What Does Nature Even Mean?
When hearing people discuss the ‘ecological crisis’ and the need to ‘protect nature’ it soon became clear to me that many people―even professionals and so-called experts―haven't necessarily identified what they are discussing and many may actually be talking about fairly different things from one another. This prompted me to think about what ‘nature’ actually means and to find a more comprehensive definition in order to align the various meanings to lead in the proper direction. I offer it below; but lest be warned, this content will be delving deep into some core philosophical concepts of our culture and might get 'weird' for a lot of people.
Before I list the concepts I have identified when I speak of ‘nature’, I will provide extracts from Frédéric Ducarme and Denis Couvet’s article “What does ‘nature’ mean?” in order to provide context:
Since at least the 1970s, a wide scientific, political, and public consensus has emerged about the crucial necessity of “protecting nature”. However, “nature” is not such an easy word, and it actually fits the definition of an abstract concept, hence a mental construction rather than a concrete notion, which is situated both historically and geographically, and needs definition in context.
One of the main present occidental meanings of “nature”, designating what is opposed to humans, currently used in public policies, conservation science, or environmental ethics, appears rare and recent, and contradictory with most other visions of nature.
Conceptions change with philosophical groundings, and are then deeply rooted in people. Hence, science cannot (and must not) artificially standardize them, all the more since science also experiences philosophical discrepancies.
Encompassing the different visions of nature rather than conflicting them appears as one of the seminal challenges to conservationists if they want to bring together as much people as possible under their flag.”
One of the main present occidental meanings of “nature”, designating what is opposed to humans, currently used in public policies, conservation science, or environmental ethics, appears rare and recent, and contradictory with most other visions of nature.
Conceptions change with philosophical groundings, and are then deeply rooted in people. Hence, science cannot (and must not) artificially standardize them, all the more since science also experiences philosophical discrepancies.
Encompassing the different visions of nature rather than conflicting them appears as one of the seminal challenges to conservationists if they want to bring together as much people as possible under their flag.”
I will now describe my vision of “nature” by enumerating the various useful conceptions I have identified of it in our culture―these came by analyzing the works of people such Charles Taylor and Carl Jung, looking at Ancient Greece and scientific materialism, or simply by exploring the limits of my understanding. As much as possible, I am trying to build a good framework that can cut through all of these conceptions and work at every level.
Nature is:
• Flora, fauna, and the abiotic world (i.e. wildlife & habitat)
• Climate and the geological patterns
• The immutable laws of the universe (e.g. physics)
• The innocence of children
• Our inner sense / voice of human morality
• Womæn
• Not maleness per se, but Man (the concept of; even if transcendent)
• The ambiguity between the process of growth and the objective realization of an abstract concept
• Something in a ‘state of integrity’ (versus denatured, debased, divided)
• Authentically produced creations (as opposed to being fake or imitated*)
• Flora, fauna, and the abiotic world (i.e. wildlife & habitat)
• Climate and the geological patterns
• The immutable laws of the universe (e.g. physics)
• The innocence of children
• Our inner sense / voice of human morality
• Womæn
• Not maleness per se, but Man (the concept of; even if transcendent)
• The ambiguity between the process of growth and the objective realization of an abstract concept
• Something in a ‘state of integrity’ (versus denatured, debased, divided)
• Authentically produced creations (as opposed to being fake or imitated*)
* not to be confounded with the natural/artificial or natural/synthetic dichotomy
References: Ducarme, F. and Couvet, D., 2020. What does ‘nature’ mean?. Palgrave Communications, 6(1), pp.1-8.
Images: Pixabay PIRO4D, ShiftGraphiX
Images: Pixabay PIRO4D, ShiftGraphiX