home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: rec.backcountry
- Path: sparky!uunet!spool.mu.edu!agate!ames!data.nas.nasa.gov!amelia.nas.nasa.gov!eugene
- From: eugene@amelia.nas.nasa.gov (Eugene N. Miya)
- Subject: [l/m 8/29/92] What is "natural?" Distilled Wisdom (24/28) XYZ
- Followup-To: poster
- Sender: news@nas.nasa.gov (News Administrator)
- Organization: NAS Program, NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA
- Date: Thu, 24 Dec 92 12:20:12 GMT
- Message-ID: <1992Dec24.122012.6774@nas.nasa.gov>
- Reply-To: eugene@amelia.nas.nasa.gov (Eugene N. Miya)
- Lines: 174
-
- Panel 24
-
- A common thread which underlies the fundamental values in
- all backcountry discussions is the issues of what is "natural"
- and what is its relation to the "human" state? For most people,
- the "woods" offer a place to see the natural world. That world
- IS "reality." That is where the recreative effect takes places.
- Backcountry recreation is a decidedly sub/urban phenomena.
-
- 'What is natural?' implies something made by natural as opposed to
- artificial processes. There is something here. Polyethelene is
- not a substance that is mined from the earth. It is clearly artificial,
- man-made. It does have advantages, and clear environmental problems.
- But yes, it is made from "natural" atoms. Man is a part of nature.
- The issue is the scale (economies) of some of these substances.
- See "biodegradability" in the dictionary.
-
- If people annoy you with this weak semantic argument,
- use the term "non-artificial." Then see what they do.
-
- It is recognized that people's tastes form a spectrum of
- desired experience. Setting the local extremes, we have the urban
- city dweller who likes the bright lights and big city to the logical
- extreme (in discussion and occasional practice) of going into the woods nude
- without modern fabrics, gear, etc. Few do the latter, the majority
- prefering a comfortable middle ground. In all probability none of the former
- reads this group. They have no need.
-
- However, underlying these ideas are two fundamental opinions. The first
- derived a specific reading of Judeo-Christian values that Man has
- complete domination of the Earth, sometimes called an "anthropocentric"
- view to a view where man is just a visitor in the woods and has equal
- footing to the animals and plants which live there. This results in
- the "take only pictures, leave only footprints" view of visitation.
- The advantage of the latter is that it allows even future generations
- of humans to visit under the same conditions.
- Also avoid "anthropomophising" non-artificial objects. Bambi may be cute,
- but giving Bambi a momentary edge can play havoc later in life.
-
- A common argument tactic is for the former to accuse the latter of
- placing wild things ABOVE humans. This is not true. The latter themselves
- acknowledge EQUAL footing for wild things. The latter become
- accused of the "one true path" philosophy. The former try to
- justify their opinions with a rational, balanced approach, frequently
- called utilitarian. A better example is to consider the conceptual
- shift from the ideas of Copernicus: as humans we considered that the
- heavens cirled around the earth, and we "discovered" that in the earth
- revolves around the Sun. To think the biological world revolves around
- humans is similarly as silly as the old Aristoltian idea.
-
- Consider the process of extinction. It is actually not one process, but two,
- the first or DIRECT extinction is also termed EXTERMINATION. This is when
- a species or group are specifically targeted: Dodos, passenger pigeons,
- badgers, wolves, wolverines, people of Jewish descent. The second form
- of extinction is INDIRECT extinction. This involves destroying habitat
- necessary for the long-term survival of a species and this can include
- trees which last hundreds of years longer than human individuals. Several
- species associated with the dodo are now dying because the dodo is gone.
-
- AN interesting rebuke to species preservation comes in areas like
- silvaculture and forestry. It comes under the heading of multi-use,
- sustained yield, and other utilitarian banners. What's wrong with this?
- It all sounds logical. That's part of the problem: logic with inadequate
- information. A forest isn't all one species. If we destroy the diversity,
- we have essentialy for all intents and purposes destroyed the forest.
- It is only living an extended artificially cultured life.
-
- So where does this all go?....
-
- R. Nash (used with permission)
- The Rights of Nature
- Natural Rights
-
- ^ ^
- \ Universe /
- \------------------------------------------------------/
- \ Planet /
- \--------------------------------------------------/
- \ Ecosystems /
- \----------------------------------------------/
- \ Rocks /
- \------------------------------------------/
- Future \ Life /
- \--------------------------------------/
- \ Plants /
- \----------------------------------/
- - - - - - - -\ Animals /
- \------------------------------/
- \ Humans /
- Present \--------------------------/
- \ Race /
- \----------------------/
- \ Nation /
- - - - - - - - - - - \------------------/
- \ Region /
- Ethical \--------------/
- Past \ Tribe /
- \----------/
- \ Family /
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - \------/
- Pre-Ethical \Self/
- Past \ /
- \/
-
- Figure 1. The Evolution of Ethics
-
-
- ?
- \------------------------------------------------------------------/
- \ Nature, Endangered Species Act, 1973 /
- \---------------------------------------------------------------/
- \ Blacks /
- \ Civil Rights Act, 1957 /
- \---------------------------------------------------------/
- \ Laborers /
- \ Fair Labor Standards Act, 1938 /
- \---------------------------------------------------/
- \ Native Americans /
- \ Indian Citizenship Act, 1924 /
- \---------------------------------------------/
- \ Women /
- \ Nineteenth Amendment, 1920 /
- \---------------------------------------/
- \ Slaves /
- \ Emancipation /
- \ Proclamation, 1863 /
- \-------------------------------/
- \ American Colonialists /
- \ Declaration of /
- \ Independence, 1776 /
- \-----------------------/
- \ English /
- \ Barons /
- \Magna Carte, 1215/
- \---------------/
- \ Natural /
- \ Rights /
- \ /
- \-------/
-
- Figure 2. The Expanding Concept of Rights
-
-
- TABLE OF CONTENTS of this chain:
-
- 24/ What is natural? <* THIS PANEL *>
- 25/ A romantic notion of high-tech employment
- 26/ Other news groups of related interest, networking
- 27/ Films/cinema references
- 28/ References (written)
- 1/ DISCLAIMER
- 2/ Ethics
- 3/ Learning I
- 4/ learning II (lists, "Ten Essentials," Chouinard comments)
- 5/ Summary of past topics
- 6/ Non-wisdom: fire-arms topic circular discussion
- 7/ Phone / address lists
- 8/ Fletcher's Law of Inverse Appreciation and advice
- 9/ Water Filter wisdom
- 10/ Words from Rachel Carson
- 11/ Snake bite
- 12/ Netiquette
- 13/ Questions on conditions and travel
- 14/ Dedication to Aldo Leopold
- 15/ Leopold's lot.
- 16/ Morbid backcountry/memorial
- 17/ Information about bears
- 18/ Poison ivy, frequently ask, under question
- 19/ Lyme disease, frequently ask, under question
- 20/ "Telling questions" backcountry Turing test (under construction)
- 21/ AMS
- 22/ Words from Foreman and Hayduke
- 23/ A bit of song (like camp songs)
-
-