create a society that is both truly just and civilized (unlike what we have now) and highly technologically advanced at the same time.