Jump to content
Science Forums

Jway

Members
  • Content Count

    138
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3
  1. The words I would use, that I find accurate, are "not man made." If that's too long, the acronym of NMM could work also. As things are for me, and what is logical, natural works. If I need to distinguish for contextual reasons, I'd go with NMM. Agreed. Calling things we don't understand, or are mysteries, the result of "God's work" is effective, yes? But is it logical and observable in our physical world? Would age old distinctions whereby the term "God's work" be something that is (using your word) distasteful? IMO, it is okay to say non man made things are natural. That's not w
  2. Saying things that are artificial (man made) are equal to unnatural would be the equivocation fallacy. As a human, I made a table. Therefore it is unnatural. I'm not saying that all natural things are man made. I'm not equating all man made things to all natural things. What I am saying is akin to all things made/processed by birds are natural. That's the direct version. Or how about, all numbers are symbols? All computers are devices? Man made phenomenon could be (theoretically) more than natural, they are just not excluding of what is natural. Nice try though.
  3. Not if we disagree on the simple point. As I said in OP, if we all do agree on the simple point, it is end of discussion. If you agree that all man made things are natural, then simple point is agreed upon, this thread likely sees no further posts, and I'll be okay with that. I really will. And is why I will continue to challenge the logic of even dictionary definitions on this topic. Because a dictionary entry says: (natural means) growing without human care; also : not cultivated; this doesn't mean I accept it as logical. I understand there is that connotation. It is an illogical cons
  4. Are computers / devices indeterministic? I beg to differ. When things are produced in the natural order, I feel they become / are deterministic.
  5. To me, it is not merely a play on words. I actually strongly disagree with that. I believe that constructs whereby man made things are (pre)determined to be unnatural sets up a rather illogical / nonsensical paradigm of "man vs. nature." Man is natural. So, to me, it shows up as preposterous as "nature vs. nature." I wonder who wins? LOL. Man made or man influenced. Both being natural. So, from my perspective, all artificial phenomenon is natural. Since that counters denotation of artificial, then artificial strikes me as inaccurate term. Such devices, I believe, wouldn't exist wit
  6. No Not if I am the one speaking accurately. I am challenging the logic of man made things as unnatural. What is example of that which is not? Because my experience with this topic has shown me that people wish to debate / discuss the idea that some/all man made things are unnatural. Thus, I am also challenging certain definitions. One's that show up to me as illogical. No, I feel I am intentionally challenging definition of natural that excludes human actions. The confusion, as I observe it, is on those who attempt to remove man's actions from what is observable/logical w
  7. If admittedly we don't know why beavers build dams (from beaver perspective), then I think that presumes something in this discussion which is sidetracking. I'm also curious why learned/intended behaviors that result in observable physical phenomena are automatically unnatural for you? This is entering, I believe, side discussion, but if the 'behavior' is deal breaker for you on consideration for 'what is natural,' then I am compelled to challenge the logic. Hoping that you keep things simple. It seems to me that learning and intention are innate behaviors of humans.
  8. From the definition I am working from, I am unaware of any dam (found in the physical world) that is unnatural. All items on this list, I conclude, are natural. I feel around 100% certain in my conclusion. "Our need to understand the affect" is a) philosophically debatable (I tend to agree with this 'need'/desire), and :naughty: am not able to observe this need in the physical. Thus, it enters into a domain not found (observable) in the simplicity of the point I am making. I disagree that "everything is natural" doesn't ALLOW for recognizable distinctions. I spoke to this in OP
  9. No problem. Thanks for asking. I can understand reason to have as much clarification on this term as possible. I felt I spoke to it in OP, though admittedly rather indirectly. When I said, I just assume we forbid "supernatural" from this topic, I thought that would help (greatly) narrow the focus down. I also think me dropping mention of "physical world" and "collective physical" are me hinting at definition. Again, this is indirect, and so I just assume go with what Wikipedia has to say. I can't say that the dictionary definition works for me. Partially cause it's not providing just one de
  10. Demonstrate where you see me as anti-science. The claim shows up to be as baseless and intended as insulting. Who's playing the role of troll?
  11. I see war as never necessary. Nor do I see it as inevitable. I see it as desired. Preferential approach to a desired outcome. If it were (truly) necessary, I believe we would engage in it far more often. As in any time we desired a specific outcome. Again, that is if the assumption is that it is necessary. From OP. The "should" question is a deceptive one, IMO. We did fight in them. And they have been justified as 'righteous action' for desired outcome. Bloodshed being a natural/normal aspect of human wars (or battles among animals). I don't believe we ever needed bloodshed. Wars
  12. I just put up my first (multi page, commercial) website this week, but made sure I did at least some homework on SEO type tasking before publishing. All that is in this thread seems like sound advice. The one that stands out to me as most vital, in early going, is establishing ((quality)) links around vast landscape of the Web to your site. Both creates (marketing) buzz and makes search robots very happy/hungry for your site. Adding dynamic/syndicated data is close 2nd, but less applicable if site is static. If at all possible to include blog into the site, that can help.
  13. I've been watching a great deal of curling (men and women's). I think I'm up to 60% of understanding it. But I voted for: Snowboarding and Hockey Shaun White showed me things that I didn't know were humanly possible until watching his gold medal run(s). Dude got the highest score in first run, final round, among all competitors and then beat that score in his 2nd run. Utterly amazing. Team USA's men's hockey win over Canada was an amazing victory. Really fun to watch. It seemed (still does) like Canada is the better team, but the defense in that game won it for USA, and I do think US's g
  14. In some discussions? Sure. Show me this dichotomy of which you speak. May I observe it? I like that. Can we have that discussion after this one? Show me the dam and I'll try to provide you a precise explanation. If the dam is man made, it is also natural.
×
×
  • Create New...