Difference between revisions of "Appeal to nature"

From Issuepedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(overview, finally)
Line 1: Line 1:
[[Category:logical fallacies]]An [[appeal to nature]] is a claim that something is [[good]] or right because it is "natural", or that something is [[bad]] or wrong because it is unnatural.
This equation is generally regarded as a fallacy for the following reasons:
* [[Civilization]] is inherently "unnatural", and any argument not [[argument from force|based solely on force]] depends on the existence of civilized discourse, itself based on the principles of rational thought and analysis. When these are suspended or removed, society reverts to [[feudalism]] and only stops there due to the innate cleverness of human beings at manipulating each other with threats.
* The large number of obvious counterexamples. You wouldn't, say, defend a shark's right to attack swimmers (much less a vicious dog's right to maim children) just because that was its natural tendency, or make laws requiring that people behave more like chimpanzees.
As with many fallacies, there is a grain of validity to it – in this case, the fact that if something is done in nature, it may be somehow vital to survival, otherwise known as the [[argument from survival]].
* {{wikipedia|Appeal to nature}}

Revision as of 01:36, 21 August 2008