Paper short abstract:

The aim of this paper is to show two different understandings of "nature" in Kyoto school philosophers in the early Showa Japan: Watsuji Tetsurō's "nature" which is included in human world and Nishida Kitarō and Miki Kiyoshi's "nature" which includes human beings.

Paper long abstract:

This paper aims at showing two different understandings of "nature" within the early Showa Kyoto School: in Watsuji Tetsurō's philosophy on the one hand and in Nishida Kitarō and Miki Kiyoshi's on the other. While several prior studies have examined the conceptions of fūdo (climate) and nature in these philosophers (Berque 1986, Tsuda 2007, Matsuoka 2013), their reciprocal differences have not yet been the object of a comprehensive study. Exploring them, this paper offers a new perspective on the relationship between "nature" and "technology"—an issue of great importance in today's world.

Watsuji's nature is situated in the human world. Under the influence of Kant, Watsuji thinks that subjective human existence is the foundation of everything. Mountains and rivers are culturally situated in a certain human society and play as an integral part of human relationships. Nothing is outside human interpretation. In that sense, there is no external "environment" from human existence. According to Watsuji, "technology" is a concept abstracted from human actions in social contexts like "hunting."

Contrarily, Nishida considers "nature" as what contains human beings as a part of itself. From an evolutionist perspective, Nishida thinks that nature is creative and has produced human beings. When individuals get apart from an existing society and unite with this creative nature, they become able to transform a society.

Miki's nature contains human beings, like Nishida's, but Miki further theorizes it in reference to "technology." Not by including "nature" in the sphere of subjective human existence like Watsuji, but only by acknowledging the opposition between a subject and its environment, we can theorize "technology" as the adaptation of a subject to its environment.

Are we an existence which includes nature or which is included by nature? As Watsuji says, when we perceive nature, cultural interpretation inevitably plays the part of perception. It is also true, however, that there are phenomena outside contexts, such as impulses or disasters, which destroy existing forms of human society. Showing these two types of relationships between human and nature, this paper will finally propose a novel perspective for today's environmental issues.