Teaching a Stone to Talk (answer)

I have to admit that I had a very hard time understanding the argument throughout the short story/essay (I'm not really sure what it is), up until the end, and it has made a lot more sense after reading your post.
I agree with you that her argument is that humans do not appreciate nature as much as they should. She gives humans credit for giving value to nature. She says "if we were not here, material events like the passage of seasons would lack even the meager meaning we are able to muster for them." But let's not forget that she is also saying that we are not fulfilling our purpose; we were brought here to appreciate nature, not destroy it with "our own act[s]."
For some reason I felt very disapointed after reading this essay. I expected it to be more about Larry "Teaching [his] Stone to Talk", and have a message about determination or a different value. I think that the organization of this essay was also confusing, the fact that it was divided into six parts and the redundancy of the argument. I also did not understand the contradiction in between the "humming" verus the "silence". She says "nature hums" a unified sound, but in her conclusion, or part six, she says that "silence is all there is."
The other essays we have read by her have left me with a questioning thought, wondering about what I do with my life etc., but rather this one has not impacted me, and I have felt the urge to nit pick at the negative things I have found about it.