It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Curiosity on terminology.

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 6 2005 @ 10:00 PM
link   
In the scientific world humans are considered to be animals. We have so much in common with many creatures in this world from basic anatomy, to genetic makeup. Everything an animal creates from an anthill, to a bee hive, to a beaver damn, is considered natural. Why are things we create not considered natural? We are animals just the same. Where is the line drawn? The fact that we alter the chemical structure of things to build them isn't any different (and in some cases is irrelevant). Bees use processes in their bodies to alter the chemical structures of the food they eat to create materials to build their hives. So when I go into my back yard and build a small hut from sticks, leaves, and mud (without altering anything chemically) why is it different from an ant building an anthill? I am a natural creature just the same as the ant. Just wondering. =)




posted on Jan, 6 2005 @ 10:04 PM
link   
Because humans feel a need to have purpose and feel as if they are above all else?

Because we alter substances until they are in a state that is not found in "nature". Of course going back to your ant hill, the dirt they use has been chemically altered by their saliva, yet it's found in nature, so our are nuclear bombs...in fact go to the right part of the earth and you can probably find remains of nuclear bombs AND ant hills....I've never seen the two together in any of my nature shows....but Im sure they are there


[edit on 1/6/2005 by JLStorm]



posted on Jan, 6 2005 @ 10:52 PM
link   
.
Greyhaven7,
I used to wonder that as a child.
We are natural, therefore everything we do is natural.
Maybe the only 'artificial' thing is the idea that anything we do is artificial.

I think the idea that we are 'separate' [based on being elevated above] from other animals is where this concept comes from.

IMHO it is a BS idea.
.



posted on Jan, 6 2005 @ 11:03 PM
link   
Could it be that humans are different in that we are capable of lording over one another? Just my guess, but I was thinking about how a dog lives, and I don't see animals setting up imaginary systems in order to subvert one another into having a social hierchy. Am I wrong, or rather does anyone know of a species that does this?

If say monkeys decided to collect leaves as a trading unit, would they hoard them to gain a personal gain?

I don't see a difference that we build things like the animals. We have only studied materials more and have found more varied uses to complete our work.

[edit on 6-1-2005 by ben91069]




top topics
 
0

log in

join