There are two ways to see this:
1. Morality is an exclusively human construct. I don't know what percent of all life humans represent but I surmise it's less than 1%. The rest (99%) haven't even thought of morality. If so are we justified in throwing the cloak of human morality over all of life?
2. As thinking animals we're gifted with self-awareness and rationality - very important and powerful tools with universal application. If these tools say that there's something wrong with carnivory (is this a real word?) we should do well to heed it. — TheMadFool
No animal likes to feel pain, therefore they inherently agree with our morality by their actions to avoid pain. Our morality is simply pain = bad therefore don't inflict pain on others — intrapersona
So we can only say at the moment that it is subjectively true from a human perspective that "nature is immoral". — intrapersona
To be honest, I feel life is an absolutely unnecessary abomination — Hamtatro
"Nature" is neither immoral nor moral, neither bad nor good. "Nature" is perceived by us to exist as a process (which we might personify as "mother nature") but doesn't have an existence such as "knowing itself".
It is absurd to speak of nature being a moral subject. — Bitter Crank
YOUR PREMISE LACKS AND ADEQUATE CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
By 'adequate', I mean based on the vast amount of existing verified knowledge that we now have. Here is an adequate classification system, based on levels of intelligence:
Working from this classification system, then the answer is 'no' - nature is not immoral - since it does not have the extended reasoning to make moral judgements. — Numi Who
Now I know some of you will agree that you can blame physical process for unethical behaviour as you need an agent of will to cause injustice and lay blame to but I think it is fair enough to say that physical process can be immoral in the outcomes or effects of their processes on to conscious creatures even if those physical processes do not have a will of their own. For instance, if an oil rig explodes and the oil harms or kills conscious marine lifeforms in the area then you could say that what occurred is violating to the marine lifeforms even if the accident occurred by natural causes and not human error. However blaming your chainsaw for "accidentally" chopping off your arm is completely foolish and another matter entirely.
That was already covered in the OP, if you just cared to look... you could have responded to that specifically but I notice you have a tendency to not do that. — intrapersona
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.