<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Artificial Vs Natural</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.reasonforliberty.com/philosophy/artificial-vs-natural.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.reasonforliberty.com/philosophy/artificial-vs-natural.html</link>
	<description>Because everything has a reason!</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 16 Aug 2010 13:02:23 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: rinzu rajan</title>
		<link>http://www.reasonforliberty.com/philosophy/artificial-vs-natural.html/comment-page-1#comment-1287</link>
		<dc:creator>rinzu rajan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Oct 2008 10:56:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.reasonforliberty.com/?p=868#comment-1287</guid>
		<description>food for thought...the debate will continue...but the natural,unnatural and artificial...
coz all these are terms coined by us humans...
 
 </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>food for thought&#8230;the debate will continue&#8230;but the natural,unnatural and artificial&#8230;<br />
coz all these are terms coined by us humans&#8230;<br />
 <br />&nbsp; </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Melissa</title>
		<link>http://www.reasonforliberty.com/philosophy/artificial-vs-natural.html/comment-page-1#comment-1291</link>
		<dc:creator>Melissa</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Oct 2008 11:28:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.reasonforliberty.com/?p=868#comment-1291</guid>
		<description>Loved the template.
Loved the content.
Will come back more often.
I cant write like your self, and I dont have what what it takes to comment your post, but I really found it interesting.
Take care, MEL.
&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.mel-brazil.blogspot.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://www.mel-brazil.blogspot.com/&lt;/a&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Loved the template.<br />
Loved the content.<br />
Will come back more often.<br />
I cant write like your self, and I dont have what what it takes to comment your post, but I really found it interesting.<br />
Take care, <span class="caps">MEL</span>.<br />&nbsp;<a href="http://www.mel-brazil.blogspot.com/" rel="nofollow" onclick="pageTracker._trackPageview('/outgoing/www.mel-brazil.blogspot.com/?referer=');">http://www.mel-brazil.blogspot.com/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: poo</title>
		<link>http://www.reasonforliberty.com/philosophy/artificial-vs-natural.html/comment-page-1#comment-1293</link>
		<dc:creator>poo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Oct 2008 07:47:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.reasonforliberty.com/?p=868#comment-1293</guid>
		<description>Natural-Artificial, Legal-illegal, Good-bad, None the differ, two extremes given a range, actually is one. its just a single plain algorithm. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Natural-Artificial, Legal-illegal, Good-bad, None the differ, two extremes given a range, actually is one. its just a single plain&nbsp;algorithm. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Fisherman</title>
		<link>http://www.reasonforliberty.com/philosophy/artificial-vs-natural.html/comment-page-1#comment-1292</link>
		<dc:creator>Fisherman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Oct 2008 05:27:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.reasonforliberty.com/?p=868#comment-1292</guid>
		<description>It is only human who can act unnaturally, for it is he who has coined the term.
I was listening to this NDTV debate on abolishing the section against sodomy, a christan scholer argued that, as sodomy is unnatural, it should be illegal.
All that occurs in nature is natural, things may be rational or irrational. Often, we are programmed to act in a rational way, which we term as natural.
An example would be, if human were four-footed, then the process of labor would have been nearly painless as the pelvis would not have modified. But, we chose to walk on two feet, and that is what is natural now.
Advaita Vedanta is the closest to modern Physics, at this point. And it abolishes the existence of both supernatural, and unnatural.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It is only human who can act unnaturally, for it is he who has coined the term.<br />
I was listening to this <span class="caps">NDTV</span> debate on abolishing the section against sodomy, a christan scholer argued that, as sodomy is unnatural, it should be illegal.<br />
All that occurs in nature is natural, things may be rational or irrational. Often, we are programmed to act in a rational way, which we term as natural.<br />
An example would be, if human were four-footed, then the process of labor would have been nearly painless as the pelvis would not have modified. But, we chose to walk on two feet, and that is what is natural now.<br />
Advaita Vedanta is the closest to modern Physics, at this point. And it abolishes the existence of both supernatural, and&nbsp;unnatural.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Unpretentious Diva</title>
		<link>http://www.reasonforliberty.com/philosophy/artificial-vs-natural.html/comment-page-1#comment-1290</link>
		<dc:creator>Unpretentious Diva</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 14 Oct 2008 12:03:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.reasonforliberty.com/?p=868#comment-1290</guid>
		<description>The cosmic world (whatever you mean by that) is bound to follow the natural laws.
It will go upto vedic discussion and the post is not meant for that, yet, I would like to mention that Rigveda just like other three vedas is depicted by various schollars in various ways, which way you call proper is your assumption, but which suits a certain extent of reason is the idea of Taitrya Vedanta and Advaita vedanta.
Taitreya Vedanta assertains causality and enumerates three causes for the Universe.
The Primary Cause (Ishwar, Omkar, Shakti, Urja, Energy and many other names for the same cause)
The Secondary Cause (Nature or prakriti or matter, which was always there and none made it)
The Common Cause ( the life and structures of matter made upon the natural laws in accordance with primary cause).

Advaita Vedanta says that the primary Cause and secondary cause are ONE, and the common cause is just replication of that One. It signifies the paganistic nature of Vedism, that is Nature is the god, natural universal laws are the realms of god.
Real is that which exists, Unreal is that which doesn&#039;t exist an cannot exist.
Natural is that which is real and hence which exist or can occur, Unnatural is that which is unreal and hence which cannot exist.
The idea of supernatural is totally discarded by Taitreya and Advaita vedanta both.
By the way, you mentioned various names of god, so I should mention that Vedic concepts like Samkhya, Mimaamsa, Nyaya, and so on are completely Atheistic and denies any existence of God, while vedic schools of Dvaita, Advaita and Taitreya Vedanta asserts the monotheistic system, (with a difference that Advaita Vedanta asserts that All is one and is Nature, Dvaita Vedanta asserting that Nature and Ishwar (urja, shakti, omkar, energy) are different, and are existing since ever for ever, while Taitreya vedanta asserting that Energy, Matter and life are all different).
None of the three major schools of Vedic philosophy supports the idea of Unnatural, some schools, accepts the idea of supernatural as being God, which cannot act against nature in any circumstance) while some schools asserts that there is nothing like supernatural and all that is, is nature).
From the roots of Samkhya, Mimaamsa, Nyaya and Charak, the branches of Vedism like jainism and budhism sprouts and fruitifies.
&lt;em&gt;
&lt;/em&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The cosmic world (whatever you mean by that) is bound to follow the natural laws.<br />
It will go upto vedic discussion and the post is not meant for that, yet, I would like to mention that Rigveda just like other three vedas is depicted by various schollars in various ways, which way you call proper is your assumption, but which suits a certain extent of reason is the idea of Taitrya Vedanta and Advaita vedanta.<br />
Taitreya Vedanta assertains causality and enumerates three causes for the Universe.<br />
The Primary Cause (Ishwar, Omkar, Shakti, Urja, Energy and many other names for the same cause)<br />
The Secondary Cause (Nature or prakriti or matter, which was always there and none made it)<br />
The Common Cause ( the life and structures of matter made upon the natural laws in accordance with primary&nbsp;cause).</p>
<p>Advaita Vedanta says that the primary Cause and secondary cause are <span class="caps">ONE</span>, and the common cause is just replication of that One. It signifies the paganistic nature of Vedism, that is Nature is the god, natural universal laws are the realms of god.<br />
Real is that which exists, Unreal is that which doesn&#8217;t exist an cannot exist.<br />
Natural is that which is real and hence which exist or can occur, Unnatural is that which is unreal and hence which cannot exist.<br />
The idea of supernatural is totally discarded by Taitreya and Advaita vedanta both.<br />
By the way, you mentioned various names of god, so I should mention that Vedic concepts like Samkhya, Mimaamsa, Nyaya, and so on are completely Atheistic and denies any existence of God, while vedic schools of Dvaita, Advaita and Taitreya Vedanta asserts the monotheistic system, (with a difference that Advaita Vedanta asserts that All is one and is Nature, Dvaita Vedanta asserting that Nature and Ishwar (urja, shakti, omkar, energy) are different, and are existing since ever for ever, while Taitreya vedanta asserting that Energy, Matter and life are all different).<br />
None of the three major schools of Vedic philosophy supports the idea of Unnatural, some schools, accepts the idea of supernatural as being God, which cannot act against nature in any circumstance) while some schools asserts that there is nothing like supernatural and all that is, is nature).<br />
From the roots of Samkhya, Mimaamsa, Nyaya and Charak, the branches of Vedism like jainism and budhism sprouts and fruitifies.<br />
<em><br />
</em></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tripti Dhar</title>
		<link>http://www.reasonforliberty.com/philosophy/artificial-vs-natural.html/comment-page-1#comment-1288</link>
		<dc:creator>Tripti Dhar</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 14 Oct 2008 10:17:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.reasonforliberty.com/?p=868#comment-1288</guid>
		<description>This paper, I think, related with the method or process of understanding of human action/behaviour in the world. It is an interesting in the sense that how I&#039;m observing my (human) world, not the other species. To the observation of the author, all kinds of actions are &#039;NATURAL&#039; becasue the world is natural and nothing is outside the world. So, it&#039;s logical, logically we can&#039;t ignore the matter. The author, at the same time, accepting the differences of moral and immoral/ rational and irrational. If nothing is &#039;Unnatural&#039; then how can I guess that the whole world is natural (whatever I understand). I think the author has done a good work, but, If we don&#039;t accept the existence of &#039;supernatural being&#039;, who has created the world then I think, it would be meaningless to accept the whole thing as natural.... though it might be better to observe the whole world as a fact. If we don&#039;t accept the existence of &#039;unnatural event or action&#039; then logically it is not possible to accept the existence of &#039;natural event or action&#039;.
I don&#039;t know, whether the author is interested to accept the Vaidic concept of &#039;&lt;em&gt;Rta&lt;/em&gt; &#039; or &#039;cosmic order&#039;, that is universal truth. It stands as the Vedic antecedent for the notion of &lt;em&gt;dharma. &lt;/em&gt;It is through &lt;em&gt;Rta&lt;/em&gt; that the sun rises and sets, that rivers flow, trees grow, and animals are born. It  signifies the cosmic law that allows the universe to run smoothly, the dynamic structure in which every object and all actions have their proper place.Rta is closely associated with the gods VARUNA and MITRA, who are the deities in charge of cosmic order. The &lt;em&gt;Rgveda&lt;/em&gt; (c. 1200 BCE) commonly assigns to the gods such epithets as &quot;he who possesses &lt;em&gt;rta&lt;/em&gt;,&quot; &quot;he who grows according to &lt;em&gt;rta&lt;/em&gt;,&quot; or &quot;he who is born of &lt;em&gt;rta&lt;/em&gt;,&quot; descriptions representing the Vedic notion that the gods derive their strength from their adherence to cosmic law. If they — or humans, for that matter — were to go against the structures of &lt;em&gt;rta&lt;/em&gt;, they would then be said to be &lt;em&gt;anrta&lt;/em&gt;, a common synonym for &lt;em&gt;vrjina&lt;/em&gt; (&quot;crooked, wrong&quot;) and even &lt;em&gt;asatya&lt;/em&gt; (&quot;untrue&quot;). Thus even the gods must obey the laws of &lt;em&gt;rta&lt;/em&gt;. Here, we get the concept of &lt;em&gt;asatya/anrta or &lt;/em&gt;untrue. It entails that Veda also accept the existence of two classes i.e. &lt;em&gt;rta &lt;/em&gt;(natural) and &lt;em&gt;anrta &lt;/em&gt;(unnatural-whatever we say).
Hence, if we are not interested to accept the distinction of &#039;natural&#039; and &#039;unnatural&#039;,I think, It would be better to accept the whole  world  or actions in/of the world as fact.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This paper, I think, related with the method or process of understanding of human action/behaviour in the world. It is an interesting in the sense that how I&#8217;m observing my (human) world, not the other species. To the observation of the author, all kinds of actions are &#8216;<span class="caps">NATURAL</span>&#8217; becasue the world is natural and nothing is outside the world. So, it&#8217;s logical, logically we can&#8217;t ignore the matter. The author, at the same time, accepting the differences of moral and immoral/ rational and irrational. If nothing is &#8216;Unnatural&#8217; then how can I guess that the whole world is natural (whatever I understand). I think the author has done a good work, but, If we don&#8217;t accept the existence of &#8216;supernatural being&#8217;, who has created the world then I think, it would be meaningless to accept the whole thing as natural&#8230;. though it might be better to observe the whole world as a fact. If we don&#8217;t accept the existence of &#8216;unnatural event or action&#8217; then logically it is not possible to accept the existence of &#8216;natural event or action&#8217;.<br />
I don&#8217;t know, whether the author is interested to accept the Vaidic concept of &#8216;<em>Rta</em> &#8217; or &#8216;cosmic order&#8217;, that is universal truth. It stands as the Vedic antecedent for the notion of <em>dharma. </em>It is through <em>Rta</em> that the sun rises and sets, that rivers flow, trees grow, and animals are born. It  signifies the cosmic law that allows the universe to run smoothly, the dynamic structure in which every object and all actions have their proper place.Rta is closely associated with the gods <span class="caps">VARUNA</span> and <span class="caps">MITRA</span>, who are the deities in charge of cosmic order. The <em>Rgveda</em> (c. 1200 <span class="caps">BCE</span>) commonly assigns to the gods such epithets as &#8220;he who possesses <em>rta</em>,&#8221; &#8220;he who grows according to <em>rta</em>,&#8221; or &#8220;he who is born of <em>rta</em>,&#8221; descriptions representing the Vedic notion that the gods derive their strength from their adherence to cosmic law. If they — or humans, for that matter — were to go against the structures of <em>rta</em>, they would then be said to be <em>anrta</em>, a common synonym for <em>vrjina</em> (&#8220;crooked, wrong&#8221;) and even <em>asatya</em> (&#8220;untrue&#8221;). Thus even the gods must obey the laws of <em>rta</em>. Here, we get the concept of <em>asatya/anrta or </em>untrue. It entails that Veda also accept the existence of two classes i.e. <em>rta </em>(natural) and <em>anrta </em>(unnatural-whatever we say).<br />
Hence, if we are not interested to accept the distinction of &#8216;natural&#8217; and &#8216;unnatural&#8217;,I think, It would be better to accept the whole  world  or actions in/of the world as&nbsp;fact.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Unpretentious Diva</title>
		<link>http://www.reasonforliberty.com/philosophy/artificial-vs-natural.html/comment-page-1#comment-1286</link>
		<dc:creator>Unpretentious Diva</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 13 Oct 2008 18:34:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.reasonforliberty.com/?p=868#comment-1286</guid>
		<description>&lt;em&gt;isn’t crime also then natural? A mentality to murder and plunder someone comes naturally to certain individuals. Well the answer is yes… It is so and that is perhaps the reason that after centuries of persecution at the hand of society we still encounter such people. It is indeed a natural offshoot of human cognitive variations…however undesired they may be.

&lt;/em&gt;Crime and criminals, both are natural, but none is rational.
Moral and immoral both are natural, but immoral is irrational. Whatever is irrational in human perspective, is immoral and hence it should be illegal. That is the rational and pretty natural basis of a sound legal system.
Laws should not be designed on mystical ideas of &quot;Unnatural&quot;.
laws can be designed only on rational premises.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><em>isn’t crime also then natural? A mentality to murder and plunder someone comes naturally to certain individuals. Well the answer is yes… It is so and that is perhaps the reason that after centuries of persecution at the hand of society we still encounter such people. It is indeed a natural offshoot of human cognitive variations…however undesired they may&nbsp;be.</p>
<p></em>Crime and criminals, both are natural, but none is rational.<br />
Moral and immoral both are natural, but immoral is irrational. Whatever is irrational in human perspective, is immoral and hence it should be illegal. That is the rational and pretty natural basis of a sound legal system.<br />
Laws should not be designed on mystical ideas of &#8220;Unnatural&#8221;.<br />
laws can be designed only on rational&nbsp;premises.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: samay</title>
		<link>http://www.reasonforliberty.com/philosophy/artificial-vs-natural.html/comment-page-1#comment-1289</link>
		<dc:creator>samay</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 13 Oct 2008 16:46:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.reasonforliberty.com/?p=868#comment-1289</guid>
		<description>&lt;!--[if gte mso 9]&gt;     &lt;![endif]--&gt;&lt;!--[if gte mso 9]&gt;  Normal 0     false false false  EN-IN X-NONE X-NONE                           &lt;![endif]--&gt;&lt;!--[if gte mso 9]&gt;                                                                                                                                            &lt;![endif]--&gt;&lt;!--  /* Font Definitions */  @font-face 	{font-family:&quot;Cambria Math&quot;; 	panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4; 	mso-font-charset:0; 	mso-generic-font-family:roman; 	mso-font-pitch:variable; 	mso-font-signature:-1610611985 1107304683 0 0 159 0;}  /* Style Definitions */  p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal 	{mso-style-unhide:no; 	mso-style-qformat:yes; 	mso-style-parent:&quot;&quot;; 	margin:0cm; 	margin-bottom:.0001pt; 	mso-pagination:widow-orphan; 	font-size:12.0pt; 	font-family:&quot;Arial&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;; 	mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;; 	mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;; 	mso-ansi-language:EN-GB; 	mso-fareast-language:EN-US; 	mso-bidi-language:HI; 	mso-bidi-font-weight:bold; 	text-decoration:underline; 	text-underline:single;} .MsoChpDefault 	{mso-style-type:export-only; 	mso-default-props:yes; 	font-size:10.0pt; 	mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt; 	mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt; 	mso-ansi-language:EN-US; 	mso-fareast-language:EN-US;} @page Section1 	{size:612.0pt 792.0pt; 	margin:72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt; 	mso-header-margin:36.0pt; 	mso-footer-margin:36.0pt; 	mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 	{page:Section1;} --&gt;&lt;!--[if gte mso 10]&gt; &lt;!   /* Style Definitions */  table.MsoNormalTable 	{mso-style-name:&quot;Table Normal&quot;; 	mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; 	mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; 	mso-style-noshow:yes; 	mso-style-priority:99; 	mso-style-qformat:yes; 	mso-style-parent:&quot;&quot;; 	mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; 	mso-para-margin:0cm; 	mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; 	mso-pagination:widow-orphan; 	font-size:11.0pt; 	font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;; 	mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; 	mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; 	mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;; 	mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; 	mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; 	mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; 	mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;; 	mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;} --&gt; &lt;!--[endif]--&gt;
Its indeed a thought provoking post...Its not a comment  but what came to my mind on  the issue in hand ...and text is underlined coz ur site has some bug [:p]



What is nature...if one may ask; the first thought that hits the mind is a some serene green beauty with little or no human presence. It’s actually sad that human consciousness have been doctored over the time to assume himself and his actions itself as unnatural. Well all that it really does show is certain domination of a brooding lamenting self pity psyche of humanity. One that continuously held up its ante against the coercion of human will to change the so called nature and the world around him as per his desires. This psyche in fact holds the human intellect itself as unnatural, the forbidden fruit that man was not meant to have.

Nature as I see is nothing beyond a set of law. These laws are nothing but the one that sets the platform for action human or divine all play by the same rules. Nothing really spills beyond the course of nature. Unnatural death is one such misnomer that we all hear in our day to day life. We assume that ageing and dying is the only natural course of life, it is perhaps because we are too frigid to accept the blatant realities of life. Our consciousness perhaps is too naive to accept that it is natural for it to cease all of the sudden without any warning or reason.

We apply almost a similar logic to all our thought process. A whole set of right and wrongs passed on from generation to generation with no rational inquiry as to why. One may ask, isn’t crime also then natural? A mentality to murder and plunder someone comes naturally to certain individuals. Well the answer is yes... It is so and that is perhaps the reason that after centuries of persecution at the hand of society we still encounter such people. It is indeed a natural offshoot of human cognitive variations...however undesired they may be. I don’t hold society wrong in persecuting them, there are not very many options available to really check this such behavioural patterns or stopping them from recurring In fact these days we see humanity more often wronged on the name of ‘right’.On the name of religion, caste and creed and so many such which were created on the first place to safeguard the so called right.

The idea is not to justify the present state of human affair, but to delineate the element of stigma that is attached to the natural course of humanity. And also to counter the so called judgement day and dooms day prophesies. Death is a natural end to man and it would be to his race and all his creations. If man were to be ever judged it would be no god that would do so but man himself</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><!--[if gte mso 9]&gt;     &lt;![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]&gt;  Normal 0     false false false  EN-IN X-NONE X-NONE                           &lt;![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]&gt;                                                                                                                                            &lt;![endif]--><!--  /* Font Definitions */  @font-face 	{font-family:"Cambria Math"; 	panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4; 	mso-font-charset:0; 	mso-generic-font-family:roman; 	mso-font-pitch:variable; 	mso-font-signature:-1610611985 1107304683 0 0 159 0;}  /* Style Definitions */  p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal 	{mso-style-unhide:no; 	mso-style-qformat:yes; 	mso-style-parent:""; 	margin:0cm; 	margin-bottom:.0001pt; 	mso-pagination:widow-orphan; 	font-size:12.0pt; 	font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"; 	mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; 	mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; 	mso-ansi-language:EN-GB; 	mso-fareast-language:EN-US; 	mso-bidi-language:HI; 	mso-bidi-font-weight:bold; 	text-decoration:underline; 	text-underline:single;} .MsoChpDefault 	{mso-style-type:export-only; 	mso-default-props:yes; 	font-size:10.0pt; 	mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt; 	mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt; 	mso-ansi-language:EN-US; 	mso-fareast-language:EN-US;} @page Section1 	{size:612.0pt 792.0pt; 	margin:72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt; 	mso-header-margin:36.0pt; 	mso-footer-margin:36.0pt; 	mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 	{page:Section1;} --><!--[if gte mso 10]&gt; &lt;!   /* Style Definitions */  table.MsoNormalTable 	{mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; 	mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; 	mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; 	mso-style-noshow:yes; 	mso-style-priority:99; 	mso-style-qformat:yes; 	mso-style-parent:""; 	mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; 	mso-para-margin:0cm; 	mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; 	mso-pagination:widow-orphan; 	font-size:11.0pt; 	font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; 	mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; 	mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; 	mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; 	mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; 	mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; 	mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; 	mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; 	mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;} --> <!--[endif]--><br />
Its indeed a thought provoking post&#8230;Its not a comment  but what came to my mind on  the issue in hand &#8230;and text is underlined coz ur site has some bug&nbsp;[:p]</p>
<p>What is nature&#8230;if one may ask; the first thought that hits the mind is a some serene green beauty with little or no human presence. It’s actually sad that human consciousness have been doctored over the time to assume himself and his actions itself as unnatural. Well all that it really does show is certain domination of a brooding lamenting self pity psyche of humanity. One that continuously held up its ante against the coercion of human will to change the so called nature and the world around him as per his desires. This psyche in fact holds the human intellect itself as unnatural, the forbidden fruit that man was not meant to&nbsp;have.</p>
<p>Nature as I see is nothing beyond a set of law. These laws are nothing but the one that sets the platform for action human or divine all play by the same rules. Nothing really spills beyond the course of nature. Unnatural death is one such misnomer that we all hear in our day to day life. We assume that ageing and dying is the only natural course of life, it is perhaps because we are too frigid to accept the blatant realities of life. Our consciousness perhaps is too naive to accept that it is natural for it to cease all of the sudden without any warning or&nbsp;reason.</p>
<p>We apply almost a similar logic to all our thought process. A whole set of right and wrongs passed on from generation to generation with no rational inquiry as to why. One may ask, isn’t crime also then natural? A mentality to murder and plunder someone comes naturally to certain individuals. Well the answer is yes&#8230; It is so and that is perhaps the reason that after centuries of persecution at the hand of society we still encounter such people. It is indeed a natural offshoot of human cognitive variations&#8230;however undesired they may be. I don’t hold society wrong in persecuting them, there are not very many options available to really check this such behavioural patterns or stopping them from recurring In fact these days we see humanity more often wronged on the name of ‘right’.On the name of religion, caste and creed and so many such which were created on the first place to safeguard the so called&nbsp;right.</p>
<p>The idea is not to justify the present state of human affair, but to delineate the element of stigma that is attached to the natural course of humanity. And also to counter the so called judgement day and dooms day prophesies. Death is a natural end to man and it would be to his race and all his creations. If man were to be ever judged it would be no god that would do so but man&nbsp;himself</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Unpretentious Diva</title>
		<link>http://www.reasonforliberty.com/philosophy/artificial-vs-natural.html/comment-page-1#comment-1285</link>
		<dc:creator>Unpretentious Diva</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 13 Oct 2008 06:06:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.reasonforliberty.com/?p=868#comment-1285</guid>
		<description>Lol! Why cannot you read it before commenting? Where did I said that artificial is Unnatural?  I am asserting that artificial is not unnatural but NATURAL. So something unnatural can be caused by nature itself.  Ok, so whatever exists or happens by virtue of nature is natural is it or not? And if it is, how it can be unnatural? Just because you couldn’t expect it?   Now that’s not the case. A meteorite fall is natural, and hence the unexpected and sudden changes in temperature an atmosphere of the earth are also natural. There’s nothing unnatural about it. And such unexpected and sudden changes are known as NATURAL CALAMITIES, there’s nothing unnatural about the NATURAL CALAMITIES, do you understand it Attila?  The Cold Age which the planet earth passed through, because of which the dinosaurs lost their existence wasn’t unnatural. Neither the extinction of dinosaurs was Unnatural. It was all NATURAL. And so was the adaptation of mammals and their success against the odd nature. (odd Nature is not unnatural, unnatural means beyond nature, which cannot happen cannot exist in an by nature.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Lol! Why cannot you read it before commenting? Where did I said that artificial is Unnatural?  I am asserting that artificial is not unnatural but <span class="caps">NATURAL</span>. So something unnatural can be caused by nature itself.  Ok, so whatever exists or happens by virtue of nature is natural is it or not? And if it is, how it can be unnatural? Just because you couldn’t expect it?   Now that’s not the case. A meteorite fall is natural, and hence the unexpected and sudden changes in temperature an atmosphere of the earth are also natural. There’s nothing unnatural about it. And such unexpected and sudden changes are known as <span class="caps">NATURAL</span> <span class="caps">CALAMITIES</span>, there’s nothing unnatural about the <span class="caps">NATURAL</span> <span class="caps">CALAMITIES</span>, do you understand it Attila?  The Cold Age which the planet earth passed through, because of which the dinosaurs lost their existence wasn’t unnatural. Neither the extinction of dinosaurs was Unnatural. It was all <span class="caps">NATURAL</span>. And so was the adaptation of mammals and their success against the odd nature. (odd Nature is not unnatural, unnatural means beyond nature, which cannot happen cannot exist in an by&nbsp;nature.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Attila</title>
		<link>http://www.reasonforliberty.com/philosophy/artificial-vs-natural.html/comment-page-1#comment-1284</link>
		<dc:creator>Attila</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 13 Oct 2008 05:39:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.reasonforliberty.com/?p=868#comment-1284</guid>
		<description>duh.. how did u connect artificial and unnatural?? afaik, artificial would be something that could not be created by nature without man around and unnatural would be something that is an oddity.. an unexpected turn of events.. (which might be caused by nature, but unexpected)..


will come back 4 more..</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>duh.. how did u connect artificial and unnatural?? afaik, artificial would be something that could not be created by nature without man around and unnatural would be something that is an oddity.. an unexpected turn of events.. (which might be caused by nature, but&nbsp;unexpected)..</p>
<p>will come back 4&nbsp;more..</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
