>>1168762literally what, thats a big jump.
Its not for nature's sake alone but the human benefits of having nature around for the sake of study, mind, biodiversity, spirituality, recreation, inspiration, etc. is considered less important than the literal material value of the natural resources. The issue is then, when all the materials have been used, all ecosystems raped, you have developers and naturalists left with nothing. It doesnt have to be a lose lose. Materialists can create sustainable industries in some parts of the world and nature can be preserved in others. Its absolutely non-dichotomous. Dont log every forest, but responsibly log some forests and promote regrowth while allowing other forests to remain old-growth in all their glory.
All that said, humans aren't the only things on Earth and recognizing the needs of other ecosystems is not anti-human, its societal maturity. Like having morals and not genociding other nations so you can have their materials.
