beautiful post. not a big fan of the current western framing either.
i've written about it in regards to the indigenous language i'm learning here:
"in mapuzugun, the closest word for nature would be the ixofijmogen; (pronounced eetro-phil-mong-nien) which is composed of three words combined "all-together-life". some translate it as totality without exclusion, others as biodiversity and ecology, but i personally call it the “web of life”. it’s important to note that whichever translation is chosen, all of them include our own human life"
love this and it also brought to mind Emerson’s distinguishing between nature and Nature. i am too lazy to restate it now but GPT!
Ralph Waldo Emerson’s use of “nature” in his writings reflects a nuanced and multifaceted understanding, deeply tied to his transcendentalist philosophy. The distinction between small-N “nature” and big-N “Nature” often aligns with his layered perception of the material and metaphysical worlds.
1. Small-n “nature”:
• Emerson uses “nature” in the lowercase to refer to the physical, observable world: trees, rivers, mountains, animals, and the immediate environment. This is the “nature” that is subject to scientific study, human interaction, and sensory experience.
• In his essay Nature (1836), he describes nature as an entity that includes everything that is not “me” (the self). In this sense, “nature” is distinct from human consciousness, yet it is intimately connected to it.
2. Big-N “Nature”:
• The capitalized “Nature” reflects Emerson’s view of the divine or universal spirit manifesting through the physical world. Nature, in this sense, transcends the material and points toward a higher, interconnected reality.
• For Emerson, Nature is not merely the sum of its parts; it is a symbol or medium through which the divine reveals itself. This is why Nature is central to his belief in the correspondence between the human soul and the cosmos. As he writes in Nature, “The currents of the Universal Being circulate through me; I am part or particle of God.”
The Key Difference
• “nature” (small-n): Concrete, material, and specific, referring to the elements of the physical world.
• “Nature” (big-N): Abstract, metaphysical, and holistic, representing the spiritual essence or the overarching divine principle animating the universe.
In essence, small-n “nature” is the tangible reflection of big-N “Nature,” the spiritual reality. Emerson encourages his readers to see beyond the surface of nature to experience Nature—using the physical world as a gateway to spiritual insight and universal truths. This distinction is foundational to his transcendentalist philosophy, which seeks to unify the material and the spiritual.
Wonderful post Sally. It chimes with something deep within me, that I have never had words for in the past. Because when I look outside of my window and can see “ nature” I see something that is green and growing, but it is separate to me. I am looking at “it”. When I look out of my window and see an ecology that is still green and growing, but does not need to be either of those things, I feel it, I feel part of it, I am it and it is me. It is very much alive in me, and me in it, and the sense of discomfort that I have when I hear the word nature, is gone.
Thanks for putting this together. It is so important. Language is so important. I tend to agree that using the term "nature" in the first place is causing more harm than good. Abstractions and nouns generally make it so easy to disconnect. In one training the facilitator asked us to spend a day not thinking of ourselves as "I", not referring to ourselves as "I", "me" etc. ... but rather the 30 trillion or so cells we are made of ... what a difference that makes ...
And as humans cannot exist without the rest of the eco-systems, it is really odd that some of is seem to want to pretend we can, and that we can traumatically change ecologies with no effect on ourselves at all, as we are outside of life....
Thank you Javier, this word and knowing of “all together life” is what English language is missing. Ecology probably comes closest, but is easily distanced or intellectualised because not grounded in dominant culture. This missing word says so much!
Thank you Claudine for sharing this mind opening / world altering exercise, revisioning ourselves as systemic and dynamic, sounds very powerful to do with others. Will carry this with me
What a beautiful post. I have seen the idea that nature is a human construct before, and it resonated with me strongly. It might have been in your book Sally . The process or system of ecology seems much more appropriate. Getting out in nature is good for you and will help you heal, is a difficult idea to get my head around. Becoming part of ecology is a grounding idea, a feeling into the world, rather than taking from it.
I have just returned from a mind blowing Journey On Summit, hosted by Warwick Schiller, in Birmingham UK, and amongst the myriad of emotions, energies, awe inspiring people, sharings, and belongings that I experienced there, two sentences stood out for me. “Words are ambiguous” and “Language is not reality”. Both those ideas were in my mind as I read your post.
Thank you Jane, always heartwarming to hear when there's a resonance between a post and life's messaging. I love "Becoming part of ecology is a grounding idea, a feeling into the world, rather than taking from it." We get closer to words when we can translate into a feeling
beautiful post. not a big fan of the current western framing either.
i've written about it in regards to the indigenous language i'm learning here:
"in mapuzugun, the closest word for nature would be the ixofijmogen; (pronounced eetro-phil-mong-nien) which is composed of three words combined "all-together-life". some translate it as totality without exclusion, others as biodiversity and ecology, but i personally call it the “web of life”. it’s important to note that whichever translation is chosen, all of them include our own human life"
Lovely post Sally. ❤️
love this and it also brought to mind Emerson’s distinguishing between nature and Nature. i am too lazy to restate it now but GPT!
Ralph Waldo Emerson’s use of “nature” in his writings reflects a nuanced and multifaceted understanding, deeply tied to his transcendentalist philosophy. The distinction between small-N “nature” and big-N “Nature” often aligns with his layered perception of the material and metaphysical worlds.
1. Small-n “nature”:
• Emerson uses “nature” in the lowercase to refer to the physical, observable world: trees, rivers, mountains, animals, and the immediate environment. This is the “nature” that is subject to scientific study, human interaction, and sensory experience.
• In his essay Nature (1836), he describes nature as an entity that includes everything that is not “me” (the self). In this sense, “nature” is distinct from human consciousness, yet it is intimately connected to it.
2. Big-N “Nature”:
• The capitalized “Nature” reflects Emerson’s view of the divine or universal spirit manifesting through the physical world. Nature, in this sense, transcends the material and points toward a higher, interconnected reality.
• For Emerson, Nature is not merely the sum of its parts; it is a symbol or medium through which the divine reveals itself. This is why Nature is central to his belief in the correspondence between the human soul and the cosmos. As he writes in Nature, “The currents of the Universal Being circulate through me; I am part or particle of God.”
The Key Difference
• “nature” (small-n): Concrete, material, and specific, referring to the elements of the physical world.
• “Nature” (big-N): Abstract, metaphysical, and holistic, representing the spiritual essence or the overarching divine principle animating the universe.
In essence, small-n “nature” is the tangible reflection of big-N “Nature,” the spiritual reality. Emerson encourages his readers to see beyond the surface of nature to experience Nature—using the physical world as a gateway to spiritual insight and universal truths. This distinction is foundational to his transcendentalist philosophy, which seeks to unify the material and the spiritual.
A lovely post Sally, it has made me rethink how I have used the word nature recently. An ecological framework is the way forward. 🙏
Wonderful post Sally. It chimes with something deep within me, that I have never had words for in the past. Because when I look outside of my window and can see “ nature” I see something that is green and growing, but it is separate to me. I am looking at “it”. When I look out of my window and see an ecology that is still green and growing, but does not need to be either of those things, I feel it, I feel part of it, I am it and it is me. It is very much alive in me, and me in it, and the sense of discomfort that I have when I hear the word nature, is gone.
This is so lovely reclaiming a word through deepening into experiencing of what is truly there
I started capitalizing Nature to mean including humans. We definitely need to adjust our definition and our mindset.
So important to remember we have the power to redefine and re-spell 🙏
Thanks for putting this together. It is so important. Language is so important. I tend to agree that using the term "nature" in the first place is causing more harm than good. Abstractions and nouns generally make it so easy to disconnect. In one training the facilitator asked us to spend a day not thinking of ourselves as "I", not referring to ourselves as "I", "me" etc. ... but rather the 30 trillion or so cells we are made of ... what a difference that makes ...
And as humans cannot exist without the rest of the eco-systems, it is really odd that some of is seem to want to pretend we can, and that we can traumatically change ecologies with no effect on ourselves at all, as we are outside of life....
Very irrational for a so called rational species! Fantasy can take us down destructive paths sometimes.
Another wonderful, thought provoking article. Here's to all the species, including us xx
Absolutely, thank you Brigid!
Thank you Kate, we do this work of seeing and understanding anew together. Love the richness of language that an ecological framework gifts us.
Such an interesting reflection Jane. It is extraordinary how words can alter our perception and meanings, and vice versa too !
Thank you Javier, this word and knowing of “all together life” is what English language is missing. Ecology probably comes closest, but is easily distanced or intellectualised because not grounded in dominant culture. This missing word says so much!
Thank you Claudine for sharing this mind opening / world altering exercise, revisioning ourselves as systemic and dynamic, sounds very powerful to do with others. Will carry this with me
Thank you Lindel
redefining the word 'nature' is not the right step in the direction, we have to change the mindset of the people ! (https://www.reddit.com/r/trippinthroughtime/comments/xznyky/praise_the_sun/)
Mindset and definitions are very entwined so not seeing this as an either or but a hand in hand process
What a beautiful post. I have seen the idea that nature is a human construct before, and it resonated with me strongly. It might have been in your book Sally . The process or system of ecology seems much more appropriate. Getting out in nature is good for you and will help you heal, is a difficult idea to get my head around. Becoming part of ecology is a grounding idea, a feeling into the world, rather than taking from it.
I have just returned from a mind blowing Journey On Summit, hosted by Warwick Schiller, in Birmingham UK, and amongst the myriad of emotions, energies, awe inspiring people, sharings, and belongings that I experienced there, two sentences stood out for me. “Words are ambiguous” and “Language is not reality”. Both those ideas were in my mind as I read your post.
Thank you Sally
Thank you Jane, always heartwarming to hear when there's a resonance between a post and life's messaging. I love "Becoming part of ecology is a grounding idea, a feeling into the world, rather than taking from it." We get closer to words when we can translate into a feeling