Environment or Nature?

Last week I was preparing a research proposal about the human connection to environment/nature.  I had to decide the best word to use to describe the concept I was looking for.  After looking on dictionary.com I came up with a few definitions for each. 

The American Heritage dictionary (2000) defines “environment” as: 

“The totality of circumstances surrounding an organism or group of organisms, especially: The combination of external physical conditions that affect and influence the growth, development, and survival of organisms: ‘We shall never understand the natural environment until we see it as a living organism’ (Paul Brooks).”

“Natural” has a couple of meanings that are of interest:

1.  Present in or produced by nature: a natural pearl.

2.  Of, relating to, or concerning nature: a natural environment.

3.  Not acquired; inherent: Love of power is natural to some people.

4.  Relation by blood: A natural blood relative.

“Nature” is defined as:

1.  The forces and processes that produce and control all the phenomena of the material world: the laws of nature.

2.  The world of living things and the outdoors: the beauties of nature.

3.  A primitive state of existence, untouched and uninfluenced by civilization or artificiality: couldn't tolerate city life anymore and went back to nature.

What I didn't like about the definitions for environment or nature is how they are described as something that is external.  We remove ourselves from the intimate connection that humans have with nature by defining the environment as something that is "outside.”  Nature is a part of all of us.  It includes the air that we breathe, the water that we drink to the fruits and vegetables we eat that come from the soil.  For this reason, I ultimately selected the word nature as the best choice for my purposes.

This posting is a comment I made to loveman lovenature who was going through the same analysis on the Inspired Protagonist site.