What's your view of the matter? Do you consider man-made constructs to be natural or not, and furthermore why? While the current oxford and Mariam Webster dictionary definitions for "natural" state that it is definable as "not man-made," their definitions for "unnatural" - being in direct opposite meaning of natural - do not include "man-made" or any derivative of such, thusly contradicting the definitions for "natural." The claim above is to counter the argument that natural implies specifically not of human craft, as all definitions are simply a commonly agreed description given to a word. Primarily, human craft can be argued natural as humans, like all other animals, are extremely complex series of reactions forged of existing circumstances in the universe, and is therefore no less natural of a human to build a log cabin than a beaver to build a dam. Many people may find this reasoning to be invalid in the case of something far more complex than a wood hut, such as something like prescription medications, in that it seems highly unlikely for one such material to occur without human intervention. However, though unlikely, it cannot be discounted that there is still a possibility for something of that nature to occur, especially since any form of intelligent life apart from humans creating the substance in question to still count as a natural occurrence according to the oxford and Mariam-Webster dictionary definitions. Pick a side and support your claim, and give us a reason to be convinced of it.