Why does Veeky Forums always shout "NATURALISTIC FALLACY!!!" whenever someone says that we should be living in tune with nature and a more natural setting?
I bet most of you believe in evolution, do you really believe that in the span of a few thousand years, humans can evolve to live and be happy in concrete jungles eating heavily processed foods, with little exercise and staring at computer/TV screens 12+ hours a day?
>tfw not being able to walk around Mesolithic earth in a loincloth
Anarcho-Primitivism thread?
>humans can evolve to live and be happy in concrete jungles eating heavily processed foods, with little exercise and staring at computer/TV screens 12+ hours a day
Good thing only white people do that while the black bulls feast on their slutty women.
>i reject science and objectivity
>i prefer to argue exclusively based on personal preferences and muh opinion
wew lad
Evolution is't perfect. We weren't perfectly suited for living in loin clothes either. There may be aspects of human physiology that are better served by living in ways that we weren't capable of living back then, like using a stiarmaster instead of running on your bare feet for exercise. Furthermore we live in a very different world today where, for example, vaccines and occasional uses of penicilin are necessary in a way that wasn't available or as necessary as they were as hunter gatherers.
Finally, chewing on a fucking leaf of some random plant your hippy friend told you cures cancer is not viable solution to ACTUAL medical treatment. Just because something is "natural" doesn't make it good.
Long story short, you have to argue for things under their own merit instead of claiming they are good just because they are "natural".
...
Native Americans were agrarian for thousands of years and still lived primitive tribal existences.
Because that's exactly what a naturalist fallacy is.
>you should do x because I consider x to be natural
Also, I'm perfectly happy in my concrete jungle. I really, really like cities and fast-paced urban living. I was always bored in the country and prefer human-made beauty to natural beauty. So, yes, based on myself, I conclude that humans can be happy in "concrete jungles" regardless of whether such life is "natural" for them. It's just a question of aesthetics/affinity.
Is your name Patrick Bateman?
Cool false consciousness, bro. Just because your brain has tricked you into liking your imprisonment doesn't mean you actually like it. You just have massive Stockholm syndrome.
I have no idea who that is.
You realize that all observable phenomena is natural, yea?
Skyscrapers are as natural as trees
>just because you enjoy something doesn't mean you enjoy it
Wha?
>Y-You don't REALY like what you like, just trust me!
I like penicillin, refrigeration, and central heating.
>I have no idea who that is.
Le epic doubles man
Pleb as fukk
Sounds boring.
People who worship evolution as some sort of conscious entity with a will and morality of its own are retarded
Evolution is no different from a thunderstorm or supernova, shit just happens
What humans are doing is natural user IT IS LITERALLY IMPOSSIBLE FOR HUMANS TO DO BEHAVIOR THAT IS NOT ENCODED IN THEIR DNA LIKE MOLD MATTER INTO DIFFERENT FORMS OUT OF PURE CURIOSITY.
Mother nature gave us these great brains and a natural curiosity instinct because obviously we are supposed to weaponize our intelligence to survive in the wild then eventually transcend the wild with civilization and forge our own destinies.
Us living in concrete jungles, driving cars, eating processed food and starring at screens is the natural development user. It is not like some alien race is forcing us to do this.
We did not develop all of this in spite of our natural urges but exactly because of them.
Whether it is beneficial or not is another question, but pointing at things and saying they are natural like it makes anything objectively superior is simply stupid.
I bet you also believe in spooks like happyness and love.
There's nothing wrong with primitvism.
There is something wrong with putting a nostalgic filter over nature, and turning it into your new deity.
>happyness and love
>spooks
You know literally nothing about Stirner's concept of spooks.
unironically accusing someone of exhibiting false consciousness. how fucking arrogant.
kys
my only problem with it is that you're deriving an "ought" from an "is". there isn't any evidence that we "should" do anything at all, all "ought"s are based on abstract axioms.
there is plenty of anthropological evidence that the average animistic tribal dude is much happier than the average globalized citizen.
regardless, we are already by definition practicing artificial selection in some ways and places, and genetic engineering is a technology that's going to separate a lot of humans from your natural selection related arguments within the next few hundred years, so, read a book get educated nerd.
>average animistic tribal dude is much happier than the average globalized citizen
At the time of the survey.
When he is dying from his teeth rotting out of his head 15 years before the globalized citizen, he probably wouldn't report so high.
Achieving happiness is substantially less important than working to prevent misery.