Environmental Ethics

On March 13th, we discussed the philosophy of deep ecologists and how it differs from most of the philosophies we have covered. The term, deep ecology, was introduced by a Norwegian philosopher named, Arne Naess in 1973. As the saw it, there were two forms of environmentalism, long-range deep ecology movement and the other shallow ecology movement. The long-range deep ecology holds the principals and ideas of modern day deep ecology. This view digs into tough questions about environmental issues and looks to make changes, basically redesigning life as we know it. Making drastic changes in our beliefs, values, and culture are the only way to save and preserve the natural systems around the world. In contrast, the shallow ecological view avoids the issue of making fundamental changes, and instead focuses on things like recycling, hybrid cars, organic farming, etc. to address the problem. Deep ecologists aren’t fans of these “quick fixes” and their supporters, like Al Gore. Instead, they see the need for a spiritual revolution so that we become molded into the environment, breaking away from the modern division of human and environmental realms. Their goal for us is to “deself,” or attempt to integrate with the whole by losing our sense of individuality. They want to return to a place where we don’t listen to our rationale, and instead get lost in nature and become apart of it. They feel that doing things like showering, wearing make up, shaving, owning property, and even socializing are not good because they separate us further from nature. Deep ecologists also are against human reproduction and think that population must immediately be reduced. Traditions like Taoism and Zen Buddhism have influenced deep ecology because of their non-dualistic approach to subjects and objects. They suggest that we lead non-complex lives, which can still be rich and full of positive experiences. Respecting diversity, reducing human consumption, restoring ecosystems, promoting nonviolence, and ending authoritarianism through decentralization are all important aspects of this rather new and quickly spreading philosophy. Deep ecologists are humble and recognize that they aren’t perfect themselves, they just do their best and encourage others to do so as well. Many ideas of the deep ecologists have been borrowed from well-known philosopher’s and historians such as Aldo Leopold and Lynn White. Deep ecologist’s have accepted Leopold’s famous statement in “The Land Ethic”: “A thing is right when it tends to preserve the integrity, stability, and beauty of the biotic community. It is wrong when it tends otherwise.” The view of historian Lynn White has also been blended into that of the deep ecologists. White argued that environmental problems are rooted in religious worldviews and that real solutions must involve a change at that fundamental level. While deep ecologists have, indeed, borrowed several thoughts and ideas from others, they do have their own ideological “bible”, known as the Deep Ecology Platform. It is a list of eight principles and can sum up their unique viewpoint…
1) The well-being and flourishing of human and nonhuman life on Earth have value in themselves (synonyms: inherent worth; intrinsic value; inherent value). These values are independent of the usefulness of the nonhuman world for human purposes.
2) Richness and diversity of life forms contribute to the realization of these values and are also values in themselves.
3) Humans have no right to reduce this richness and diversity except to satisfy vital needs.
4) Present human interference with the nonhuman world is excessive, and the situation is rapidly worsening.
5) 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.
6) Policies must therefore be changed. The changes in policies affect basic economic, technological structures. The resulting state of affairs will be deeply different from the present.
7) The ideological change is mainly that of appreciating life quality (dwelling in situations of inherent worth) rather than adhering to an increasingly higher standard of living. There will be a profound awareness of the difference between big and great.
8.) Those who subscribe to the foregoing points have an obligation directly or indirectly to participate in the attempt to implement the necessary changes.