Appeal to nature

Supermarket shelf with four different brands advertising themselves, in some form, as "natural"

Appeal to nature is a logical fallacy that occurs when something is claimed to be good because it is 'natural', or bad because it is 'unnatural'. This fallacy can be found in a variety of arguments, particularly those relating to food, medicine, and environmental ethics. The appeal to nature assumes that "natural" things possess inherent virtue, while "unnatural" things do not, an assumption that is not always valid or relevant to the argument at hand.

Overview

The appeal to nature fallacy is often used in marketing to promote products that are labeled as "natural", implying that they are inherently better or healthier than synthetic alternatives. This can be seen in industries such as food and beverage, cosmetics, and dietary supplements. However, the distinction between what is natural and what is not can be arbitrary and does not necessarily reflect the safety, efficacy, or environmental impact of a product.

Examples

1. In the food industry, products may be advertised as "all-natural" to suggest they are healthier than processed foods, despite the fact that some natural substances can be harmful and some synthetic substances are beneficial. 2. In medicine, the appeal to nature is used by proponents of alternative medicine to argue that natural remedies are preferable to pharmaceutical drugs, ignoring the fact that many natural substances can be toxic and many synthetic drugs have been proven safe and effective through rigorous testing. 3. In debates about genetically modified organisms (GMOs), opponents often argue that GMOs are bad because they are not natural, without addressing the scientific evidence regarding their safety and benefits.

Criticism

Critics of the appeal to nature argue that it is a simplistic and misleading way of thinking. The naturalness of something does not necessarily imply its superiority. Many natural substances are dangerous or deadly, while many synthetic substances have greatly improved human health and well-being. Furthermore, the concept of what is natural is often subjective and culturally dependent.

Conclusion

While the appeal to nature may seem persuasive, it is important to critically evaluate claims that rely on this fallacy. Decisions about health, diet, and environmental practices should be based on scientific evidence and a comprehensive understanding of the issues, rather than on simplistic distinctions between natural and unnatural.