“It’s natural for people to be prejudiced against groups that aren’t their own.”
“It’s natural for people to marry and want to have children.”
I hear stuff like this all the time without really thinking about. Perhaps because most times the statement just feels right. But on some occasions, it really rubs me the wrong way. Believing that something is “natural” is just a step away from saying something else is “unnatural”. In the English language, “unnatural” has negative connotations. So does “abnormal” or “deviant”. Whenever I become tempted to say “X is natural”, I try to remember that the person I may be talking to may not do or be into “X”. So I’d do well to come up with different wording if I don’t want to offend.
It also seems like a rhetorical cop-out to me. For instance, saying prejudice is natural implies that there’s something inherent to the human psyche that makes individuals act in prejudiced ways. Not cultural programming. Not one’s personality hang-ups. But something intrinsic to the species that is beyond our control. Perhaps prejudice really is hardwired in us, but do we actually *know *this? And shouldn’t we know this before we make an appeal to nature? It always seems to me that people who make the “it’s natural” argument are relying only on “common sense” rather than actual scientific findings. That makes me feel uneasy because I don’t trust “common sense.”
Do you have a problem with people proclaiming things as “natural?” If so, how have you handled it?
The trouble with “natural” is that it is often conflated with “law of nature” which gives it a moral weight it doesn’t deserve. Human beings have the option of considering options which are not the first one suggested by their nature (whatever that nature is) and adopting them when they think it is the better choice.
“Natural” is a word that generally goes undefined. Does it mean instinctive like the “fight or flight” response? Does it mean built-in to DNA like curly hair? Does it mean a biological necessity like eating? Does it refer to a bio-chemical response like hunger? Does it refer to a process like gestation and birth? And if something is not “natural” by any of those definitions, does that make it unnatural? As the OP said, that’s pejorative by implication at least.
Other words like “normal” I can work around ok, but “natural” just rubs me wrong.
Not exactly on topic, but way back when I was in the Navy, I was waiting for a ride to the airport at the LA bus terminal, when I was approached by a bag woman. She sat and mumbled some inanities at me, then shuffled over to the curb and found a beer can. She came back over to me and crowed “Look, somebody left a perfectly good half a can of beer over there!” and proceeded to down it. Looking over toward the stairway, she suddenly said “Look! Look!” I looked. There was a very well-groomed and nicely dressed black man coming down the steps with a briefcase in his hand.
“They’re just natural-born pimps!”, she hisses at me. :smack:
Many of these things are natural for humans - that doesn’t (or shouldn’t) mean we just accept them without challenge or modification. It’s natural for me to crave fats and sugars. It’s not OK for me to indulge those cravings without limit, because these things are available more readily than is good for me.
It’s natural for humans to be wary of people outside of their group etc. That doesn’t mean it’s OK to act with hostility or in any other way to the detriment of those outsiders. We’re animals with intelligence and choices now - we can’t always choose our initial reactions to things - but we can choose what happens next.
“Natural” is too big a catch-all term to have any real meaning, although people try to give it one, saying things like the OP mentioned. I have never had an interest in children or having children; that’s my nature. It’s natural for me to not want kids. What would feel awfully damned unnatural to me is having kids without having an ounce of interest in them.
So yeah, it does bother me when people say “It’s natural for people to be X” because it doesn’t really mean anything. They could convey what they are actually trying to say by using a different word.
Because I hear the same echoes as the OP, when I use “natural” I’m generally referring to things that are unusual, trying to counter the idea that natural has to be opposed to unnatural. In other words, “That can be a natural reaction, even if it’s not the most common.”
Exactly so. We have instinctive suites of behaviors…but we also can control these to some degree. We all have to shit…but we can manage to do it out in the latrine trench behind the barn…and not right at ma’s dinner table.
“It’s natural for people to be uncomfortable around people in wheelchairs.”
“It’s natural for people to take pity on those they feel have it worse than them.”
I’ve heard both of these myriad times over the years. And they are both so irritating and stupid. * “It’s natural for people to be uncomfortable around people in wheelchairs”*…so it’s always up to the person in the wheelchair to make these ill at-ease people more comfortable around them (is the oft-mentioned, although sometimes only implied rest of the statement). Bullshit. We’re all adults. Act like adults. I don’t need to make anyone feel comfortable around me. That’s not my problem. That’s their’s. I have enough to deal with in the day. And if you ARE uncomfortable; keep it to yourself. No need to try to make up for that uncomfortable-ness by needlessly asking if I need help when I’m not even doing anything. /rant
This is known as the is-ought fallacy and many people unwittingly commit it when they talk about what’s “natural”. That doesn’t mean it invalidates the concept though, just poor usage.
Yes, because it’s often a lazy excuse for bad behavior or an intellectually sloppy way of saying that something must be bad because it’s unusual. Some behaviors may be natural for humans, but that doesn’t say much about individual people in specific circumstances. Saying “natural” when you mean “common” (or “unnatural” for “uncommon”) is nonsense and Shalmanese is also right about the is-ought problem. In most cases the claim is a vague load of garbage.
That isn’t quite how I’d interpret it. I think it may very well be natural for people, unaccustomed to being around others who are in almost any way different from what they know, to feel uncomfortable. The guy from an all-white neighborhood meeting a person of color for the first time; someone introduced to a small person for the first time; someone meeting someone in a wheelchair for the first time.
Novelty has an instinctive response in many of us; it makes us uncomfortable.
It doesn’t mean that the person in the wheelchair bears any responsibility – although they might benefit from finding ways to put people at their ease.
All it really means is, as said above, some of us need to work on overcoming our instinctive responses. It’s a part of social discipline. Some people have less of it than others. It has to be learned. Little kids can get away with saying dumb things; they’re innocent. Adults should know better.
But…not all adults have ever met anyone in a wheelchair, and many simply haven’t been trained in how to behave. It’s awkward all around.
It’s understandable if the person is a little uncomfortable or doesn’t know some of the fine points of what is considered polite or impolite. It’s not an excuse for being an ass- some common sense is still expected.
monstro, I think you might be straining at the bit, a bit.
I get the general gist of your OP and argument, but unfortunately the English language doesn’t always have the words to discern the subtle nuances that we wish to convey. Saying something is ‘natural’ can often be shorthand for ‘it’s the norm’ or ‘the most common way of doing things’.
Whilst some people might indeed think such acts or beliefs are natural, as in, an intrinsic part of the human condition, were you to ask an average, educated person the real meaning of that statement, I’d guess you’d get a totally different answer. Meaning they’d cite conditioning and socialization as equally profound forces that help determine our ‘nature’.
That many? Wow…I’ve yet to meet a single soul with no prejudices whatsoever.
