Isn't the mysticism and fetishism surrounding nature a bourgeois construct? Why should I care about nature? Assuming it has a net positive effect for humanity, why shouldn't we just bulldoze everything and make room for actually useful things, if we were to figure out terraforming and shit?
Let's drink some water from this river that has been polluted with heavy metals from the copper mines.
>>758643What's precluding us from recycling clean water or just synthesizing it? Again, this is a hypothetical scenario, not our current one.
>>758645A majority luddic population
>>758662That’s your own moral failure for not having a strong enough immune system
>>758642why bother terraforming when stuff just grows naturally, you literally don't need to do anything and there's plenty of room already
if you got rid of all the plants you wouldn't have any oxygen either
>>758663Parasites are not like normal bacteria
>>758642Because humans are nature. Nature is humanity's inorganic body. Humans are species being, or something. The whole world is humanity
>>758642>Assuming it has a net positive effect for humanity,Most of nature is net positive for humanity.
Thinking that you ought not to care about your natural environment because in the future, maybe, potentially, you hope so, it could be solved by technology, is techbro millenarianism. You should care about nature because you live in the present, not in some hypothetical potential that will most likely never come to pass.
>a bourgeois construct
The bourgeois view of nature is of a dead, inanimate thing that can be planned with and turned into commodities. There is no mysticism or fetishism about nature, it's part of the economic calculation the same way everything else is.
It's completely possible to care about sustainability in a purely rational & dispassionate manner based on both its short-term but especially long-term benefits for us humans.
>>758953I didn't know you could predict the future. Do you seriously believe in this "harmony with nature" nonsense? We will have to learn terraforming to survive as a species. That's a fact, not a vibe. Also, my claim was never that we should bulldoze everything now. Obviously any transition to full on synthetic ecosystems for survival is going to be gradual. The equation is simple really - extract maximum utility from nature as we slowly progress to a post natural society. You say seeing nature as just raw material for commodities is a bourgeois construct - true, but I would say seeing nature is anything more than tools to advance humanity is idealistic, tree hugging trash.