Humans might be as naturally occuring as anything else, but they are no longer wild, which I believe is a shame. As far as eliminating myself for the sake of the wild, I have in fact sacrificed my old and wrongful attitudes and beliefs for more appropriate and respectful attitudes and ways, so that I am more in harmony with the wild, more at home there. But I must also admit, that I think most humans have probably not done any such self-sacrificing. If people continually go to the wild in the modern and disrespectful ways that they seem so proud of these days, it will not be long until there are no more wilds. All the bears will be raiding camps, and the racoons will be eating from our hands. Campers will continue thinking that biodegradable means they can wash their hair in the streams, and the wilds will become a campground, not wild anymore. Natural perhaps, but not wild. I have no ultimate need of nature, per se, I desire wilderness. Further, if I truly felt from your hastily thought-out and presumptuous response, that you honestly sought a truly philosophical discussion with me, I would be happy to correspond with you further on some deeper level, but as it seems, you do not, and so I do not. Thus I have no choice but to ignore you or argue semantics.
The only point I was making is that we as modern humans must change our attitudes and thus our ways concerning wilderness. It is a mistake to think you can be a part of wilderness if you seek to tame it.
Unlike the cancer that humans seem to be, humans have the ability to change their ways. They don't need to be eliminated by way of a false logic. They only need to be motivated to change for the betterment of the whole. Don't defend our ugliness and weakness. As a rural-suburban man who genuinely feels a love for wilderness, I believe I have enough sense that I can honestly say that when in the wild, I am a guest and that's all there is to it. I live at the edge of town, right next to the wilderness, but in town nonetheless, not in the wild forest as the animals do. Until such time as I live exclusively in the wilderness like the animals do, I will continue to be a guest when I am there. John Muir was very poetic and his words are a great catalyst for change. He and others like him seek that humans understand their great potential. We very easily deceive ourselves, and to think you are at home in the wilderness when you know that you are not, is folly, and is how people find out that they are in fact in a survival situation, and not at all at home.
If you really believe that you can subsist permanently in the wilderness, and that you require nothing that wilderness does not provide, that you truly are at home there, that its terms are your terms, that you are simply another animal in the ecosystem, then why don't you live there permanently? Why don't you raise your children there, and teach them the ways of the wildeness, instead of the ways of urbanization and globalization? The answer is probably because you long for HOME, or the weather turns, you HAVE to go back to work, etc. Unfortunately, as natural as it might or might not be for us humans to be as far removed from wilderness as we are; and this is debated by philosophers everyday; we humans are destructive, eliminative, and intrusive to wilderness. To say that wilderness is our home and yet that it is natural for us to, for lack of a better word, destroy, wilderness, is in the very least, a contradiction. There should be no doubt in your mind that this is true.
I don't want to argue semantics anymore.