[bungeonsBaggins]

I don't mean to blow your mind, but humans are a part of nature. One advantage we have over other species is that we can spot patterns and work collectively to fix undesirable situations or circumstances. And if our fix causes further problems, we can fix those too!

We're flawed creatures so it's not ideal, but it sure beats being at the mercy of the forces nature uses to correct things on its own, like diseases and famine.

[bcatanzaro]

Yes! Is a beaver dam artificial or natural? I believe everything humans do is part of nature.

[lo_zamoyski]

I would submit that the very idea of "nature", as used informally, is ill-defined and frankly incoherent, and should not be used, or at least should only be used loosely within specific contexts where it does make sense (a healthy ecosystem in which human beings also thrive, which is no doubt a range), like "I love taking walks in nature". What is natural under this definition? If water from a stream natural, but is water synthesized from hydrogen and oxygen unnatural?

The only sensible definition I know of of "natural" is "according to the nature of a thing". Thus, human beings have a nature, and that nature is what determines what is good or bad for us. Arsenic isn't poisonous as such, but it is poisonous to us by virtue of our nature. We are rational animals by nature. And so, unnatural are things which depart from that nature, like the desire to eat glass or having a sexual interest in oak trees and so on. It is the nature of a thing that is the reference point that allows pathologies to be defined. By nature, we should have two arms, hence to lose or lack an arm is a defect. Similarly, psychological disorders only make sense with reference to the normative, which is defined by human nature. To say "everything is natural" renders the word meaningless, annihilating all justifiable and objectively normative statements, which is absurd. If everything is "natural", then nothing is unnatural, because natural is simply identical with everything.

[skeledrew]

And look at the state of the world with all our interventions. We may be "a part of nature", but the things we do to it are definitely not natural. We're the only ones doing collectively irreparable harm, so as not to be at its mercy.

[TeMPOraL]

> We may be "a part of nature", but the things we do to it are definitely not natural.

Name three.

I can think of one: we landed stuff on the Moon and beyond. I think that otherwise, nature has a hard time reaching out beyond low Earth orbit.

Other than that, I can't think of anything we'd consider massive fuckups that nature didn't do better. We're definitely tamer than anything else, considering that life itself is a mass murder fest at every scale, from molecular to planetary.