On Environmental Ethics of the Two Tao and the Ch' I

BY CHUNG-YING CHENG

---

Chung-ying Cheng is professor of philosophy at the University of Hawaii at Manoa.

---

Methodological Considerations

Although environmental ethics is one of the applications of ethics arising from contemporary interest in applying and exploring certain ethical concepts and positions in relation to a set of concrete situations that human persons confront in their daily world, close reflection on this particular application leads to a metaphysical critique of certain basic ethical positions concerning relationships of human beings to nature, other human beings, and themselves. At the outset it must be said that ethics cannot be applied until we have a clear understanding of the underlrying concepts of the human person and his/her end-values as well as a clear understanding of the objects or situations to which the applications pertain. Both understandings require a disclosure of presupposed reality and, therefore, a resolution on the order or scheme of things in which humans find themselves.

Methodologically speaking, we an treat problems of applied ethics at three levels: the metaethical level, where meanings of ethical terms are clarified; the metaphysical level, where the fundamental premises of the nature of reality are examined; and finally, the normative level, where ethical norms for actions and attitudes are formulated. Environmental ethics thus cannot be fully understood unless we deal with these three levels of the subject. This approach is particularly appropriate in view of the fact that environmental ethics is not yet a wellformed system of ethical concepts and no system of norms has been fully formulated and agreed upon. This fact is not to be deplored, but welcomed, since identifying the problems, not to speak of resolving them, is itself a worthy methodological and metaphysical undertaking, with possible rewards of insight, not only into environmental-ethical issues but also into the foundations of ethics but also into the foundations of ethics in general. We may consider the three levels of understanding as dealing with the analytical, the teleological, and the deontological dimensions of environmental ethics.

Analytical Considerations

One central question for environmental ethics that must be raised before others concerns the meanings of the term 'environment'. Environment' is derived from environs, meaning "in circuit" or "turning around in" in Old French. The word is apparently a preposition, indicating an external relation without a context, and also certainly devoid of a relationship of organic interdependence. When we reflect on the experience of environment, however, we encounter many different things and processes in the context of organic interdependence. We might say that what we experience presupposes the existence of life and living processes of many forms. This experience of environment is better expressed by the Chinese philosophical paradigm, sheng-sheng-pu-yi, ("incessant activity of life creativity"). Therefore we must make a distinction between surface meaning and depth meaning for the term 'environment'. Without understanding life and the living process of life, we cannot understand the depth meaning. On the other hand, without understanding the constituents and conditions of life, we cannot understand life and the process of life. Hence, the very essence of environment requires an understanding of reality and the true identity of life in both the aspects of state and process. This means we have to understand the Tao content and the Tao process in the environment, whereas Tao indicates the way of life-creativity in ceaseless movements and multitude of forms.

With the above analysis of the meaning of 'environment' it is clear that the essential depth meaning was lost in modern man's conception of environment. The modern conception is based on the surface meaning, which is typified by technology and science with their underlying philosophy of mechanistic naturalism. The modern concept of environment was thus very much objectified, mechanized, rigidified, dehumanized, possibly even de-enlivened, and so de-environmentalized. Environment then is no longer environment at all; it becomes simply the surroundings, the physical periphery, the material conditions, and the transient circumstances. The environment is conceived as passive deadwood and very often as only visible and tangible externalia. But the depth meaning of 'environment' suggested above--namely environment is active life--is not necessarily visible or tangible, and it certainly cannot simply be a matter of externality. Hence, it cannot be treated as an object, the material conditions, a machine tool, or a transient feature. Environment is more than the visible, the tangible, the external, more than the matter of a quantified period of time or expanse of space. It has a deep structures as well as a deep process, as the concept of Tao indicates.

The distinction between the surface meaning and the depth meaning of environment suggests a distinction between the western and the Ch'inese approach to environment. Whereas the West focuses on the external relation of man to his surroundings based upon a qualitatives separation and confrontation between the human and nonhuman worlds, the Chinese focus is on the internal relation of man to his surroundings based upon an integrative interdependence and a harmony between man and the world. For modern Western man after Descartes, the nonhuman world is to be rationally studied, researched, and then scientifically manipulated and exploited for the maximum utility of man. This will to conquer and dominate nature is of course premised on the externality of nature to man, but there are two other rational principles or assumptions involved in exercising this will to conquer and dominate.

First, it is assumed that nature is a completed work of mechanical forces with one-dimensional natural laws controlling its workings. The one-dimensional natural laws are revealed in the physical sciences and the reductonistic methodology for physicalism. Hence, biological laws are very often reduced to laws of physics and chemistry; no other laws are permitted to stand on their own. Yet the relationship between various forms of life in the totality of nature cannot be said to be fully captured by physicalistic laws nor can the relationship between man and the world of things be said to be regulated by these laws. The very fact of the breakdown of the environment in industrialized societies, as reflected in the problems of water, air, noise pollution, points to a lack of understanding of the relationship between various forms of life and man's environment.

There is a second assumption of modern mechanical science: that everything in the world constitutes a distinct, separate entity of its own and can therefore be individually and separately dealt with as a closed system. This is the isolationistic and atomistic assumption in the problem-solving methodology of modern science, which is reflected in Western medical diagnostic and treatment. It was not until recently that modern medical and health-care researchers became aware of the limitations of this isolationist and atomistic approach. In contrast with the Western externalist point of view on environment, Chinese tradition as represented both by Confucianism (with the I Ching as its metaphysical philosophy) and Taoism (with Chuang Tzu and Lao-tzu as its content), has developed an internalistic point of view on environment. The internalistic point of view focuses on man as the consummator of nature rather than as the conqueror of nature, as a participant in nature rather than a predator of nature. Man as the consummator of nature expresses continuously the beauty, truth, and good of nature, and articulates them in a moral or natural cultivation of human life or human nature. This is paradigmatically expressed in Confucius' saying, "Man can enlarge the Way (Tao) rather than the Way enlarging man." It is also expressed in Chuang Tzu's saying. "The Tao penetrates and forms a Unity." As part and parcel of nature, man does not stand opposite nature in a hostile way. On the contrary, he has profound concern and care for nature at large, as befitting his own nature. For his own growth and well-being, man has to cultivate the internal link in him between himself and Mother Nature. To conquer nature and exploit it is a form of self-destruction and self-abasement for man. The material consequence of the conquest and exploitation must he forestalled by awakening to what man really is and what his nature really consists in.

In contrast with the other two Western assumptions on environment, Chinese philosophy clearly asserts that nature, and therefore man's environment, is not a complete work on production by a transcendent God, but is rather a process of continuous production and reproduction of life. In Bruno's words, nature is Natura naturata. In other words, nature is an organism of continuous growth and decay, but never devoid of internal life. With this understanding, men cannot treat nature as an isolated and atomic part without regard for the totality involving a past and a future. This leads to the second understanding contrary to the Western methodology of atomism: man has to interact with nature in a totalistic manner, realizing that there is no single linear chain of causality. There is always a many-to-many relationship between cause and effect. Hence, man has to consider a many-to-many approach to relate the needs of man to nature. Man has to naturalize man as well as to humanize nature, treating nature as his equal and as a member within the family of the Tao. This approach to nature is reflected in the holistic approach of Chinese medicine in both its diagnostic and medical in both its diagnostic and medical health-care aspects.

The modern mandarin translation for 'environment' is huan-chin, meaning "world of surroundings." This translation reflects the surface meaning of 'environment' correctly. But when embedded in the context of Chinese philosophy and Chinese cultural consciousness, "world of surroundings" does not simply denote individual things as entities in a microscopic structure; it also connotes a many-layered reality such as heaven and earth in a macroscopic enfoldment. It is to be pointed out that this "world of surrounding" is generally conceived as something not static but dynamic, something not simply visible but invisible. It is in this sense of the environment that we can speak of the Tao as the true environment of man is also the true environment of nature or anything in nature. Being asked about the presence of the Tao, Chuang Tzu said: "[The Tao is] nowhere not present." Pressed as to exactly where the Tao lies, Chuang Tzu replied that the Tao is in the ants, the weeds, the ruins, and in the dung. The import of Chaung Tzu's message is that the Tao embraces everything large or small in the universe and imparts a unity of relationships in our environment. The Tao is a totality as well as parts of the totality pervading everything beyond our perception so that we should not ignore what is hidden in our understanding of environment. If understanding is the basis for action, this understanding of environment in terms of the Tao is essential for formulating an ethics of the environment--for articulating what human persons should do and what attitude they should do and what attitude they should adopt toward their surroundings. Two more observations are to be made in order to explicate the philosophy of the Tao for formulating an environmental ethics of the Tao or an ethics of environment based on an understanding of the Tao.

The first observation concerns the Tao as the tzu-jan. Tzu-jan means: "doing-something-on-its-own-accord," or natural spontaneity. In the Tao Te Ching, it is said that "Man follows earth; earth follows heaven; heaven follows the Tao; and the Tao follows tzu-jan. But tzu-jan is not something beyond and above the Tao. It is the movement of the Tao as the Tao, namely as the underlying unity of all things as well as the underlying source of life of all things. One important aspect of tzu-jan is that movement of things must come from the internal life of things and never results from engineering or conditioning an external power. That is why the life-creativity nature of the Tao is the only proper way of describing the nature of the movement of the Tao, However, to say this is not to say that only the Tao can have movement of tzu-jan. In fact, all things can follow tzu-jan insofar as they follow the Tao, or, in other words, insofar as they act and move in the manner of the Tao and in unison and accordance with the Tao. Perhaps a better way of expressing this is: Things will move of their own accord (tzu-jan) insofar as they move by way of the Tao and the Tao moves by way of them. One has to distinguish between Tao-oriented or Tao-founded movement on the one hand and thing-oriented or thing founded movement on the other. Only when movement of a thing comes from the deep source of the thing--the Tao and its harmony with the totality of movements of all other things--will the movement of things be genuinely of its own accord and, therefore, be said to be spontaneous. Spontaneity (tzu-jan) is a matter of infinite depth and infinite breadth in an onto-cosmological sense.

One can, of course, speak of different degrees of tzu-jan in view of different degrees of depth and breadth of harmonious relating and self-assertion among things. As things have their own histories and defining characteristics in form and substance, they also have their relative freedom of self-movement and life-creativity. Things, in fact, can be considered as conditions or preconditions of various forms of tzu-jan (spontaneity): Insofar as things preserve their identity without destroying the identities of other things, and insofar as things change and transform without interfering with the process of change and transformation of other things, there is tzu-jan. this explains the mutual movement, rise and decline, ebb and flow, in things of nature.

For human beings, tzu-jan finds its rationale not only in internal movement and life-creativity of human activity, but in the principle of least effort with maximum effect. Whatever, produces maximum effect by minimum effort in human activity manifests natural spontaneity. One may therefore suggest that only in following natural spontaneity is there least effort and maximum effect. This can be called the ecological principle of nature. With this principle correctly understood, we can then correctly understand the most important Taoist point regarding the nature of the Tao: "The Tao constantly does nothing and yet everything is being done" (Tao-chang-wu-wei erb wa-pu-wei). That the Tao constantly does nothing means that the Tao does not impose itself on things: the Tao only moves of its own accord. That all things also move of their own accord means that all things will come into being on their own accord. The constant nonaction of the Tao is the ultimate cosmological principle of life-creativity and the only foundation for the evolution of the variety of life and the multitude of things. The nonaction of the Tao in this sense is an intrinsic principle of ultimate creativity; this intrinsic principle of ultimate creativity consists in unlimitedness and unlimitation of expression of life forms and life processes in a state of universal harmony and in a process of universal transformation. In this ultimate sense of creativity, there is no effort made by the Tao and yet there is an infinite effect of achieving life-creativity. The ecological principle reaches its ultimate limit in the principle of chang-wu-wei. Hence we can conceive the principle of least effort with maximum effect as an approximation to the tzu-jan of the Tao on the human plane.

With this principle thus correctly understood, we can resolve the dilemmatic predicament of civilization and knowledge. The Taoist questions the value of knowledge and civilization that lead to greed, lust, and evil (tricks and treachery) in human society. In the same spirit, we can question the value of science and technology. In resolving problems of man, do science and technology create more problems for man? Do science and technology appear to lead man to a purely pessimistic future? The Taoistic criticism here is that without an understanding of the Tao, it is not only possible but inevitable that knowledge and civilization, science and technology will doom man to self-slavery and self-destruction. Man simply falls into the bondage of his own conceptual prison and becomes a victim of his own desires. The Taoistic criticism of wu-wei is to awaken man to self-examination and self-doubt; in this way man is awakened to a quest for self-surpassing and self-overcoming in an understanding of the totality of reality and its secret of creativity through wu-wei and reversion (jan). with this awakening, it may be pointed out that man can still proceed with his knowledge and civilization, science and technology, if he is able to neutralize and temper his intellectual and intellectualistic efforts with a sense of the Tao. This means that man has to develop knowledge and civilization, science and technology not out of pace with his efforts to relate to things, other humans, and himself. His knowledge and civilization, science and technology have to contribute to his relating to and integrating with the world of his surroundings. To do this, he has to keep pace with his own growth as a sentient moral being, having regard and respect for his own identity and dignity of other beings, including his fellow man. Furthermore, he has to use his knowledge and, hence, science and technology in keeping with the order of things, with his best interests conceived and deferred in harmony with life and in preservation or promotion of universal creativity. He also has to follow closely the principle of least effort, if not the principle of no effort, with maximum effect, if not infinite effect, in terms of life and creativity, preservation and promotion, for his intellectual, scientific, technological, organizational activities.

As man is part and parcel of the Tao, it is only when he losses the sense of the Tao and respect for the Tao in his life that he becomes alienated from the Tao and his activities become a means of self-alienation that will inevitably result in loss of the true identify by way of self-destruction. This is the natural and spontaneous reaction of the Tao to the self-alienation of man in his intellectual, scientific, exploitative preoccupation and obsession with himself. Hence the remedy for knowledge and civilization or for science and technology is not more knowledge and more civilization or more science and more technology but a constant relating and integrating of these with the Tao. To do so is to naturalize as well as humanize knowledge and civilization, science and technology. It is to make these a part of the Tao. As knowledge and civilization, science and technology are man's forms of approximation of nature (the Tao), man should also let nature reappropriate them by integrating them with nature (the Tao). This is the essential point of ethics in man's relation to the environment: To understand the Tao and to follow the Tao environment. It is also the way to transform the artificiality and unnaturalness of knowledge and civilization, science and technology into the spontaneity and naturalness of the Tao.

In light of this understanding, the conflict between the Tao and knowledge, civilization, science, and technology will be resolved; the true ecology and life-creativity of nature will be restored with knowledge, civilization, science, and technology. They will be enhancing rather than obstructing, complementing rather than opposing the actual spontaneity and harmony of the creativity of the Tao. This is the true wisdom of the Taoist, critique of knowledge and civilization, science and technology. It is called hsi-ming, "hidden light," by Lao-tzu, and lianghsing, "parallel understanding," by Chuang Tzu. In this wisdom lies the most profound principle of both the ecology of nature and the ethics of environment.

The second observation concerns the Tao as a process of ramification and differentiation of the ch'i. Before we explain the meaning and reality of ch'I in Chinese philosophy, it is important to appreciate the significance of introducing ch'i as an explanation of the depth structure and depth process of environment. We have seen that the depth structure and depth process of environment have been explained in terms of the Tao and its life-creativity (sheng-sheng). Even though this explanation is necessary in pinpointing the ontological being and becoming of environment, it is not sufficient, on the one hand, to illuminate the dynamics and dialectics of differentiation and ramifications of the Tao and, on the other hand, to manifest those dynamics and dialectics of unification and integration of the Tao. In other words, there is a gap between the ontology and the cosmology of the Tao that must be bridged.

It is when the Tao is seen in the form and activity of ch'i that this bridging takes place. It might be suggested that the Tao expresses itself in terms of three perspectives, which result in three characterizations in the history of Chinese philosophy. The first perspective is derived from understanding the quality of the activity: it is the perspective of life creativity as clearly formulated in the texts of the I Ching. This perspective we have already discussed above. The second perspective is derived from understanding the patterns of the activity. It is the perspective of the movement of internal spontaneity, reversion, and return, as clearly formulated in the Tao Te Ching as well as those of the Chuang Tzu. In fact, a concentration on the patterns of the movement of the Tao may led one to see the Tao in terms of principles and reasons. The neo-Confucianist metaphysics of li ("principle") is a logical result of this development. This development also leads to an epistemology of the Tao. In both the ontology of the Tao (life-creativity) and epistemology of the Tao (principles of non-action, etc.) the Tao is always conceived as a totality and unity; in the least, the nature of the unity and totality of the Tao is stressed above all. In fact, the very concept of the Tao carries with it a reference to its unity and totality. Yet the Tao is as much a distribution and diversification of being and becoming as a unity and totality. Hence, we need another explanations of this former aspect of the Tao that will also serve the purpose of cosmologizing the ontology and epistemology of the Tao. This is how the Tao-as-the-ch'i paradigm comes in. This is also how the concept of ch'i based on experience of the Tao as ch'i develops. We might therefore suggest that to understand 'environment' in its depth meaning, one has to focus on both the totalistic and distributive aspects of the environment. Hence, one must focus on both the Tao as tzu-jan and the Tao as ch'i.

Another consideration with regard to the importance of the Tao as the ch'i is that, whereas the Tao focuses on reality as a passage of dynamic processes, the ch'i focuses on reality as a presence of material stuff that leads to an actualization of things and the concretization of events. Hence, for understanding the formation and transformation of environment in its substantive structure, one has to understand ch'i. It is in understanding ch'i that one can see and grasp the subtleties of environment vis-à-vis human beings. It is only on this basis of understanding (that is, understanding the Tao as ch'i) that one is capable of formulating an ethics of environment or an ethics of the Tao toward environment. For this reason, we may consider the discussion of the nature of ch'i as constituting a metaphysical inquiry into the depth structure and depth process of environment. As the goal of an ethics of environment is to understand how human beings should relate to environment via a true understanding of environment, we may see how a metaphysical inquiry into the structure and process of environment also constitutes a teleological inquiry into the nature of environment in relation to man. It is only when we are able to understand the nature of environment in its true identity that we are able to see what end-values of our thinking about and acting toward environment are. The end-values are provided by our understanding of reality: to act in accord with reality and our true nature will be our end and will be ultimately the criterion of value. Hence, metaphysics of environment becomes teleology of environmental ethics is founded. With this foundation, we can then rightly speak of an environmental ethics of the Tao, which is the deontology of the Tao.

Metaphysical Teleological Considerations

Before considering the nature of the Tao as ch'i there are several passages in the Tao Te Ching that attempt to justify or explain the Tao as ch'i in the cosmos-making process. In chapter 14 of the Tao Te Ching, the Tao is described as something invisible, inaudible, and ingraspable. Being invisible is called the Great (yi); being inaudible is called the Silent (hsi); being ingraspable is called the Subtle (wei). The source of these three cannot be fully disclosed. They merge to form Oneness. The Above of this Oneness is not bright, and the Below of this Oneness is not dark. As a continuum it cannot be named, and it again vanishes [into] no-thing-ness. It is therefore the form of no-form, the image of no object. It is called 'Seeming-To-Be' (fu-huang).

This description of the Tao is no doubt applicable to ch'i as the primary source of being and becoming. Hence the Tao is Tao-as-ch'i, the ch'i is Tao. In chapter 21 of the Tao Te Ching, again the Tao is described as being constantly indeterminate and unformed (fu-huang), and obscure and dark (yao-min), and yet containing and yielding the concrete things.

The Tao is something indeterminate and unformed. Being indeterminate and unformed, there emerge the forms; being unformed and indeterminate, there emerge the things. Being obscure and dark, there emerge the essence (chin); these essences are very real, wherein the truth (hsin) exists.

The essence (chin) are generally explained by commentators as the chinch'i or the quintessential ch'i, which is the primary or elementary ch'i. Hence we may also see how the Tao is related to the ch'i: Tao in its actual movements becomes the ch'i. Or, alternatively speaking, the movement of the ch'i is the Tao. In fact, chapter 25 of the Tao Te Ching gives an even more vivid characterization of the Tao as ch'i, that is, as something which is the primary substance for all things. It says,

There is something which comes into being before heaven and earth. It is silent and formless. It exists without depending on anything else. It moves in circles ceaselessly. I do not know its name, so I just call it the Tao. I also try to call it the Great. The Great is passing; the Passing is distant; the Distant returns to its own.

Although Lao-tzu does not speak straightforwardly about the Tao as ch'i, it is clear that the Tao must present itself as the ch'i for the purpose of cosmos-making and thing-making. In other words, to speak of the Tao as ch'i is necessary insofar as there is a need for explaining the constitution of the world of things. Similarly, for satisfying the need of explaining the totalistic and transformational nature of things, one has to speak of the ch'i as Tao. It is only when one understands the Tao in the form of ch'i and ch'i in the form of Tao that we are able to understand thoroughly the nature of reality that forms our environment and defines a teleology of end-values for our ethical demands on our behavior toward the environment. In the following, we will give a characterization of Tao as ch'i by answering the question "What is ch'i?" We will follow the classical literature on ch'i Lao-tzu, Chuang Tzu, Kuan Tzu, and the I Ching, and even more importantly, in the classic of Chinese medicine, the Nei Ching.

What is Ch'i? Ch'i is the most fundamental concept in Chinese philosophy as well as in Chinese common sense. Ch'i has been variously translated into English as "material force," "mortal force." "energy." Like many fundamental Chinese philosophical terms, no translation captures its full meaning. In fact, all existing translations conceal and obscure the rich experiential structure of meaning in the concept of ch'i. It is important to recognize that the concept of ch'i has already contained a metaphysical theory, an epistemological theory, and a scientific theory. It also contains a structure of levels and implies a process of stages. Ch'i, on the natural level, is simply the vapor in the form of steam over the rice paddies and the cloud/mists in the sky. On the human level pertaining to daily human experience, ch'i is simply the breath. As breath links to air, so ch'i covers the organic life-energy and the energy in nature in various forms. Hence nothing in the human body is not ch'i and nothing in nature is not ch'i . Two important conditions for understanding ch'i are (1) ch'i is the vital energy of no form. It moves, rests, goes and comes, condenses and stretches. In other words, it transforms. (2) Ch'i nevertheless forms all things in the universe: it can form into various forms depending upon how it moves and rests and how it relates to things formed from ch'i. By itself ch'i does not have any form or any determinate form. But it is precisely due to its indeterminateness and inner capacity of creativity that ch'i can creatively form into things, and yet all things have no permanent form and substance. The life and death of man and any species have to be ultimately explained on the basis of the impermanence of the form of ch'i.

The onto-cosmology of ch'i has also developed to the extent that to think of ch'i one also has to recognize three more characteristics of ch'i on reflection. (1) Ch'i as universally present is not confined to a single region just as it is not confined to a simple form. Hence, there exists a universal sympathy and interrelatedness among things in the universe. Yet the difference in kind, structure, and level of things makes a difference of degrees of sympathy and interrelatedness among things. To discover which things are in sympathetic resonance and which things are not are two important efforts in both traditional applied environmental analysis (feng-shui) and diagnosis/healing-therapy in Chinese medicine.

(2) In the pre-Chin philosophy of ch'i the order, structure, and form exhibited by ch'i itself. As to how different things are formed, the apparent randomness of ch'i actually conceals an ordering force of balance, control, cohesion, sustenance, and qualitative elevation or evolution. Hence ch'i is not to be conceived as an arbitrary chaotic existence: it is to be conceived as leading to seasoned and proportionate evolution and sustenance of life. In fact, reason and principle (li) can be explained as the essence of ch'i that is, as that which constitutes the nature of ch'i insofar as ch'i would behave in accord with them. Hence one should not speak of li apart from or external to ch'i Li belongs to the innermost of ch'i. This explains why in the formation of the natural world and human physiology, there are orderly principles to be found, and similarly why nature in itself exhibits regularity and produces laws and patterns open to human understanding. The possibility of human understanding can indeed be explained as the sympathetic activities of ch'i inside one person in resonance with ch'i external in the world.

(3) The basic order inherent in ch'i is exhibited in the distinction of yin and yang. Yin and yang refer to two aspects of ch'i as a whole, yet in the process of change and transformation one aspect could become dominating and outstanding. As such the dominating and outstanding aspect of the ch'I becomes perceptible and experienced. Yet at the same time, the other aspect also exists or subsists. It takes a subtle mind to experience it, and it takes a period of time to see its functioning. Yin and yang originally respectively refer to the shady and the lighted (the bright) under the sun. Both the shady and the bright have the light as central subject. Similarly, the yin and yang also have the ch'i as their central subject.

With the above analysis of ch'i, we are able to see how ch'i can be more particularly considered on the level of distinction of yin/yang aspects. On this level we can speak of two polarities of ch'i. In doing this, we must remember that yin/yang concepts have their primary experiential roots. They are not arbitrary inventions of man but reflect instead deep features of the nature of the ch'i. Thus, we can speak of ch'i and yang-ch'i. In the light of primary experience of ch'i, one can immediately see how yang-ch'i can be interpreted and seen in motion, brightness, and firm-ness (kang), whereas yin-ch'i can be interpreted and seen in rest, darkness, and softness (jou). The reason for this interpretation is again experiential: yang-ch'i or yin-ch'i is not experienced as a definite single quality, but rather experienced as a indefinite mass phenomenon, the nature of which reveals itself in different ways under different circumstances. Hence, for the yin/yang distinction of the ch'i , an indefinite subcategorization for either yin or yang can be introduced by way of sympathetic understanding and in spontaneous revelation. Not only motion, light, and firmness thus become yang natures, but also rest, shade, and softness become yin natures. A long list of other qualities or states of things can be naturally divided into the yin/yang groups. In each of these divisions, an identification of the yin and the yang will enrich and make more definitive the yin/yang experiences and their corresponding concepts. Yet no complete distinction and exhaustion of the yin/yang totality can be given. Perhaps we can speak of an inductive and implicit definition of the yin/yang:yin/yang are those natures or qualities compatible with and strengthening those natures or qualities already known as yin/yang.

Philosophically speaking, both the I Ching and Lao-tzu's Tao Te Ching have conveyed a general criterion for distinguishing between yin/yang. Yin is passive, receptive, closed-in, downward, soft, resting, and background-like; whereas yang is active, creative, opened-up, upward, firm, moving, and foreground-like. Yin/yang become more clearly described when we describe them relative to concrete things on different levels. Therefore we can speak of heaven/earth as yin/yang, man/woman as yin/yang, life/death as yin/yang, and so forth. In each case, of course, the substantive reference to ch'i is presupposed, for apart from ch'i, how does the yin/yang become discovered or revealed? In reference to ch'i, we can establish the following yin/yang distinctions:

For yin: shade, rest, softness, cold, the weak, closure;

For yang: light, motion, firmness, hot, the strong, openness;

We may also note the following five principles governing the yin/yang distinctions.

(1) The principle of universality: yin/yang exists in all things and for all things on different levels. Indeed, it is because of the yin/yang distinction, that things come to exist in different kinds and on different levels. This is related to the principle of creativity established by the I Ching.

(2) The principle of relationality: yin/yang always exist in close relation to each other, which should explain how things are always related in yin/yang. Insofar as there are relations, there are the yin/yang distinctions and unities underlying all the things. The relationships will be established according to the next principle.

(3) This is the principle of opposite complementarity. Yin/yang forms a unity in which yin and Yang are opposite to each other and yet depend on each other and therefore complement each other and therefore complement each other for their being distinguished as opposites. What makes opposite complementarity is opposite because of unity. Unity and difference exist at the same time as internal natures of the ch'i or as internal, dynamical tendencies in the ch'i. As such we can speak of the unifying and differentiating aspects of the ch'i which give rise to yin/yang and their natural bond of oneness in difference and opposition. This is again made very clear in the I Ching. In light of this principle, we may indeed speak of the yin/yang as polarities of ch'i.

(4) The principle of relativity. All states of ch'i and hence all things can be both yin and yang relative to different other stats of ch'i or things. As individual things, ch'i reveals a manifold of context in which things are related. Hence yin/yang distinction is sufficient to characterize things in their relation to many other things. A wife who is an employer can be yin relative to her husband, but can be yang relative to her employees. In fact she can be both yin and yang to the same object, depending on the contexts of relationships that give rise to differences of activities and positions. A network of yin/yang develops for a single state of ch'i or an individual thing. One can see how the complex of the human body or the whole universe can be presented in terms of a network of the yin/yang.

(5) The principle of creativity. With the polarity of yin/yang aspects inherent in ch'i, activities involving disturbing the balance or harmony in yin/yang, developing a new level of balance or harmony, or restoring a given balance and harmony are possible. In fact, all things in the universe are results of creative activities of the yin/yang; and all the creative activities are actual results of yin/yang movements of opposition and unity. By yin alone or by yang alone there cannot be continuation of life and creativity. As there are life and creativity in the evolution of new entities or new generation of things, yin/yang is perceived to be ever-present among all things. In regard to this creative capacity, yin/yang unity of differences is specifically called the ta'ich'i (the great ultimate). It is clear that the ta'i-ch'i is ch'i in its totality and ever-renewing activities of producing and maintaining the order of things in the environment of man.

Given the above principles of the yin/yang, we can easily see how the Chinese notion of natural environment, insofar as it is depending on the basis of the Ch'i philosophy and yin/yang distinction, is totalistic, phenomenatlistic, and organismic. The reason in simple. Ch'i with its yin/yang activities is totalistic, phenomenalistic, and organismic. For ch'i is a totality, dynamically presenting itself on different levels or reality, and yet well related with reference to all its parts. These characteristics of ch'i not only lead to the development of a conception of the natural environment as ch'i differentiation without losing its unity, but as a process constantly involving internal interaction of its parts and circulation of the ch'i, as well as constantly involving the human ch'i with external things in the world. The purpose of environmental care is to maintain both the internal and external harmony of dynamical interaction of ch'i, just as the purpose of medical care is to restore balance and harmony to either the disrupted internal state of ch'i or to the disrupted state of ch'i in reference to the external world. Chinese traditional environmental studies are precisely and intimately founded and developed on the basis of the ch'i philosophy.

With ch'i as the basic substance process of all things in the world, we have the yin/yang activities of ch'i providing both a structure and a process of creative transformation among all things in the world. Then with regard to the concrete things in the context of the yin/yang interchange, we have to introduce a further structured distinction in the concretizing activities of the ch'i based on yin/yang. This is the distinction of wu-hsing (five powers) we mentioned above. The "five powers" theory dates to ancient time when people started to wonder how things were constituted and related. Again due to the Ch'i philosophy, recognizing ch'i as a dynamical power, the "five powers" are conceived as agencies rather than as elements, as processes rather than as states. Hence the wuhsing can be seen as five agencies or even five functions of ch'i realized in the concrete processes of things. The wu-hsing are powers of metal, wood, water, fire, and earth. The basic characteristics of these five powers are as follows: metal is sharp and cutting; wood is growing and firm; water is soft and penetrating; fire is bright and burning; earth is solid yet adjustable.

The significance of the yin/yang analysis of the wu-hsing theory for the Chinese conception of the environment is that we can consider the opposite and complementary relations among ch'i structures in the human person or between the human person and the external environment not only in the second-order relations of generation/destruction of wu-hsing but in the primary-order relations of differentiation, unification, balancing, and harmonization of the yin/yang. This means that the I Ching philosophy of unity of difference and identify and its dialectics of transformation based on "one-dividing-into-two" and "two-unifying-into-one" are always in the background of the formation of views on human life, its environment and their relationship in the Chinese tradition.

Deontological, Trans-Deontological Considerations

What we have said above constitutes a metaphysical picture of reality on the basis of which our conception of environment can be built. As reality is conceived in terms of sheng-sheng (life-creativity), the Tao (the way of transformation), and ch'i (vital-force), so environment can be also understood under these three categories, and thus can be seen as being intimately related to human beings in a relationship of part and whole: man is part of the environment; the environment is a part of man; and they both are a part of the same whole. It is evident that these propositions are meaningful in light of the Tao-and ch'i-metaphysics or reality as developed in the Chinese philosophic tradition. Man and his environment may form different orders of their own, but yet they beong to the same totality, which is the universal process of transformation called the Tao. Within this totality of transformation, man and his environment are interdependent, interacting as well as interpenetrating. Hence, man cannot treat his environment as a mere object for knowing, controlling, and exploitation. Environment consists of many processes to be involved with and related to this process exemplified and embodied in the Tao, the life-creativity, and the ch'i properties. Hence, the environment should always preserve a unity, harmony, and a balance inherent in the relationship of things and processes. Man is part of this unity, harmony, and balance, and should contribute to their continuous sustenance and growth. This is the supreme categorical imperative for man's behavior toward environment.

With the environment understood as Tao and ch'i, we can also deduce important conclusions regarding misuse or abuse of environment. The environment can react in a harmful way if it is itself harmed. This is a natural consequence from the intrinsic movement of reversing for the Tao. On the other hand, the environment can preserve life and enhance health, if the life preserving and health-enhancing measures are adopted by man in relation to the environment. Environment is a perfect mirror of man. Man's benevolence, justice, and integrity will be reflected in the life-generating and health-enhancing powers of environment. Just as human selfishness, inconsiderateness, and cruelty will be reflected in catastrophes and disasters in the environment, from this point of view, benevolence, justice, and integrity are not just simply human virtues towards one's fellow-man and human community, but are virtues toward things and nature in general. This is because they can be conceived as life-preserving and health-enhancing powers of nature. On the basis of a metaphysical understanding of environment, human ethics can be transformed into environmental ethics.

The environmental ethics of the Tao begins with an understanding of the Tao. After the Tao is understood, Tao becomes the supreme end for man. Man has to treat nature as if there were an intrinsic end in nature. But the proper way of treating nature in this sense is to share and embody the Tao in nature; in other words, to achieve the supreme of the Tao is to be with the Tao, in the Tao, and of the Tao. Environmental ethics of the Tao becomes an art of harmonizing with the Tao, as well as the art of self-realization in nature by way of the Tao. Here we may indeed say that our deontological duties toward nature or environment come from nature environment itself. It may appear to be an imposition of nature on man independent of his understanding of nature. But when man comes to understand nature, the deontological considerations of the environmental ethics are no longer deontological. This is because the deontological becomes part of the teleology of nature; they represent what nature really is. It is in this sense that the environmental ethics of the Tao not only are founded on the basis of the environmental metaphysics of the Tao, but become one with it. Of course, we still can recognize that the metaphysics of environment can produce a true picture of the nature of reality as an end.

We can now formulate four axioms of a metaphysics of environment on the basis of our understanding of reality as Tao process and ch'i structure. Then we can establish four corresponding principles of the deontology of environmental ethics on the basis of these four metaphysical axioms.

1. Axiom of self-transformation. The Tao, or reality as the Tao, presents itself in a process of temporal, spatial, material, immaterial, and relational transformations. There is no simple linear relation of cause and effect, but a manifold of levels and dimensions in organic relation.

2. Axiom of creative spontaneity. The creativity of reality consists in a natural process toward the emergence of life. Even though proper physical conditions for emergence of life and its nourishing have to be conceived as inherent in a self-transforming movement of the Tao and ch'i. Life is not only part of the whole nature of ch'i, but it is feasted in every particle and wave of the ch'i.

3. Axiom of interpenetration. All elements in nature are interdependent, interacting, and interpenetrating. There cannot be real separation among them. Hence, there is the effect of the whole on the part and the effect of the part on the whole. No life process or creative effort can be achieved without taking into consideration the interpenetration relationship of things.

4. Axiom of harmonization. All elements in nature can maintain a relationship of harmony and balance on relevant levels of being and becoming. There is always an inherent harmony pertinent to a given level of relationship. But to achieve a proper harmony on the proper level, one has to relate to all elements in a proper way on that level and also relate to all elements in a proper way on lower levels. Otherwise, a natural return to a lower level of harmony would appear as an ecological breakdown of harmony on a higher level.

Corresponding to these four axioms of nature we may now suggest four corresponding deontological principles in man's relationships to nature or his environment.

1. The principle of harmonization. Man has to preserve a sense of harmony with regard to nature. This sense of harmony is to be articulated in his conscious efforts to love life and to appreciate what is good in life. This sense of harmony will not only be expressed in a sound conservationist position on the ecology of nature, but will also be expressed in man's well-coordinated strategies for cultural and culture can enhance each other's value, and thus together enhance the value of life.

2. The principle of interpenetration. Man has to develop science and design technology with a totalistic sense of reality. Man must recognize that there are visible and invisible elements of nature, and that there are many concentric circles of ch'i structures, all of which can act and react on the well-being of man. Man has to incorporate his understanding of the interpenetration among things in his technological exploration of nature. This is essential for making technology not only humanized, but also naturalized, as well.

3. The principle of creative spontaneity. Man has to learn to seek creativity in a spontaneous way, whereby he can contribute to the richness of life and harmony among things at the same time he fulfills his own needs. It is necessary that man follow the Tao in becoming creative, so that his research and invention will not issue from a desire to dominate and will not result in a will to control. Many things men have done in history have been a waste of life and energy. This can be avoided by following the creative spontaneity of the Tao.

4. The principle of self-transformation. Man also eventually has to learn to transform himself in accordance with the totality of reality. He has to see himself as embodying the Tao, and acting with a will not to will. It is only with his understanding that he is able to resolve conflicts within himself and environment. His self-transformation consists in constantly interacting with nature, so that he can be said to be part of nature and nature can be said to be a part of himself. It is in nature and the Tao that man should find his true self.

It is clear that, whereas the four axioms of the environmental metaphysics of the Tao and the ch'i exhibit an order of ontogenesis, the corresponding deontological principles of environmental ethics of the Tao and the ch'i exhibit an order or returning to the source and embracing the totality. It is this order of going back to the source embracing the totality that the environmental ethics of the Tao and ch'i transforms the metaphysics of the Tao and chi into a teleology as well as a deontology of the Tao and chi. The integration and unification of the teleological and the deontological in the metaphysics of the Tao and ch'i will lead to a maturity of the environmental ethics of the Tao and ch'i. It is in this mature form of the environment ethics of the Tao and Ch'i that we can speak of the embodiment of a new reason in the mind of man.