[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 41 KB, 340x511, boy swing.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2465543 No.2465543 [Reply] [Original]

Why is it that in science and philosophy we always seem to separate man from nature? It seems that man is often treated to be some unnatural being by referring to things we make as synthetic. Is it just part of our western culture (Bible, ect seems to place humans as being above nature) or is this found in eastern viewpoints too?

>> No.2465555

Many Native American cultures considered humans to be just another animal. Many far eastern cultures tried to emulate animals with stuff like snake-style kung fu. It's really the Europeans that wanted to call themselves special.

>> No.2465571

>>2465555
Nice quads, and you're right. Because we in the west primarily take on this western approach towards life, we see ourselves as being "exceptional" or "chosen" beings. A lot of it comes from the Bible IMHO

>> No.2465576

>science and philosophy
>the Bible

niggawatt

As far as production is concerned, if it is not "naturally" occurring (i.e. only with our direct influence), then said products would be considered as being "artificial" or "synthetic" or some other synonym. In actuality, "synthetic" materials and "natural" materials are not fundamentally different, it's merely a matter of categorization.

Man often sees himself as an or the observer. As compared to the inanimate, we -are- special, in a way, so this may be why some consider themselves to be separate from "nature," even though all matter originated from the same source.

Not really science.

>> No.2465579

>>2465555
I just don't understand how it is possible to point out things humans do as being unnatural. It seems every new gadget or tool we create is an unnatural phenomenon. But how is it possible for man a natural being to produce something unnatural. I don't understand how something unnatural could exist within nature.

Perhaps things mankind does things that are detrimental to our natural environment, but it isn't unnatural for deer to overpopulate and end up screwing themselves by eating their food supply.

Are there any good writings on this subject, I'm sure I'm very elementary in my thoughts.

>> No.2465588

>>2465576
I understand its importance for categorical sense, but it seems that synthetic can often times be synonymous with unnatural.

>> No.2465593
File: 3 KB, 126x126, 1296198834622.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2465593

>>2465579
It's only a matter of semantics.

/thread

>> No.2465609

>>2465576

unless you mean "herp evurting be maked outz dem matters derp" than your an idiot

people who say synthetic and natural are all the same always like to play the "theoretical speculation" game, when this is completely unnecessary....

in every category of action synthetic compounds are more powerful and more destructive overall than anything natural, theoretically it does not need to be this way, true, but dems da fax nigguhs

>> No.2465655

>>2465609
I'm not sure how you're deriving any of this from my post. Nevermind the
>your an idiot
bit.

>in every category of action synthetic compounds are more powerful and more destructive overall than anything natural,

"Category of action?" Either way, this is all far too general.

>> No.2465692

>>2465655

oh yea, but its less general then saying everything is the same, theirs no difference between natural and synthetic? your an idiot stands

>> No.2465701

>>2465655

name one category of chemical, product, substance of anykind, where the natural is stronger than the synthetic? just one correct answer and anon will withdraw the your an idiot

>> No.2465714
File: 203 KB, 563x1527, natural.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2465714

Science doesn't separate man from nature.

>> No.2465721

>>2465714
>>2465714

because it doesn't have to, reality did that on its own

>> No.2465728

>cultures place no value on human life
>no individuality, fail at science

>cultures place huge value on human life
>personal freedoms, awesome science age

>> No.2465736

>>2465692
not op. but i see where he is coming from, and you obviously do not.

>> No.2465748

>>2465721
1). Use sentences.
2) What are you talking about?

>> No.2465755

>>2465736

my point was totally relevant to op,
>why do we in science seperate man from nature?

answer: because what man does is orders of magnitude stonger and more destructive than anything nature does(geological and astronomical timescales not withstanding)

>> No.2465758

>>2465576
This.

It's simply separation of observer and event, the observer should ultimately know that they're part of the event (they're not disconnected) but a pause of connection is reasonable.

>> No.2465768

>>2465728
>cultures place no value on human life
>no individuality, fail at science

The dark ages were pretty bad I can't disagree with you there.

>> No.2465771

>>2465748

no ant farm ever set a river on fire with its waste, or burned half of its surrounding to ash to feed its growth, but according to your emo philosophical bull shit we should consider these things the same?

>> No.2465781

>>2465755
>answer: because what man does is orders of magnitude stonger and more destructive than anything nature does

How is that at all relevant? What of Black Holes, Supernovae, Asteroids, etc; are they not "naturally occurring" yet their grandeur is far beyond anything that man is [currently] capable of?

I think you should reconsider what you're actually trying to support here.

>> No.2465818

>>2465781

did you just ask me how is that relevant, then proceed to say black holes and asteroids are more relevant? you dumb fucking space cadet, think about real life for two fucking seconds, in real life everything man does annihilates the power of nature

>> No.2465834
File: 123 KB, 1100x914, 1292215072095.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2465834

>>2465818
Are you trying to say that astronomical phenomena are not "real life?"

Good God, you're a moron. Please shut that excrement-hole that you call a mouth quickly before it spills over you more.

>> No.2465841

>>2465834

are you still trying to say that natural and synthetic are the same? because that's just fucking dumb

and science does make the distinction, ever heard heard of a natural products chemist?

>> No.2465854

to the op...
science makes the distinction because it is useful to make.....fyi, all distinctions science makes are artificial, and their all real, and their all useful....this is just the basic nature of science.....deal with it

>> No.2465858

HUMANS ARE ANIMALS! Science confirms this. Philosophy is in denial...