But I don't think if it matters whether or not its natural. What matters is solving the earths problems. If we can use G.E. and its safe then we should. If we can use nuclear power and its safe then we should. All that matters is if doing something will cause more trouble than good.
Friday, April 16, 2010
Natural?
I don't know what others think about things being natural or not. But I think that in order for something to be natural it has to be untouched by humans. Brand says that its natural just because you can't do anything unnatural because you wouldn't be able to do it if it was natural. What I think is would it happen if we were not here? Some things do change on its own and pass things on to one another using natural selection, but they can't pass things on to other species. An example is the tomato with the fish gene would the tomato have acquired that gene on its own.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I see what your saying about the pros and cons of the situation. However, I think it may be something deeper than bringing the best possible solution out of what we "touch." I think there is a certain mystery to things that have not been touched by humans. We have parts of the world, such as caves that have not been explored by man. This is what I think they are speaking of. Now in regards to the use of other resources, I am all for it, but who makes that decision? That is what intrigues me the most.
Post a Comment