What is Natural?

As I was driving through town today, I looked around me and started thinking. I was wondering just what the animals all think about our cars, our buildings, our roads, and everything else we make. I thought, "can they tell the difference between something natural and something man-made?" Then I thought, "wait a minute, is there even a difference?" I mean, humans are natural creatures, and everything we make is made from natural materials, so what is so "unnatural" about our creations. It would seem to me that it is just another incident in which humans think they are better than the other animals, as if we are more special than them.Now, I remember watching a special on one of those television channels”like the Discovery Channel, or the History Channel, something like that”about chimpanzees modifying sticks so they could slide them down ant holes and get themselves a treat. They would simply break off any smaller twigs running on the sides of the stick in order to make it straight. So, is this stick (modified nature) unnatural? If it isn't, then why is a space shuttle? I mean, a space shuttle is simply modified nature; it's just modified to a different degree.So what makes our space shuttle so much more unnatural than the chimp's stick? Is it the degree? Is it just humans thinking they are better? Are we? Is the chimp's stick unnatural? How can we tell?I don't have a lot of input on this now. I have so many thoughts running through my head about this, that to try to write them all down would make quite a mess.So, if anyone has any input, please, jump in. I would like having this put somewhat into perspective from the views of others.Thanks,
Trék

Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.

Obviously natural is just a word and can be defined many different ways and not be wrong. If we are talking about identifying the source of objects it is probably useful to discuss "natural" meaning something which occurs without intentional effort to make it what it is.But if we want to discuss it in terms of moral or creative sense, then I think as you seem to be suggesting, that it is wrong to consider our own creations any less natural.I see no difference in "naturalness" between cars, digging sticks (of monkeys), nests (of birds), and dams (of beavers).

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

It seems here that your first impression is that ”man-made’ is not ”natural’. This is my impression too. Because without us, nature can’t make them.I think the natural/unnatural line is crossed when we make something that nature cannot make itself, without us. Well, I am guilty of that . Do you consider Global Warming and ozone depletion to be natural occurrences too?The reason that I wouldn't is that if we weren't here then they wouldn't happen (assuming they exists and are a result of our actions).

Hi Holmes.. Maybe the division can be made where if something is created instinctivley it is natural such as dams or nest. But cars and digging sticks are not instinctive for monkeys to make. * edit quote.This message has been edited by 1.61803, 01-23-2006 12:28 PMThis message has been edited by 1.61803, 01-23-2006 12:29 PM

Yes, I consider Global Warming to be 100% natural. Just because something is man-made doesn't change the fact that it is natural. The way I am seeing it, is that it comes down to humans thinking we are in some way removed from nature.I'll add more in a little bit, but I have to go to class now.Trék

---

In considering the Origin of Species, it is quite conceivable that a naturalist... might come to the conclusion that each species had not been independently created, but had descended, like varieties, from other species. - Charles Darwin On the Origin of Species

As holmes suggested, "natural" is our word and we can make it mean what we want it to mean.Conventionally, when we are contrasting natural to supernatural we would consider a space shuttle to be natural. But when we are contrasting natural to unnatural, we would consider a shuttle to be unnatural.The border between natural and unnatural is fuzzy. I would guess that most people would consider a small vegetable garden to be natural, and a large mechanized farm to be unnatural. Maybe a thatched hut is natural, but a skyscraper is unnatural.AbE: to get some idea of what other creatures think of us, take a look at Wild Gorillas using Tools.This message has been edited by nwr, 01-23-2006 11:50 AM

I don't know if I'd agree, because I'm trying to focus on the nature of the process that went into making the product, and not the nature of the process that created the process that went into making the product. Not to say you are wrong, just that that seems a step removed for me.You know that totally raises a question to my mind, for those that do things instinctually, didn't they have to have some freedom to work, before any action became ingrained. And by this I am more talking about things like dam building, than something like cocooning.What activities or abilities predated the instinct such that the brain could get hardwired with such a specific productive instinct. In ten thousand years could we be hardwired to build a car or something (if we did it by hand)?

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

Hey, Invictus! Good topic! What is the difference between human inventions and other animals stuff? Well.. Remember the night we were discussing "inventions"? Now...did the monkey invent the straight stick or did they merely discover that the stick fit down the hole when trimmed? As this article points out, there is a difference between an invention and a discovery. Did Beavers invent dams?It would be a good study to see if Beaver Dams have improved over the years! I suppose that the Beavers, by creating dams, could be said to have invented them....yet the argument could be made that Beavers merely discovered how to keep water in place...perhaps by adding to a fallen tree across a stream. Is instinct the mother of invention or is necessity?

Do you think we should let nature take its course? I was saying that if nature can't make the thing on its own then that thing is unnatural. Why do you think that humans think this way?Probably because we have no other species to share our thoughts with.

No offense, but you are a prime example here. You say that nature cannot make something on it's own, but what is nature? I think humans are nature.About Global Warming, nature will always take it's course. If we decide that we want to change Global Warming, that will be a natural decision. When we stop it, that will be nature taking it's course.But then the question comes: is removing ourselves from the definition of natural a good thing or a bad thing? Is it better for us to consider ourselves to be a part of nature, or is it better if we think of ourselves as being an outsider.I would say that if we consider ourselves as being more a part of nature, we might just start taking better care of it.But, once again, class is about to start, and I have to cut this short. I will respond completely to all of this in about an hour.Over and out,
Trék

---

In considering the Origin of Species, it is quite conceivable that a naturalist... might come to the conclusion that each species had not been independently created, but had descended, like varieties, from other species. - Charles Darwin On the Origin of Species

No, you’ve misunderstood me. A lot of things occur naturally and nature has made a lot of things on its own.There are also some things that cannot be produced by nature without the help of man. They require man to manipulate nature for the thing to exist. I think the things that nature cannot make on its own are the unnatural things. I disagree. Last night when I was trying to sleep it got really cold outside, and started to get cold inside. I turned up the heat and I went back to sleep. Nature did not take its course, which would have been me freezing to death if I wasn’t sleeping in a climate controlled house. The way I see it, the climate controlled house is unnatural, nature couldn’t have made it without man, and this unnatural thing changed nature’s course.But, you could also say that because man was produced naturally, then the climate controlled house is natural and nature did take its course last night. Is that the way you see it? You didn’t answer the question, I assume because you didn’t have time. I would still like to read your answer though.I think that we think that we are in some way removed from nature it is because we have no other species, or any other natural thing, to share our thoughts with. To the average person, it just seems like we are removed. I think removing ourselves from the definition of natural is a good thing and it is better if we think of ourselves as being an outsider.With this view we are the keepers of the planet. We are the most intelligent species and I think we should be in charge. I think this would hinder technological advancement. Consider the fate of the native americans, a culture that seemed to be “one with nature”, so to speak.I also don’t think we are doing a very bad job of taking care of the planet.

KABOOM! Right on! That is exactly the way I see it. Do you think humans are the only ones who view themselves as special? Do you think it is natural for us to view ourselves as special? If it's not natural, then why do we do it? Do the other animals think of our creations as unnatural? Can they tell the difference? Do they see us as significant? Yeah, I didn't have time. You seem to think this way, and all the people who say that things created by humans are unnatural seem to be thinking the same. I guess I've just observed such thinking all my life; maybe I am just making a generalization that isn't true. The Native Americans were also mostly nomadic, which greatly inhibits cultural advancement. Not to mention, that they mostly declined because of European and American advancement onto their territories. I often think of just what could have been if the two sides would have never met.

---

So, let me see if I understand you on this. You think that anything that nature cannot produce without the help of Man is "unnatural". Now, what about those things produced with the help of other animals? The other animals may very well think that they are the ones who are special, and that it is their creations that are unnatural. Who is right?Trék

---

In considering the Origin of Species, it is quite conceivable that a naturalist... might come to the conclusion that each species had not been independently created, but had descended, like varieties, from other species. - Charles Darwin On the Origin of Species

A discovery would be finding a straight stick and realizing that poking it in the ant hole brings out ants. The "invention" comes when the animal finds a not-so-straight stick and breaks off various branches to make it straight. I mean, the animal still discovered that when he breaks off the other parts of the stick, it becomes straight.I think it is a discovery that piling a bunch of metal, rubber, and what not into a certain structure creates something that can be driven.Your second quote uses the word nature. We need to come to an agreement on just what natural/nature is, before we can go further on discovery vs. invention. I mean, did the dog invent a toy or make a discovery, when he realized that kicking around the head of a decapitated man was fun and enjoyable?Responding... one message at a time,
Trék

---

In considering the Origin of Species, it is quite conceivable that a naturalist... might come to the conclusion that each species had not been independently created, but had descended, like varieties, from other species. - Charles Darwin On the Origin of Species

Why do you think that humans think this way?