Words Matter

Words are important. If they don’t go so far as to limit what and how we think, at the very least they direct our thoughts. The simple use of single word can carry a lot of subtle and hidden meaning. In particular,  the definition and root of a word might be based on a great many hidden assumptions or associations. A classic example of this is anthropomorphization, where words that are associated strictly with human beings are applied to non-human beings. To say, for example, that “A tree branched danced in the wind” goes beyond a description of mechanical motion. Among other things, it implies intent and emotion, since dance is an intentional, expressive and emotional activity.

Anthropomorphization is all fun and games, although incurable literalists will still complain, “Trees can’t dance!”

Using Foreign Language

From a Christian perspective, this is food for thought since it applies to borrowing words minted in (or tied to) other religions or philosophies. Why? Using a word validates to some degree the philosophy or religion which formed it.

Generally, reasonable people don’t talk nonsense. Using a word is an implicit acknowledgement that there is at least some level of sense or meaning to the word and the assumptions it implies. If a word is exclusively defined by a philosophy which does not make any sense at all (it is nonsensical) , then it doesn’t mean anything. It *can’t* mean anything. When you use it, you’re talking non-sense.

A common reaction to someone talking nonsense is to substitute the most reasonable definition you can invent for the word, on the grounds that the person talking must be saying *something*. This is a tricky thing because two people might use the same word while never communicating with one another, all the while believing that they have a genuine understanding. They are in fact talking about two different things, beyond each other’s experiences or understanding. While it is possible to glean some understanding, this is limited strictly to the realm of fantasy – it’s possible to envision what is being described, while not being able to tie it to any real experience.

Nature

With the introduction out of the way, it’s time to pick on an example: “Nature”

“Nature” seems to have been steadily accumulating associations which are dragging it out of the realm of solid philosophy and Christian belief. In particular, it’s a poor synonym for the expressive and direct “Creation”. “Creation” means so much more – it’s such a beautiful word. To prove the point, try and use the phrase “Mother Creation”. It sounds wrong – it is wrong. It shines a bright light on the differing philosophies and connotations of the words. Because the world is created by a single creator God it doesn’t make sense to try and talk about “Mother Nature” – it’s nonsense.

How many times do I say “Nature” when I really mean “Creation”? When I say “Creation”, there’s no doubt about what I’m talking about.

There is a second sense to the word nature, where it is used to mean “the essential (created) properties of an entity”, as in “human nature” or simply “natural”. I struggle to find a good Christian synonym for this, because I don’t think there’s a direct mapping.

Certainly there is the state in which we were created – is that our natural state? There is our current fallen state, and this is the one to which a secular ‘natural’ most often applies. Differentiating between the two requires a concept of moral “rightness” which doesn’t exist in a naturalistic philosophy. Does “human nature” refer to the way which we observe humans acting, or the way in which they were created to act, the way they ought to?

I have problems with “nature” because I *want* to talk about God’s Creation and about mankind, fallen, then redeemed. I want to express the concept of alignment with the Creator’s will and perfect desire. I want to communicate the beauty of a perfect creation, the corruption of a sinful fall and the glory of a final restoration – but I don’t think I have the words.