Nature Vs. Technology Who is right? Who is wrong? Post ideas

File: 78465454165456151.jpg (52KB, 658x370px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 658x370px

>>50369051

>>50369034
both are right, a lot of technology is derived from nature and so are the natural resources needed. technology should be used to be sheppards of nature not its master. technology vs nature is based on a false dichotomy, when both should be considered without one being detrimental to the other

>>50369034
>FUCKING BURYATS GIVE US OUR OIL BACK REEEEEEE

>>50369034

I always thought of ideas of having a setting be thrown into civil war as a new age religion all about caring for planet gets huge while the world governments try quelling all of the unrest in their countries.

>>50369034
I stand with Mr. Burns on this debate, and everyone who doesn't is a faggot

https://vimeo.com/140082542

>>50369092
You mean both are wrong. I say let's destroy technology AND nature.

File: 545154515451.jpg (53KB, 500x270px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 500x270px

>>50369092

Yes if everyone was in equal harmony but both relying on nature and technology fully could bring negatives correct?

Relying on technology to much could lead to poor living environments for your people or we can have all these advancements but at the cost of experimentation on human/animal life.

As for a nature society could be one of regression where people do not like advancement and stick to the old ways even if said ways are unproven or there reliance on "nature spirits" and sacrifices could be one of uneeded hardships and cult worship.

Id say you could make an interesting setting based on the idea aside from "pollution bad"

>>50369034
>natural vs technology
>right vs wrong
False dichotomies are false.

There is no such thing as unnatural technology. It is produced by humans, naturally. Human technology is as 100% natural as ant hills and bird nests, or even the waxy coating on a magnolia leaf.

Right and wrong are value-judgments that exist only in the act of discerning them, and can never be universally applied to anything, ever.

>>50369164
>can never be universally applied to anything, ever.
Pretty sure I meant "categorically applied"

>>50369034
Technology of course, nature is a fucking bitch who doesn't love us and only enjoys forcing us into terrible situations to "evolve".

Technology has been our friend from the get go, gave us fire, gave us air conditioning, gave us the internet, even gave us table top games. Then when we were like "Hey technology, you've done so much for us is there anything we can do in return" technology was all like "It's all good humans, just keep on doin what you do best"

Did nature ever do shit for us?

Fuck no, she probably gave us smarts on accident and then was like "oh shit I've created something I don't totally control" and freaked out like the control freak she is. Given half a chance nature would kill you and everyone you ever loved.

File: 5057471+_66a23cd152b561b2554abf06535956ab.jpg (391KB, 798x1138px) Image search: [Google]

391KB, 798x1138px

>>50369034

>>50369164
This.

If your technology is wrecking the environment and you also think that's a problem, rethink your technology until you can create a solution. It's not technologies fault, it's yours.

Technology isn't natural at all, it arises purely as a contrivance of man's mind and in no other way.

File: 145633247655.jpg (137KB, 900x546px) Image search: [Google]

137KB, 900x546px

>>50369196
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ecvLRxb3MU

>>50369164
While I agree, just to play doubles advocate, it's also possible to argue the inverse.

That everything that we consider to be natural is actually rather unnatural. The natural state of of matter in the universe(so far as we know) is to be as they were after they were created, only changing in a predictable manner based on various cycles of energy. Life then, from the tiniest self replicating molecules, to man, is something that can be considered aberrant or against the probable order of the universe. Evolution adds another layer of deviancy, as life is constantly adding further error to these processes further changing them into something more and more unlikely to have arisen in the first place.

>>50369249

So the Adeptus Mechcanicus is on one side of the spectrum what are super nature factions in other settings?

>>50369051
Are those lips at the end of the barrel?

File: 1449708728121.png (87KB, 192x187px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 192x187px

>>50369034

>not hybridizing nature and technology

File: 44614651645184561.jpg (851KB, 2000x1098px) Image search: [Google]

851KB, 2000x1098px

>>50369363

FUCK OFF COMBINE

>>50369363
Nature, a concept barrel alive.

Gentlemen, we can rebuild her, we have the technology. We have the capability to make the worlds first bionic system.

Nature will be that system, better than she was before. Better, stronger, faster.

>>50369417
Well good job anon, you scared them off. Now we're going to have to wait another Decade for them to comeback for Half-life 3.

File: rNkxxyp9Kmx2c8faNAcWqJ8Qo1_500.png (57KB, 489x632px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 489x632px

>>50369363

>>50369417

What are these designs exactly?

>>50369363
You mean Genetic Engineering? I believe that would still fall under the concept of technology.

File: 00_gold-nanomachines.jpg (191KB, 900x675px) Image search: [Google]

191KB, 900x675px

>>50369452
>Not just injecting everything with nanobots to make bio/synth hybrids

I always hate how nature is always put into a good light and industry/technology bad

Id like to see a setting where they atleast make the nature faction be in the grey area of morality

>>50369493
I had an idea that was basically going to be a campaign totally stolen from Megaman, but played straight, with robotics and cybernetics becoming common, and nano-ecology used to counteract the effects of drastic global change. Nearly everything is in some form mechanical, and then shit starts going bad.

>>50369034
Is a bird's nest unnatural? How about an anthill or a stick that a monkey uses to gather termites?

Humans are naturally evolved creatures. Technology is made by these naturally evolved creatures from materials and processes that are found in nature.

Technology is completely natural.

>HFY fags in 3... 2... 1...

>>50369924

Why do both HFY and anti HFY gotta shit it up

>>50369034
Technology gives man the potential to surpass nature, to create his own.
Man must not simply be the master of the jungle, but be above it.

>>50369935
Because fuck nice things.

File: 4645184648164.gif (1MB, 499x408px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 499x408px

I actually had this throw off setting of the Earth getting covered in jungle and remnants of the U.S. army basically have this entire Vietnam theme going for them and I was gonna throw in amazons following a nature goddess, and a race of advanced plantlife that want to convert humans to plantlife so the entire planet can be "one"

nature only beats tech with magic
magic is advanced tech you don't understand
no matter what tech wins

>>50369991
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TLV4_xaYynY

BITCHES IN THE WIRE

File: Untitled.png (47KB, 301x307px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 301x307px

>>50369034
>saved

File: 151494549421.jpg (11KB, 243x255px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 243x255px

>>50370464

>>50370464
>>50370510

Will night vision ever not be retarded looking

>>50369034
Nature is right on a cosmic level(although I'm stretching "nature" to include physics), technology is right because being a hippe doesn't actually give you sun-magic like OP's pic seems to imply.

Unless we're talking morally, in which case there is no right or wrong side.

File: sample-644fd3e0b0f1662ef96afc910a5b1f21.jpg (128KB, 850x1133px) Image search: [Google]

128KB, 850x1133px

>>50369034

Nature using technology. It's why I always liked fairies and gnomes over elves and the other brands of fey: where elves either neglect tech for magic entirely or hate it based on principal, the little races are able to see that they can use it to actually aid nature and/or aid their jobs in furthering it.

>>50369272

I'd say Eldar, but they're fully willing to sack the ecosystems of whole worlds for self-preservation.

>>50369092
so what you're saying is that we need robots to herd our livestock

Just as life seeks to reproduce and in doing so adapt, so too does technology. Technologies are ideas given form. The idea remains in a technology even after it has been formed, and ideas may affect the minds of men. "When you have a hammer, everything looks like a nail" as the saying goes. Don't assume that a tool doesn't have its own agenda to fulfill.

Technology seems apart from nature because the majority of technologies employed by men are so docile. Just as sheep and cows rely on humans to survive, most of the technology we encounter happens to be domesticated. Just as undiscovered beasts lurk in the wilderness, wild technology may yet be out there.

>>50371854
we have always used machines to help us survive, taking the metaphor literally is actually not a bad idea

>>50369272
Every other faction in 40k is pretty far. The closest is probably Nids since they're all natural and destroy technology, though they also destroy life.

Darwinists/Entente in Leviathan is one, since they're all natural and use nature as their weapon.

>>50369133
With?

>>50372357
Spiral power.

>>50372551
Fair enough.

>>50369271
>doubles advocate
Was this on purpose? If so, kek.

>>50369034
>Progress vs primitivism
I always laugh, especially in real life, when people suggest the situation where a single scrach can mean a painful death through infected wounds is the better situation. Fucking primitivists.

>>50369197
>If your technology is wrecking the environment and you also think that's a problem, rethink your technology until you can create a solution.
Pretty much this. The whole "nature vs technology" dichotomy is a false one. In the Netherlands we now have more forests than a few hundred years ago because we planted them, for example.

>>50372258
>Darwinists/Entente in Leviathan is one, since they're all natural and use nature as their weapon.
They use gigantic, probably genetically modified, beasts of war. Not sure how natural that is.

>>50374001
Well, if you believe in Ancient Aliens or Adam and Eve, it makes sense to say human tech is not natural, I suppose.

There's a thousand books in every genre about the conflict you describe.

Have fun looking all those up.

File: Fig-6-Historical-forest-clearance-maps-for-1000-BC-300-BC-AD-350-AD-1000-AD-1500.png (2MB, 850x1362px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 850x1362px

>>50374001
>Nederland has more trees than it had a few hundred years ago
Yeah, but mostly because humans had basically deforested all of Europe a long time ago, not because you've planted enough trees to offset the losses.

>>50374134

No way is Scotland on that map accurate.

Every piece of farmable land got deforested to fuck (and then later depopulated too).

Sure conservation and replanting has been going on for a fair while now but compared to the Caledonian Forest in ancient times it's nothing.