[Taxacom] when is a common species critically endangered?

[Daniel Whitmore]

I once tried to convince a friend that killing a cat can contribute to
saving a species and that saving a species is more important than the life
of each individual cat. In vane. She (a vegan) also used the argument that
we and the cats are part of nature just as the bird species threatened by
roaming cats is. In a final attempt to plead my cause I presented her with
a copy of "Last Chance To See" by Douglas Adams, but the letter I received
in reply proved me definitively defeated.

Daniel

2012/6/27 Paul van Rijckevorsel <dipteryx at freeler.nl>

> Actually, no sentence including the word "nature" can be expected
> to stand up to semantic scrutiny, as the word "nature" has an
> indefinite number of meanings.
>
> As a rule of thumb, it is safe to assume that the use of "natural"
> means "according to my nature" (that is the nature, the character,
> of the speaker). The other day the BBC ran an item on how cats
> are pests, and a danger to wildlife. This item had the inevitable
> "woman in the street" to whom a cat is a pet rather than a pest,
> who felt that cats are a part of nature, and that they should be
> given a free run to act out their nature, no matter what the
> consequences.
>
> Paul
>
> From: "Stephen Thorpe" <stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz>
> To: "Mark Wilden" <mark at mwilden.com>; "TAXACOM" <
> taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
> Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2012 4:46 AM
> Subject: Re: [Taxacom] when is a common species critically endangered?
>
>
> That is an incredibly naive question!! :)
> Semantically, it makes no sense! The humans vs. nature distinction is just
> that, a distinction between humans and nature (artificial vs. natural,
> etc.)
> So it is a semantic nonsense to claim that humans are part of nature! What
> you really mean, though, is something different, more like "humans and
> nature are together parts of a unified system" (which we don't really have
> a
> good name for, except perhaps "reality"), or something like "humans and
> nature are intimately mutually dependent", but I think we all know that
> already from natural disasters and the like ...
>
> Stephen
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Mark Wilden <mark at mwilden.com>
> To: TAXACOM <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
> Sent: Wednesday, 27 June 2012 2:29 PM
> Subject: Re: [Taxacom] when is a common species critically endangered?
>
> This is no doubt an incredibly naive question, but how long will it
> take before humans and their artifacts are considered part of
> "nature"?
>
> ///ark
>
> Mark Wilden
> Web Applications Developer
> California Academy of Sciences
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Taxacom Mailing List
> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
>
> The Taxacom archive going back to 1992 may be searched with either of these
> methods:
>
> (1) by visiting http://taxacom.markmail.org/
>
> (2) a Google search specified as: site:
> mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom
> your search terms here
> _______________________________________________
>
> Taxacom Mailing List
> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
>
> The Taxacom archive going back to 1992 may be searched with either of these
> methods:
>
> (1) by visiting http://taxacom.markmail.org
>
> (2) a Google search specified as:  site:
> mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom
> your search terms here
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Taxacom Mailing List
> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
>
> The Taxacom archive going back to 1992 may be searched with either of
> these methods:
>
> (1) by visiting http://taxacom.markmail.org
>
> (2) a Google search specified as:  site:
> mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom  your search terms here
>