Nature as a Palimpsest – Conceptual Histories Across Cultures

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.46324/PMP2602249

Keywords:

nature, conceptual history, cross-cultural analysis, environmental humanities

Abstract

This article conceptualizes nature as a dynamic and multilayered construct, whose meanings emerge through continuous processes of accumulation, transformation, and cross-cultural interaction. Rather than replacing earlier meanings, new interpretations of nature are added to pre-existing ones, resulting in a palimpsestic structure in which different semantic layers coexist. Drawing on a comparative framework, the study traces the historical evolution of the concept across Western and Chinese traditions, emphasizing both internal developments and intercultural exchanges. In the European context, nature has its roots in Ancient Greece, when it was defined as a dynamic process. Its understanding has constantly changed, being shaped by theological, scientific, and industrial paradigms, becoming a term defined by its opposition to culture. In parallel, the Chinese conceptual field – articulated through paradigms of thought such as Confucianism, Daoism, and Buddhism – develops a relational understanding of the world, in which humans are embedded within a continuous process of transformation. The encounter with Western modernity in the early twentieth century introduces new semantic layers into the Chinese conceptualization of nature, while contemporary ecological thought echoes Chinese concepts such as 自然 (ziran – nature as a self-generating process). Methodologically, the article combines conceptual history and comparative analysis, within the interdisciplinary field of Environmental Humanities, paying particular attention to the interplay between linguistic, philosophical, and cultural dimensions. By foregrounding the stratified nature of the concept, the study argues that nature cannot be understood as a stable category, but rather as an open, evolving construct shaped by ongoing processes of reinterpretation and intercultural negotiation.

References

Collingwood, R.G. (2012). The idea of nature. Martino Fine Books. (Original work published 1945).

Droz, L., Chen, HM., Chu, HT. et al. (2022). Exploring the diversity of conceptualizations of nature in East and South-East Asia. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 9, 186. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-022-01186-5.

Ducarme, F., Couvet, D. (2020). What does ‘nature’ mean?. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 6(1), Article 14. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-020-0390-y .

Eckel, M.D. (1997). Is there a buddhist philosophy of nature? In E. M. Tucker, D. R. Williams (Eds.), Buddhism and Ecology: The Interconnection of Dharma and Deeds. 327-351. Harvard University Press.

Elverskog, J. (2020). The Buddha's Footprint: An Environmental History of Asia. University of Pennsylvania Press.

Elvin, M. (2004). The Retreat of the Elephants. An Environmental History of China. Yale University Press.

Haraway D. J. (2003). The companion species manifesto: dogs people and significant otherness. Prickly Paradigm Press.

Haraway D. J. (2016). Staying with the trouble. Makimg Kin in the chthulucene. Duke University Press.

Kabilsingh, C. (1990). Early buddhist views on nature. In A. H. Badiner (ed.), Dharma Gaia: A Harvest of Essays in Buddhism and Ecology, (pp.8-14). Parallax Press.

Miller, J. (2017). Daoism, China’s green religion: Daoism and the quest for a sustainable future. Columbia University Press.

Seed, J., Macy, J., Fleming, P., Naess, A. (1988). Thinking like a mountain: towards a council of all beings. New Society Publishers.

Shapiro, J. (2001). Mao's War against nature: Politics and the environment in revolutionary China. Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511512063.

Sörlin, S. (2012). Environmental humanities: Why should biologists interested in the environment take the humanities seriously?. BioScience,62,(9), 788–789. https://doi.org/10.1525/bio.2012.62.9.2.

Sponberg, A. (1997). Green buddhism and the hierarchy of compassion. In E. M. Tucker, D. R. Williams(Eds.), Buddhism and ecology: the interconnection of Dharma and Deeds (pp. 351-377). Harvard University Press.

Tu, W. (1998). The Continuity of being: Chinese visions of nature. In E. M. Tucker, J. Berthrog, (Eds.), Confucianism and ecology: The interrelation of heaven, earth, and humans. Harvard University Press.

Tucker, M.E. (2020). Confucian Cosmology and Ecological Ethics: Qi, Li, and the Role of the Human. In M.Sam, M.E.Tucker, J. Grimm, (Eds.). Living earth community. Multiple ways of being and knowing. https://doi.org/10.11647/OBP.0186.

Wei, F., Cui, S., Liu, N., Chang, J., Ping, X., Ma, T., Xu, J., Swaisgood, R.R., Locke, H. (2021). Ecological civilization: China's effort to build a shared future for all life on Earth. National Science Review, 8(7). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/nsr/nwaa279.

Weller, R.P. (2006). Discovering nature: Globalization and environmental culture in China and Taiwan. Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511805257. Kindle Edition.

Yang, M. (ed.) (2021). Chinese environmental ethics. Religions, Ontologies, and Practices. Rowman & Littlefield. Kindle Edition. https://www.amazon.com/Environmental-professor-religious-University-California/dp/1538156482 https://searchworks.stanford.edu/view/14061194

Downloads

Published

2026-07-15

How to Cite

Clara Enescu, I. . (2026). Nature as a Palimpsest – Conceptual Histories Across Cultures. Postmodernism Problems, 16(2), 249–263. https://doi.org/10.46324/PMP2602249