Mime-Version: |
1.0 |
Sender: |
|
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
Date: |
Thu, 12 Oct 2006 12:48:14 -0400 |
Content-Transfer-Encoding: |
8bit |
Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset="windows-1252" |
Reply-To: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
On Wed, 11 Oct 2006 14:55:37 -0700, Dee Lusby <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
> So why is it then, beekeepers do so much artificially
...
Laying aside any issues with the premise to your question, I think the
answer is that all agriculture is "artificial" in the sense you use the
word. Agriculture is different from hunting/gathering precisely in that it
is "artificial," i.e. agriculture is defined by
intervention/management/manipulation of natural systems. I think
fundamentally your argument condemns beeKEEPING in general, as opposed to
bee-hunting, but that's obviously not the case you're trying to make. Is
there any rationale for how you differentiate between this or that
manipulation or management procedure, calling one "natural" and casting an
evil shadow over the other? It seems to me that if you want to be
a "natural" purist you should only hunt and rob wild hives. If you're not
willing to take that position, then I think it's absurd to talk in
absolutes. We need to be careful not to draw haphazard pharasaical lines
in the sand. That would be misleading and wrong, wouldn't it?
Eric
-- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l for rules, FAQ and other info ---
|
|
|