DEEP ECOLOGY ARNE NAESS PDF

Summary. “Deep ecology” is a concept that was forged by Norwegian ecologist and philosopher Arne Naess in Forty years later, this. To understand what Arne Naess means by deep ecology it helps to imagine this For Arne Naess, ecological science, concerned with facts and logic alone. ophers: the Norwegian Arne Naess, the Americans. George Sessions and David Rothenberg, and the Austral- ian Warwick Fox. Deep Ecology is inextricably.

Author: Nakora Shakus
Country: Brazil
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Literature
Published (Last): 14 April 2009
Pages: 29
PDF File Size: 11.55 Mb
ePub File Size: 7.62 Mb
ISBN: 261-9-41024-810-1
Downloads: 61395
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Kelar

Deep ecology is a somewhat recent branch of ecological philosophy ecosophy that considers humankind as an integral part of its environment. The philosophy emphasizes the interdependent value of human and non-human life as well as the importance of the ecosystem and natural processes.

It provides a foundation for the environmental and green movements and has led to a new system of environmental ethics. Deep ecology’s core principle eecology the claim that, like humanity, the living environment as a whole has the same right to live seep flourish.

Deep ecology describes itself as “deep” because it persists in asking deeper questions concerning “why” and “how” and thus is concerned with the fundamental philosophical questions about the impacts of human life as one part of the ecosphere, rather than with a narrow view of ecology as a branch of biological science, and aims to avoid merely anthropocentric environmentalism, which is concerned with conservation of the environment only for exploitation by and for humans purposes, which excludes the fundamental philosophy of deep ecology.

Deep ecology seeks a more holistic view of the world we live in and seeks to apply to life the understanding that separate parts of the ecosystem including humans function as a whole. The phrase “deep ecology” was coined by the Norwegian philosopher Arne Naess in ,[1] and he helped give it a theoretical foundation. For this we need ecological wisdom. Deep ecology seeks to develop this by focusing on deep experience, deep questioning and deep commitment.

These constitute an interconnected system. For example, judgments on whether an animal has an eternal soul, naesss it uses reason or whether it has consciousness or indeed higher consciousness have all been used to justify desp ranking of the human animal as superior to other animals. No single species of living being has more of this particular right to live and unfold than any other species.

As such Deep Ecology would support the view of Aldo Leopold in his book, A Sand County Almanac that humans are “plain members of the biotic community”. They also would support Leopold’s ” Land Ethic “: It is wrong when it tends otherwise.

Deep ecology offers a philosophical basis for environmental advocacy which may, in turn, guide human ecoloby against perceived self-destruction. Deep ecology and environmentalism hold that the science of ecology shows that ecosystems can absorb only limited change by humans or other dissonant influences.

Further, both hold that the actions of modern civilization threaten global ecological well-being. Ecologists have described change and stability in ecological systems in various ways, including homeostasis, dynamic equilibrium, and “flux of nature”.

As a consequence, civilization is causing mass extinction. Deep ecologists hope to influence social and political change through their philosophy. They include the science of ecology itself, and cite its major contribution as the rediscovery in a modern context that “everything is connected to everything else”.

They point out that some ecologists and natural historians, in addition to their scientific viewpoint, have developed a deep ecological consciousness—for some a political consciousness and at times a spiritual consciousness. This is a perspective beyond the strictly human viewpoint, beyond anthropocentrism. A further scientific source for deep ecology adduced by Devall and Sessions is the “new physics.

Basic Principles of Deep Ecology

They refer to Fritjof Capra’s The Tao of Physics and The Turning Point for their characterisation of how the new physics leads to metaphysical and ecological views of interrelatedness, which, according to Capra, should make deep ecology a framework for future human societies.

Devall and Sessions also credit the American poet and social critic Gary Snyder —with his devotion to Buddhism, Native American studies, the outdoors, and alternative social movements —as a major voice of wisdom in the evolution of their ideas. The scientific version of the Gaia hypothesis was also an influence on the development of deep ecology. The central spiritual tenet of deep ecology is that the human species is a part of the Earth and not separate from it.

A process of self-realisation or “re-earthing” is used for an individual to intuitively gain an ecocentric perspective. The notion is based on the idea that the more we expand the self to identify with “others” people, animals, ecosystemsthe more we realize ourselves. Transpersonal psychology has been used by Warwick Fox to support this idea.

  COLOUR ATLAS OF ANATOMY ROHEN PDF

Drawing upon the Buddhist tradition is the work of Joanna Macy. Macy, working as an anti-nuclear activist in the USA, found that one of the major impediments confronting the activists’ cause was the presence of unresolved emotions of despair, grief, sorrow, anger and rage.

The denial of these emotions led to apathy and disempowerment. We may have intellectual understanding of our interconnectedness, but our culture, experiential deep ecologists like John Seed argue, robs us of emotional and visceral experience of that interconnectedness which we had as small children, but which has been socialised out of us by a highly anthropocentric alienating culture.

One of the topical centres of inquiry connecting Spinoza to Deep Ecology is “self-realization. Proponents of deep ecology believe that the world does not exist as a resource to be freely exploited by humans.

The ethics of deep ecology hold that a whole system is superior to any of its parts. They offer an eight-tier platform to elucidate their claims: In practice, deep ecologists support decentralization, the creation of ecoregions, the breakdown of industrialism in its current form, and an end to authoritarianism.

Deep ecology is not normally considered a distinct movement, but as part of the green movement. The deep ecological movement could be defined as those within the green movement who hold deep ecological views. Deep ecologists welcome the labels “Gaian” and “Green” including the broader political implications of this term, e.

Deep ecology has had a broad general influence on the green movement by providing an independent ethical platform for Green parties, political ecologists and environmentalists. The philosophy of deep ecology helped differentiate the modern ecology movement by pointing out the anthropocentric bias of the term “environment”, and rejecting the idea of humans as authoritarian guardians of the environment.

Animal rights activists state that srne something efology require rights and protection intrinsically, it must have interests.

Foundation For Deep Ecology | The Deep Ecology Platform

Deep ecologists claim to identify with non-human nature, and in doing so, criticise those who claim they have no understanding of what non-human nature’s desires and interests are. The jaess is that the interests that a deep ecologist purports to give to non-human organisms such as survival, reproduction, growth and prosperity are really human interests.

While the deep ecologist critic would answer that the logical application of language and social mores would provide this justification, i. Deep ecology is criticised for its claim to be deeper than alternative ness, which by implication are shallow.

However despite repeated complaints about use of the term it still enjoys wide currency; deep evidently has an attractive resonance for many who seek to establish a new ethical framework for guiding human action with respect to the natural world.

It may be presumptuous to assert that one’s thinking is deeper than others’. Both ecofeminism and deep ecology put forward a new conceptualization of the self.

Some ecofeminists, such as Marti Kheel,[17] argue that self-realization and identification with all maess places too much emphasis on the whole, at the expense of the independent being. Ecofeminists contend that their concept of the self as a dynamic process consisting of relations is superior.

Ecofeminists would also place more emphasis on the problem of androcentrism rather than anthropocentrism. Daniel Botkin[18] has likened deep ecology to baess antithesis, the wise use movement, when he says that they both “misunderstand scientific information and then arrive at conclusions based on their misunderstanding, which are in turn used as justification for their ideologies.

Both begin with an ideology and are political and social in focus. Writer William Grey believes that developing a non-anthropocentric set of values is “a hopeless quest” He seeks an improved “shallow” view, writing, “What’s wrong with shallow views is not their concern about the well-being of humans, but that they do not really consider enough ecologj what that well-being consists.

We need to develop an enriched, fortified anthropocentric notion of human interest to replace the dominant short-term, sectional and self-regarding conception.

Social ecologists such as Murray Bookchin[20] claim that deep ecology fails to link environmental crises with authoritarianism and hierarchy. Social ecologists believe that environmental problems are firmly rooted in the manner scology human social interaction, and protest that an ecologically sustainable society could still be socially exploitative.

  CARTINA MIAMI BEACH PDF

Deep ecologists reject the argument that ecological behavior is rooted in the social paradigm according to their view, that is an anthropocentric fallacyand they maintain that the converse of the social ecologists’ objection is also true in that it is equally possible for a socially egalitarian ane to continue to exploit the Earth. Parallels have been drawn between deep ecology and other movements, in particular the animal rights movement and Earth First!.

Peter Singer’s book Animal Liberation critiqued anthropocentrism and put the case for animals to be given moral consideration. This can be seen as a part of arns process of expanding the prevailing system of ethics to wider groupings. However, Singer has disagreed with deep ecology’s belief in the dcology value of nature separate from questions of suffering, taking a more utilitarian stance. The feminist and civil rights movements also ecolkgy about expansion of the ethical system for their particular domains.

Likewise deep ecology brought the whole of nature under moral consideration.

Foundation For Deep Ecology | The Deep Ecology Movement

Many in the radical environmental direct-action movement Earth First! In particular, David Foreman, the co-founder of the movement, has also been a strong advocate for deep ecology, and engaged in a public debate with Murray Bookchin on the subject.

It should however be noted that, especially in the United Kingdom, there are also strong anti-capitalist and anarchist currents in the movement, and actions are often symbolic or have other political aims.

Although Ecopsychology is a highly differentiated umbrella that encompasses many practices and perspectives, its ethos is generally consistent with DE. As this now almost forty-year old “field” expands and continues to be reinterpreted by a variety of practitioners, social and natural scientists, and humanists, “ecopsychology” may change to include these novel perspectives. Development The phrase “deep ecology” was coined by the Norwegian philosopher Arne Naess in ,[1] and he helped give it a theoretical foundation.

Spiritual The central spiritual tenet of deep ecology is that the human species is a part of the Earth and not separate from it. Experiential Drawing upon the Buddhist tradition is the work of Joanna Macy.

Principles Proponents of deep ecology believe that the world does not exist as a resource to be freely exploited by humans. These values are independent of the usefulness of the nonhuman world for human purposes.

Richness and diversity of life forms contribute to the realization of these values and are also values in themselves. Humans have no right to reduce this richness and diversity except to satisfy vital human needs.

The flourishing of human life and cultures is compatible with a substantial decrease of the human population. The flourishing of nonhuman life requires such a decrease.

Present human interference with the nonhuman world is excessive, and the situation is rapidly worsening. Policies must therefore be changed. These policies affect basic economic, technological, and ideological structures. The resulting state of affairs will be deeply different from the present. The ideological change is mainly that of appreciating life quality dwelling in situations of inherent value rather than adhering to an increasingly higher standard of living.

There will be a profound awareness of the difference between big and great. Those who subscribe to the foregoing points have an obligation directly or indirectly to try to implement the necessary changes. Movement In practice, deep ecologists support decentralization, the creation of ecoregions, the breakdown of industrialism in its current form, and an end to authoritarianism.

Criticism Interests in nature Animal rights activists state that for something to require rights and protection intrinsically, it must have interests. Deepness Deep ecology is criticised for its claim to be deeper than alternative theories, which by implication are shallow.

Ecofeminist response Both ecofeminism and deep ecology put forward a new conceptualization of the self. Misunderstanding scientific information Daniel Botkin[18] has likened deep ecology to its antithesis, the wise use movement, when he says that they both “misunderstand scientific information and then arrive at conclusions based on their misunderstanding, which are in turn used as justification for their ideologies.

Links with other movements Parallels have been drawn between deep ecology and other movements, in particular the animal rights movement and Earth First!. Ecology, Community and Lifestyle: Outline of an Ecosophy.