Naess, Arne The Deep Ecological Movement_Some philosophical Aspects

Prévia do material em texto

402 Chapter 10 ARNE NAESS The Deep Ecological Movement: Some Philosophical Aspects Arne Naess is professor emeritus at the University of Oslo, Norway. Born in 1913, he was appointed professor of philosophy at age 27, the youngest in Norway's history. After some 30 years of work on semantics, philosophy of science, Spinoza, and eastern philos- ophy, he resigned in 1969 to devote himself to environmental matters. In 1972, he coined the phrase deep ecology, to distinguish a moral relation to the natural world from simply an instrumental one. In addition to writing many articles about environmental philosophy, in Ecology, Community and Lifestyle, Naess sets out his "Ecosophy T," or the philosophical basis for what became codified, with deep ecologist George Sessions in 1984, as the deep ecology platform. CRITICAL READING QUESTIONS 1. Why does Naess use the adjective deep to describe his view about the proper position of people in the natural world? 2. How does Naess' "deep" approach contrast with "shallow" environmentalism on pollution, resources, population, cultural diversity, and appropriate technology, land use, and education? 3. What does Naess mean when he says that deep ecology is a "derivational system"? 4. What does Naess mean by "Ecosophy T"? 1. DEEP ECOLOGY ON THE DEFENSIVE less, he persisted and influenced thousands of peo- ple (including myself). Increasing pressures for continued growth and de- Mysterud became a well-known professional "ex- velopment have placed the vast majority of envi- pert" at assessing the damage done when bears ronmental professionals on the defensive. By way of killed or maimed sheep and other domestic ani- illustration: mals in Norway. According to the law, their owners The field-ecologist Ivar Mysterud, who both pro- are paid damages. And licensed hunters receive fessionally and vigorously advocated deep ecologi- permission to shoot bears if their misdeeds become cal principles in the late 1960s, encountered con- considerable.¹ Continued growth and development siderable resistance. Colleagues at his university required that the sheep industry consolidate and said he should keep to his science and not meddle sheepowners became fewer, richer, and tended to in philosophical and political matters. He should live in cities. As a result of wage increases, they resist the temptation to become a prominent "pop- could not afford to hire shepherds to watch the ularizer" through mass media exposure. Neverthe- flocks, so the sheep were left on their own even more than before. Continued growth also required moving sheep to what was traditionally considered This essay originally appreared in Philosophical Inquiry 8, 1-2 "bear territory." In spite of this invasion, bear pop- (1986). Reprinted with permission. ulations grew and troubles multiplied.Broader Concerns: Thoreau, Deep Ecology, and Ecofeminism 403 How did Mysterud react to these new problems? mit the necessity for deep and far-ranging changes, Did he set limits to the amount of human/sheep but they no longer speak out in public. As a result, encroachment on bear territory? Did he attempt a people deeply concerned about ecology and the en- direct application of his deep ecological perspec- vironment feel abandoned and even betrayed by the tive to these issues? Quite the contrary. He adopted "experts" who work within the "establishment." what appeared to be a shallow wildlife management In ecological debates, many participants know a perspective, and defended the sheepowners: more lot about particular conservation policies in partic- money to compensate for losses, quicker compen- ular places, and many others have strong views con- 1913, he was sation, and the immediate hiring of hunters who cerning fundamental philosophical questions of history. After killed mostly "juvenile delinquent" bears accused of environmental ethics, but only a few have both stern philos- killing many sheep. qualities. When these people are silent, the loss is In 1972, he Protectors of big carnivores noted with concern formidable. world from the change of Mysterud's public "image"; had he re- For example, the complicated question con- vironmental ally abandoned his former value priorities? Pri- cerning how industrial societies can increase en- ny T," or the vately he insisted that he hadn't. But in public he ergy production with the least undesirable conse- Sessions in tended to remain silent. quences is largely a waste of time if this increase is The reason for M.'s unexpected actions was not pointless in relation to ultimate human ends. Thou- difficult to find: The force of economic growth was sands of experts hired by the government and other so strong that the laws protecting bears would be big institutions devote their time to this compli- per position changed in a highly unfavorable direction if the cated problem, yet it is difficult for the public to sheepowners were not soon pacified by accepting find out or realize that many of these same experts alism on some of their not unreasonable demands. After all, consider the problem to be pointless and irrelevant. nology, it did cost a lot of money to hire and equip people What these experts consider relevant are the prob- to locate a flock of sheep which had been harassed lems of how to stabilize and eventually decrease system"? by a bear and, further, to prove the bear's guilt. And consumption without losing genuine quality of life the bureaucratic procedures involved were time- for humans. But they continue to work on the irrel- consuming. M. had not changed his basic value pri- evant problems assigned to them while, at the same orities at all. Rather, he had adopted a purely defen- time, failing to speak out, because the ultimate sive compromise. He stopped promoting his deep power is not in their hands. ands of peo- ecology philosophy publicly in order to retain credi- bility and standing among opponents of his princi- essional "ex- ples and to retain his friendships with sheepowners. 2. A CALL TO SPEAK OUT when bears And what is true of Mysterud is also true of thou- omestic ani- sands of other professional ecologists and environ- What I am arguing for is this: Even those who com- their owners mentalists. These people often hold responsible pletely subsume ecological policies under the nar- ters receive positions in society where they might strengthen re- row ends of human health and well-being cannot at- eds become sponsible environmental policy, but, given the ex- tain their modest aims, at least not fully, without ponential forces of growth, their publications, if being joined by the supporters of deep ecology. solidate and any, are limited to narrowly professional and spe- They need what these people have to contribute, d tended to cialized concerns. Their writings are surely compe- and this will work in their favor more often than it reases, they tent, but lack a deeper and more comprehensive will work against them. Those in charge of environ- watch the perspective (although I admit that there are some mental policies, even if they are resource-oriented own even brilliant exceptions to this). (and growth tolerating?) decision makers, will in- Iso required If professional ecologists persist in voicing their creasingly welcome, if only for tactical and not fun- considered value priorities, their jobs are often in danger, or they damental reasons, what deep ecology supporters n, bear pop- tend to lose influence and status among those who have to say. Even though the more radical ethic may are in charge of overall Privately, they ad- seem nonsensical or untenable to them, they know404 Chapter 10 that its advocates are, in practice, doing conserva- In short, environmental education campaigns tion work that sooner or later must be done. They can fortunately combine human-centered argu- concur with the practice even though they operate ments with a practical environmental ethic based from diverging theories. The time is ripe for pro- on either a deeper and more fundamental philo- fessional ecologists to break their silence and ex- sophic or religious perspective, and on a set of press their deepest concerns more freely. A bolder norms resting on intrinsic values. But the inherent advocacy of deep ecological concerns by those strength of this overall position will be lost if those working within the shallow, resource-oriented envi- who work professionally on environmental prob- ronmental sphere is the best strategy for regaining lems do not freely give testimony to fundamental some of the strength of this movement among the norms. general public, thereby contributing, however The above is hortatory in the positive etymolog- modestly, to a turning of the tide. ical sense of that word. I seek "to urge, incite, insti- What do I mean by saying that even the more gate, encourage, cheer" (Latin: hortari). This may modest aims of shallow environmentalism have a seem unacademic but I consider it justifiable be- need for deep ecology? We can see this by consid- cause of an intimate relationship between horta- ering the World Conservation Strategy-prepared tory sentences and basic philosophical views which by the International Union for the Conservation of I formulate in section 8. To trace what follows from Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN) in coopera- fundamental norms and hypotheses is eminently tion with the United Nations Environmental Pro- philosophical. gramme (UNEP) and the World Wildlife Fund (WWF). The argument in this important document is thoroughly anthropocentric in the sense that all 3. WHAT IS DEEP ECOLOGY? its recommendations are justified exclusively in terms of their effects upon human health and basic The phrase "deep ecology movement" has been well-being. 3 used up to this point without trying to define it. A more ecocentric environmental ethic is also rec- One should not expect too much from definitions ommended apparently for tactical reasons: "A new of movements; think, for example, of terms like ethic, embracing plants and animals as well as peo- "conservatism," "liberalism," or the "feminist move- ple, is required for human societies to live in har- ment." And there is no reason why supporters of mony with the natural world on which they depend movements should adhere exactly to the same defi- for survival and well-being." But such an ethic would nition, or to any definition, for that matter. It is the surely be more effective if it were acted upon by peo- same with characterizations, criteria, or a set of pro- ple who believe in its validity, rather than merely its posed necessary conditions for application of the usefulness. This, I think, will come to be understood term or phrase. In what follows, a platform or key more and more by those in charge of educational terms and phrases, agreed upon by George Sessions policies. Quite simply, it is indecent for a teacher to and myself, are tentatively proposed as basic to proclaim an ethic for tactical reasons only. deep ecology. 4 More accurately, the sentences have Furthermore, this point applies to all aspects of a double function. They are meant to express im- a world conservation strategy. Conservation strate- portant points which the great majority of support- gies are more eagerly implemented by people who ers accept, implicitly or explicitly, at a high level of love what they are conserving, and who are con- generality. Furthermore, they express a proposal to vinced that what they love is intrinsically lovable. the effect that those who solidly reject one or more Such lovers will not want to hide their attitudes and of these points should not be viewed as supporters values, rather they will increasingly give voice to of deep ecology. This might result because they are them in public. They possess a genuine ethics of supporters of a shallow (or reform) environmental conservation, not merely a tactically useful instru- movement or rather they may simply dislike one or ment for human survival. more of the eight points for semantical or other rea-Broader Concerns: Thoreau, Deep Ecology, and Ecofeminism 405 mpaigns sons. But they may well accept a different set of cludes individuals, species, populations, habitat, as d argu- points which, to me, has roughly the same meaning, well as human and nonhuman cultures. Given our IC based in which case I shall call them supporters of the current knowledge of all-pervasive intimate rela- al philo- deep ecology movement, but add that they think tionships, this implies a fundamental concern and a set of they disagree (maybe Henryk Skolimowski is an ex- respect. nherent ample of the latter). The eight points are: The term "life" is used here in a more compre- if those hensive nontechnical way also to refer to what biol- al prob- 1. The well-being and flourishing of human ogists classify as "nonliving": rivers (watersheds), and nonhuman life on earth have value in amental landscapes, ecosystems. For supporters of deep themselves (synonyms: intrinsic value, ecology, slogans such as "let the river live" illustrate ymolog- inherent worth). These values are inde- this broader usage so common in many cultures. te, insti- pendent of the usefulness of the non-human Inherent value, as used in (1), is common in may world for human purposes. deep ecology literature (e.g., "The presence of in- able be- 2. Richness and diversity of life forms herent value in a natural object is independent of n horta- contribute to the realization of these values any awareness, interest, or appreciation of it by any which and are also values in themselves. conscious being"). 5 WS from 3. Humans have no right to reduce this richness RE (2): The so-called simple, lower, or primitive ninently and diversity except to satisfy vital needs. species of plants and animals contribute essentially 4. The flourishing of human life and cultures is to the richness and diversity of life. They have value compatible with a substantially smaller human in themselves and are not merely steps toward the population. The flourishing of nonhuman life so-called higher or rational life forms. The second requires a smaller human population. principle presupposes that life itself, as a process over evolutionary time, implies an increase of di- as been 5. Present human interference with the versity and richness. efine it. nonhuman world is excessive, and the Complexity, as referred to here, is different from finitions situation is rapidly worsening. complication. For example, urban life may be more rms like 6. Policies must therefore be changed. These complicated than life in a natural setting without st move- policies affect basic economic, technolog- being more complex in the sense of multifaceted orters of ical, and ideological structures. The quality. me defi- resulting state of affairs will be deeply RE (3): The term "vital need" is deliberately left It is the different from the present. vague to allow for considerable latitude in judgment. t of pro- 7. The ideological change will be mainly that of Differences in climate and related factors, together n of the appreciating life quality (dwelling in situa- with differences in the structures of societies as they n or key tions of inherent value) rather than adhering now exist, need to be taken into consideration. Sessions to an increasingly higher standard of living. RE (4): People in the materially richest countries basic to There will be a profound awareness of the cannot be expected to reduce their excessive inter- ces have difference between bigness and greatness. ference with the nonhuman world overnight. The press im- 8. Those who subscribe to the foregoing points stabilization and reduction of the human popula- support- tion will take time. Hundreds of years! Interim have an obligation directly or indirectly to level of try to implement the necessary changes. strategies need to be developed. But in no way does posal to this excuse the present complacency. The extreme or more seriousness of our current situation must first be re- pporters Comments on the Eight Points alized. And the longer we wait to make the neces- they are of the Platform sary changes, the more drastic will be the measures nmental RE (1): This formulation refers to the biosphere, or needed. Until deep changes are made, substantial one or more professionally to the ecosphere as a whole decreases in richness and diversity are liable to oc- ther rea- (this is also referred to as "ecocentrism"). This in- cur: the rate of extinction of species will be ten to406 Chapter 10 one hundred or more times greater than in any tions becomes increasingly important. Many of other short period of earth history. these organizations are able to act globally "from RE (5): This formulation is mild. For a realistic grassroots to grassroots" thus avoiding negative assessment, see the annual reports of the World- governmental interference. watch Institute in Washington, D.C. Cultural diversity today requires advanced The slogan of "noninterference" does not imply technology, that is, techniques that advance the that humans should not modify some ecosystems, as basic goals of each culture. So-called soft, inter- do other species. Humans have modified the earth mediate, and alternative technologies are steps in over their entire history and will probably continue this direction. to do so. At issue is the nature and extent of such in- RE (7): Some economists criticize the term terference. The per capita destruction of wild (an- "quality of life" because it is supposedly vague. But, cient) forests and other wild ecosystems has been on closer inspection, what they consider to be vague excessive in rich countries; it is essential that the is actually the nonquantifiable nature of the term. poor do not imitate the rich in this regard. One cannot quantify adequately what is important The fight to preserve and extend areas of wilder- for the quality of life as discussed here, and there is ness and near-wilderness ("free Nature") should no need to do so. continue. The rationale for such preservation RE (8): There is ample room for different opin- should focus mainly on the ecological functions of ions about priorities: what should be done first; these areas (one such function: large wilderness ar- what next? What is the most urgent? What is clearly eas are required in the biosphere for the continued necessary to be done, as opposed to what is highly evolutionary speciation of plants and animals). desirable but not absolutely pressing? The frontier Most of the present designated wilderness areas and of the environmental crisis is long and varied, and game reserves are not large enough to allow for there is a place for everyone. such speciation. The above formulations of the eight points may RE (6): Economic growth as it is conceived of be useful to many supporters of the deep ecology and implemented today by the industrial states is in- movement. But some will certainly feel that they are compatible with points (1) through (5). There is imperfect, even misleading. If they need to formu- only a faint resemblance between ideal sustainable late in a few words what is basic to deep ecology, forms of economic growth and the present policies then they will propose an alternative set of sen- of industrial societies. tences. I shall of course be glad to refer to them as Present ideology tends to value things because alternatives. There ought to be a measure of diver- they are scarce and because they have a commodity sity in what is considered basic and common. value. There is prestige in vast consumption and Why should we call the movement "the deep waste (to mention only several relevant factors). ecological movement"?6 There are at least six other Whereas "self-determination," "local commu- designations which cover most of the same issues: nity," and "think globally, act locally," will remain key "Ecological Resistance," used by John Rodman in terms in the ecology of human societies, neverthe- important discussions; "The New Natural Philoso- less the implementation of deep changes requires phy" coined by Joseph Meeker; "Eco-philosophy," increasingly global action: Action across borders. used by Sigmund Kvaloy and others to emphasize Governments in Third World countries are (1) a highly critical assessment of the industrial mostly uninterested in deep ecological issues. growth societies from a general ecological point of When institutions in the industrial societies try to view, and (2) the ecology of the human species; promote ecological measures through Third "Green Philosophy and Politics" (while the term World governments, practically nothing is accom- "green" is often used in Europe, in the United plished (e.g., with problems of desertification). States "green" has a misleading association with the Given this situation, support for global action rather "blue" Green agricultural revolution); "Sus- through non-governmental international organiza- tainable Earth Ethics," as used by G. Tyler Miller;Broader Concerns: Thoreau, Deep Ecology, and Ecofeminism 407 of and "Ecosophy" (ecowisdom), which is my own fa- trees which will tolerate high acidity, etc. The deep vorite term. Others could be mentioned as well. approach concentrates on what is going on in the And so, why use the adjective "deep"? This ques- total ecosystem and calls for a high priority fight tion will be easier to answer after the contrast is against the economic conditions and the technol- made between shallow and deep ecological con- ogy responsible for producing the acid rain. The cerns. "Deep ecology" is not a philosophy in any long-range concerns are 100 years, at least. er- proper academic sense, nor is it institutionalized as The priority is to fight the deep causes of pollu- in a religion or an ideology. Rather, what happens is tion, not merely the superficial, short-range effects. that various persons come together in campaigns The Third and Fourth World countries cannot af- rm and direct actions. They form a circle of friends sup- ford to pay the total costs of the war against pollu- ut, porting the same kind of lifestyle which others may tion in their regions; consequently they require the think to be "simple," but which they themselves see assistance of the First and Second World countries. m. as rich and many-sided. They agree on a vast array Exporting pollution is not only a crime against hu- ant of political issues, although they may otherwise sup- manity, it is a crime against life in general. is port different political parties. As in all social move- ments, slogans and rhetoric are indispensable for B. Resources bin- in-group coherence. They react together against irst; the same threats in a predominantly nonviolent Shallow Approach: The emphasis is upon resources arly way. Perhaps the most influential participants are for humans, especially for the present generation in ghly artists and writers who do not articulate their in- affluent societies. In this view, the resources of the tier sights in terms of professional philosophy, express- earth belong to those who have the technology to and ing themselves rather in art or poetry. For these rea- exploit them. There is confidence that resources sons, I use the term "movement" rather than will not be depleted because, as they get rarer, a may "philosophy." But it is essential that fundamental at- high market price will conserve them, and substi- logy titudes and beliefs are involved as part of the moti- tutes will be found through technological progress. are vation for action. Further, plants, animals, and natural objects are mu- valuable only as resources for humans. If no human logy, use is known, or seems likely ever to be found, it sen- 4. DEEP VERSUS SHALLOW ECOLOGY does not matter if they are destroyed. m as Deep Approach: The concern here is with re- liver- A number of key terms and slogans from the envi- sources and habitats for all life-forms for their own ronmental debate will clarify the contrast between sake. No natural object is conceived of solely as a re- deep the shallow and the deep ecology movements.⁷ source. This leads, then, to a critical evaluation of other human modes of production and consumption. ssues: A. Pollution The question arises: to what extent does an increase an in in production and consumption foster ultimate hu- iloso- Shallow Approach: Technology seeks to purify the air man values? To what extent does it satisfy vital and water and to spread pollution more evenly. Laws needs, locally or globally? How can economic, legal, limit permissible pollution. Polluting industries are and educational institutions be changed to coun- ustrial preferably exported to developing countries. teract destructive increases? How can resource use int of Deep Approach: Pollution is evaluated from a serve the quality of life rather than the economic ecies; biospheric point of view, not focusing exclusively on standard of living as generally promoted by con- term its effects on human health, but rather on life as a sumerism? From a deep perspective, there is an em- United whole, including the life conditions of every species phasis upon an ecosystem approach rather than the th the and system. The shallow reaction to acid rain, for consideration merely of isolated life-forms or local "Sus- example, is to tend to avoid action by demanding situations. There is a long-range maximal perspec- Miller; more research, and the attempt to find species of tive of time and place.408 Chapter 10 C. Population life-forms. A high priority should be given to cul- tural anthropology in general education programs Shallow Approach: The threat of (human) "over- in industrial societies. population" is seen mainly as a problem for devel- There should be limits on the impact of Western oping countries. One condones or even applauds technology upon present existing nonindustrial population increases in one's own country for countries and the Fourth World should be de- shortsighted economic, military, or other reasons; fended against foreign domination. Political and an increase in the number of humans is considered economic policies should favor subcultures within as valuable in itself or as economically profitable. industrial societies. Local, soft technologies should The issue of an "optimum population" for humans allow for a basic cultural assessment of any techni- is discussed without reference to the question of an cal innovations, together with freely expressed crit- "optimum population" for other life-forms. The de- icism of so-called advanced technology when this struction of wild habitats caused by increasing hu- has the potential to be culturally destructive. man population is accepted as in inevitable evil, and drastic decreases of wildlife forms tend to be ac- cepted insofar as species are not driven to extinc- E. Land and Sea Ethics tion. Further, the social relations of animals are ig- Shallow Approach: Landscapes, ecosystems, rivers, nored. A long-term substantial reduction of the and other whole entities of nature are conceptually global human population is not seen to be a desir- cut into fragments, thus disregarding larger units able goal. In addition, the right is claimed to defend and comprehensive gestalts. These fragments are one's borders against "illegal aliens," regardless of regarded as the properties and resources of indi- what the population pressures are elsewhere. viduals, organizations or states. Conservation is ar- Deep Approach: It is recognized that excessive gued in terms of "multiple use" and "cost/benefit pressures on planetary life stem from the human analysis." The social costs and long-term global eco- population explosion. The pressure stemming logical costs of resource extraction and use are usu- from the industrial societies is a major factor, and ally not considered. Wildlife management is con- population reduction must have the highest prior- ceived of as conserving nature for "future ity in those societies. generations of humans." Soil erosion or the deteri- oration of ground water quality, for example, is D. Cultural Diversity and noted as a human loss, but a strong belief in future Appropriate Technology technological progress makes deep changes seem Shallow Approach: Industrialization of the Western unnecessary. industrial type is held to be the goal of developing Deep Approach: The earth does not belong to countries. The universal adoption of Western tech- humans. For example, the Norwegian landscapes, nology is held to be compatible with cultural diver- rivers, flora and fauna, and the neighboring sea are sity, together with the conservation of the positive not the property of Norwegians. Similarly, the oil elements (from a Western perspective) of present under the North Sea or anywhere else does not be- nonindustrial societies. There is a low estimate of long to any state or to humanity. And the "free na- deep cultural differences in nonindustrial societies ture" surrounding a local community does not be- which deviate significantly from contemporary long to the local community. Western standards. Humans only inhabit the lands, using resources Deep Approach: Protection of nonindustrial cul- to satisfy vital needs. And if their nonvital needs tures from invasion by industrial societies. The come in conflict with the vital needs of nonhumans, goals of the former should not be seen as promot- then humans should defer to the latter. The eco- ing lifestyles similar to those in the rich countries. logical destruction now going on will not be cured Deep cultural diversity is an analogue on the hu- by a technological fix. Current arrogant notions in man level to the biological richness and diversity of industrial (and other) societies must be resisted.Broader Concerns: Thoreau, Deep Ecology, and Ecofeminism 409 iven to cul- F. Education and the Scientific Enterprise time, people-from heads of state to the members n programs of rural most readily be Shallow Approach: The degradation of the environ- brought to demand conservation if they ment and resource depletion requires the training of of Western themselves recognize the contribution of more and more "experts" who can provide advice conservation to the achievement of their needs as nindustrial concerning how to continue combining economic perceived by them, and the solution of their uld be de- growth with maintaining a healthy environment. We problems, as perceived by them. 8 and are likely to need an increasingly more dominating ures within There are several dangers in arguing solely from and manipulative technology to "manage the planet" gies should the point of view of narrow human interests. Some when global economic growth makes further envi- any techni- policies based upon successful homocentric argu- ronmental degradation inevitable. The scientific en- ressed crit- ments turn out to violate or unduly compromise the terprise must continue giving priority to the "hard when this objectives of deeper argumentation. Further, ho- sciences" (physics and chemistry). High educational tive. mocentric arguments tend to weaken the motiva- standards with intense competition in the relevant tion to fight for necessary social change, together "tough" areas of learning will be required. with the willingness to serve a great cause. In addi- Deep Approach: If sane ecological policies are tion, the complicated arguments in human-centered adopted, then education should concentrate on an ms, rivers, conservation documents such as the World Conser- increased sensitivity to nonconsumptive goods, and nceptually vation Strategy go beyond the time and ability of on such consumables where there is enough for all. rger units many people to assimilate and understand. They Education should therefore counteract the exces- ments are also tend to provoke interminable technical dis- sive emphasis upon things with a price tag. There es of indi- agreements among experts. Special interest groups should be a shift in concentration from the "hard" tion is ar- with narrow short-term exploitive objectives, which to the "soft" sciences which stress the importance of st/benefit run counter to saner ecological policies, often ex- the local and global cultures. The educational ob- lobal eco- ploit these disagreements and thereby stall the de- jective of the World Conservation Strategy ("build- e are usu- bate and steps toward effective action. ing support for conservation") should be given a nt is con- When arguing from deep ecological premises, high priority, but within the deeper framework of "future most of the complicated proposed technological respect for the biosphere. he deteri- fixes need not be discussed at all. The relative mer- In the future, there will be no shallow environ- ample, is its of alternative technological proposals are point- mental movement if deep policies are increasingly in future less if our vital needs have already been met. A focus adopted by governments, and thus no need for a ges seem on vital issues activates mental energy and strength- special deep ecological social movement. ens motivation. On the other hand, the shallow en- elong to vironmental approach, by focusing almost exclu- adscapes, sively on the technical aspects of environmental 5. BUT WHY A "DEEP" ECOLOGY? g sea are problems, tends to make the public more passive the oil and disinterested in the more crucial nontechnical, The decisive difference between a shallow and a S not be- lifestyle-related, environmental issues. deep ecology, in practice, concerns the willingness "free na- Writers within the deep ecology movement try to to question, and an appreciation of the importance ; not be- articulate the fundamental presuppositions under- of questioning, every economic and political policy lying the dominant economic approach in terms of in public. This questioning is both "deep" and pub- esources value priorities, philosophy, and religion. In the lic. It asks "why" insistently and consistently, taking needs shallow movement, questioning and argumenta- nothing for granted! tion comes to a halt long before this. The deep ecol- Deep ecology can readily admit to the practical eco- ogy movement is therefore "the ecology movement effectiveness of homocentric arguments: e cured which questions deeper." A realization of the deep tions in It is essential for conservation to be seen as central changes which are required, as outlined in the deep isted. to human interests and aspirations. At the same ecology eight point platform (discussed in #3410 Chapter 10 above) makes us realize the necessity of "question- The pyramidal model has some features in com- ing everything." mon with hypotheticodeductive systems. The main The terms "egalitarianism," "homocentrism," difference, however, is that some sentences at the "anthropocentrism," and "human chauvinism" are top = deepest) level are normative, and preferably often used to characterize points of view on the are expressed by imperatives. This makes it possible shallow-deep spectrum. But these terms usually to arrive at imperatives at the lowest derivational function as slogans which are often open to misin- level: the crucial level in terms of decisions. Thus, terpretation. They can properly imply that man is in there are "oughts" in our premises as well as in our some respects only a "plain citizen" (Aldo Leopold) conclusions. We never move from an "is" to an of the planet on a par with all other species, but they "ought," or vice versa. From a logical standpoint, are sometimes interpreted as denying that humans this is decisive! have any "extraordinary" traits, or that, in situations The above premise/conclusion structure (or di- involving vital interests, humans have no overriding agram) of a total view must not be taken too seri- obligations towards their own kind. But this would ously. It is not meant in any restrictive way to char- be a mistake: They have! acterize creative thinking within the ecology In any social movement, rhetoric has an essential movement. Creative thinking moves freely in any di- function in keeping members fighting together un- rection. But many of us with a professional back- der the same banner. Rhetorical formulations also ground in science and analytical philosophy find serve to provoke interest among outsiders. Of the such a diagram helpful. many excellent slogans, one might mention "na- As we dig deeper into the premises of our think- ture knows best," "small is beautiful," and "all things ing, we eventually stop. Those premises we stop at hang together." But sometimes one may safely say are our ultimates. When we philosophize, we all that nature does not always know best, that small is stop at different places. But we all use premises sometimes dreadful, and that fortunately things which, for us, are ultimate. They belong to level 1 in hang together sometimes only loosely, or not at all. the diagram. Some will use a sentence like "Every Only a minority of deep ecology supporters are life form has intrinsic value" as an ultimate premise, academic philosophers, such as myself. And while and therefore place it at level 1. Others try, as I do, deep ecology cannot be a finished philosophical to conceive of it as a conclusion based on a set of system, this does not mean that its philosophers premises. For these people, this sentence does not should not try to be as clear as possible. So a dis- belong to level 1. There will be different ecosophies cussion of deep ecology as a derivational system may corresponding to such differences. be of value to clarify the many important premise/ Obviously, point 6 of the 8 point deep ecology conclusion relations. tenets (see section 3) cannot belong to level 1 of the diagram. The statement "there must be new poli- cies affecting basic economic structures" needs to 6. DEEP ECOLOGY ILLUSTRATED AS A be justified. If no logical justification is forthcom- DERIVATIONAL SYSTEM ing, why not just assert instead that ecologically de- structive "business as usual" economic policies Underlying the eight tenets or principles presented should continue? In the diagram I have had ecoso- in section 3, there are even more basic positions phies as ultimate premises in mind at level 1. None and norms which reside in philosophical systems of the 8 points of the deep ecology principles be- and in various world religions. Schematically we long at the ultimate level; they are derived as con- may represent the total views logically implied in clusions from premises at level 1. the deep ecology movement by streams of deriva- Different supporters of the deep ecology move- tions from the most fundamental norms and de- ment may have different ultimates (level 1), but will scriptive assumptions (level 1) to the particular de- nevertheless agree about level 2 (the 8 points), Level cisions in actual life situations (level 4). 4 will comprise concrete decisions in concrete situa-Broader Concerns: Thoreau, Deep Ecology, and Ecofeminism 411 res in com- B P C The main nces at the Level 1: preferably ultimate premises it possible and ecosophies ions. Thus, Logical as in our Derivation Deep Ecology "is" to an Platform Level 2: the 8-point deep standpoint, Questioning ecology platform or principles ture (or di- en too seri- vay to char- ep ecology Level 3: general normative ly in any di- consequences and ional back- "factual" hypotheses sophy find our think- we stop at we all Level 4: particular rules or e premises decisions adapted to to level 1 in particular situations like "Every te premise, Examples of kinds of fundamental premises: try, as I do, B = Buddhist on a set of C = Christian does not P = Philosophical (e.g., Spinozist or Whiteheadian) ecosophies ep ecology tions which appear as conclusions from delibera- goals of our pyramid, but not in relation to the evel 1 of the tions involving premises at levels 1 to 3. An impor- highest level, then this decision should not be e new poli- tant point: supporters of the deep ecology move- judged to be rational. This is an important point! If needs to ment act from deep premises. They are motivated, an environmentally oriented policy decision is not forthcom- in part, from a philosophical or religious position. linked to intrinsic values or ultimates, then its ra- ogically de- tionality has yet to be determined. The deep ecol- ic policies ogy movement connects rationality with a set of had ecoso- 7. MULTIPLE ROOTS OF THE DEEP philosophical or religious foundations. But one vel 1. None ECOLOGY PLATFORM cannot expect the ultimate premises to constitute nciples be- rational conclusions. There are no "deeper" prem- ved as con- The deep ecology movement seriously questions ises available. the presuppositions of shallow argumentation. Deep ecological questioning thus reveals the fun- logy move- Even what counts as a rational decision is chal- damental normative orientations of differing posi- 1), but will lenged, because what is "rational" is always defined tions. Shallow argumentation stops before reaching ints), Level in relation to specific aims and goals. If a decision fundamentals, or it jumps from the ultimate to the crete situa- is rational in relation to the lower level aims and particular; that is, from level 1 to level 4.412 Chapter 10 But it is not only normative claims that are at is- recommended in peace-making. I mention Taoism sue. Most (perhaps all) norms presuppose ideas chiefly because there is some basis for calling John about how the world functions. Typically the vast ma- Muir a Taoist, for instance, and Baha'i because of jority of assertions needed in normative systems are Lawrence Arturo. descriptive (or factual). This holds at all the levels. Ecosophies are not religions in the classical As mentioned before, it does not follow that sup- sense. They are better characterized as general porters of deep ecology must have identical beliefs philosophies, in the sense of total views, inspired in about ultimate issues. They do have common atti- part by the science of ecology. At level 1, a tradi- tudes about intrinsic values in nature, but these tional religion may enter the derivational pyramid can, in turn (at a still deeper level), be derived from through a set of normative and descriptive assump- different, mutually incompatible sets of ultimate tions which would be characteristic of contempo- beliefs. rary interpretations (hermeneutical efforts) of that Thus, while a specific decision may be judged as religion. rational from within the derivational system (if Supporters of the deep ecology movement act in there is such) of shallow ecology, it might be judged contemporary conflicts on the basis of their funda- as irrational from within the derivational system of mental beliefs and attitudes. This gives them a par- deep ecology. Again, it should be emphasized that ticular strength and a joyful expectation or hope for what is rational from within the deep ecology de- a greener future. But, naturally, few of them are ac- rivational pyramid does not require unanimity in tively engaged in a systematic verbal articulation of ontology and fundamental ethics. Deep ecology as where they stand. a conviction, with its subsequently derived practical recommendations, can follow from a number of more comprehensive world views, from differing 8. ECOSOPHY T AS AN EXAMPLE OF A ecosophies. DEEP ECOLOGICAL DERIVATIONAL Those engaged in the deep ecology movement SYSTEM have so far revealed their philosophical or religious homes to be mainly in Christianity, Buddhism, Tao- I call the ecosophy I feel at home with "Ecosophy T." ism, Baha'i, or in various philosophies. The top My main purpose in announcing that I feel at home level of the derivational pyramid can, in such cases, with Ecosophy T is didactic and dialectic. I hope to be made up of normative and descriptive principles get others to announce their philosophy. If they say which belong to these religions and philosophies. they have none, I maintain that they have, but per- Since the late 1970s, numerous Christians in Eu- haps don't know their own views, or are too modest rope and America, including some theologians, or inhibited to proclaim what they believe. Follow- have actively taken part in the deep ecology move- ing Socrates, I want to provoke questioning until ment. Their interpretations of the Bible, and their others know where they stand on basic matters of theological positions in general, have been re- life and death. This is done using ecological issues, formed from what was, until recently, a crude dom- and also by using Ecosophy T as a foil. But Socrates inating anthropocentric emphasis. pretended in debate that he knew nothing. My pos- There is an intimate relationship between some ture seems to be the opposite. I may seem to know forms of Buddhism and the deep ecology move- everything and to derive it magically from a small set ment. The history of Buddhist thought and prac- of hypotheses about the world. But both interpreta- tice, especially the principles of nonviolence, non- tions are misleading! Socrates did not consistently injury, and reverence for life, sometimes makes it claim to know nothing, nor do I in my Ecosophy T easier for Buddhists to understand and appreciate pretend to have comprehensive knowledge. deep ecology than it is for Christians, despite a Socrates claimed to know, for instance, about the fal- (sometimes overlooked) blessedness which Jesus libility of human claims to have knowledge.Broader Concerns: Thoreau, Deep Ecology, and Ecofeminism 413 Taoism Ecosophy T has only one ultimate norm: "Self- so on!¹⁰ The eight points of the deep ecology plat- calling John realization!" I do not use this expression in any nar- form are derived in a fairly simple way. i because of row, individualistic sense. I want to give it an ex- A philosophy as a world view inevitably has impli- panded meaning based on the distinction between cations for practical situations. Like other ecoso- classical a large comprehensive Self and narrow egoistic self phies, Ecosophy T therefore moves on, without as general as conceived of in certain Eastern traditions of at- apologies, to the concrete questions of lifestyles. inspired in This large comprehensive Self (with a capital These will obviously show great variation because of 1, a tradi- "S") embraces all the life forms on the planet (and differences in hypotheses about the world in which nal pyramid elsewhere?) together with their individual selves each of us lives, and in the "factual" statements about tive assump- (jivas). If I were to express this ultimate norm in a the concrete situations in which we make decisions. contempo- few words, I would say: "Maximize (long-range, uni- I shall limit myself to a discussion of a couple of orts) of that versal) Self-realization!" Another more colloquial areas in which my "style" of thinking and behaving way to express this ultimate norm would be to say seem somewhat strange to friends and others who ment act in "Live and let live!" (referring to all of the life forms know a little about my philosophy. heir funda- and natural processes on the planet). If I had to First, I have a somewhat extreme appreciation of them a par- give up the term fearing its inevitable misunder- diversity; a positive appreciation of the existence of or hope for standing, I would use the term "universal symbio- styles and behavior which I personally detest or find are ac- sis." "Maximize Self-realization!" could, of course, nonsensical (but which are not clearly incompati- culation of be misinterpreted in the direction of colossal ego ble with symbiosis); an enthusiasm for the "mere" trips. But "Maximize symbiosis!" could be misinter- diversity of species, or varieties within a genus of preted in the opposite direction of eliminating in- plants or animals; I support, as the head of a phi- dividuality in favor of collectivity. losophy department, doctrinal theses completely at A Viewed systematically, not individually, maximum odds with my own inclinations, with the require- Self-realization implies maximizing the manifesta- ment only that the authors are able to understand tions of all life. So next I derive the second term, fairly adequately some basic features of the kind of "Maximize (long-range, universal) diversity!" A corol- philosophy I myself feel at home with; an apprecia- osophy lary is that the higher the levels of Self-realization at- tion of combinations of seemingly incompatible in- el at home tained by any person, the more any further increase terests and behaviors, which makes for an increase I hope to depends upon the Self-realization of others. In- of subcultures within industrial states and which If they say creased self-identity involves increased identification might to some extent help future cultural diversity. :, but per- with others. "Altruism" is a natural consequence of So much for "diversity!" modest this identification. Second, I have a somewhat extreme appreciation e. Follow- This leads to a hypothesis concerning an in- of what Kant calls "beautiful actions" (good actions ing until escapable increase of identification with other be- based on inclination), in contrast with actions which natters of ings when one's own self-realization increases. As a are performed out of a sense of duty or obligation. issues, result, we increasingly see ourselves in other beings, The choice of the formulation "Self-realization!" is Socrates and others see themselves in us. In this way, the self in part motivated by the belief that maturity in hu- My pos- is extended and deepened as a natural process of mans can be measured along a scale from selfishness to know the realization of its potentialities in others. to an increased realization of Self, that is, by broad- small set By universalizing the above, we can derive the ening and deepening the self, rather than being terpreta- norm, "Self-realization for every being!" From the measured by degrees of dutiful altruism. I see joyful norm, "Maximize diversity!" and a hypothesis that sharing and caring as a natural process of growth in sophy T maximum diversity implies a maximum of symbio- humans. owledge. sis, we can derive the norm "Maximize symbiosis!" Third, I believe that multifaceted high-level Self- the fal- Further, we work for life conditions such that there realization is more easily reached through a lifestyle is a minimum of coercion in the lives of others. And which is "simple in means but rich in ends" rather414 Chapter 10 Ecosophy T Self-realization C S implies The higher S attained realization by anybody the more of all SP its increase depends Diversity upon increase of the increases S of others SP CS of any- one depends on that of all Subjection reduces S P Exploitation S for all reduces or Maximum eliminates beings diversity SP No subjection Class soci- Egalitari- Self-determi- ety negates anism: all nation favors No exploitation equal rights have equal realization of to S rights of SP Maximum self- No-class determination Complexity maximizes Symbiosis max- society diversity imizes diversity Maximum Maximum S = Self-realization complexity symbiosis C = Complete P = Potential SP = Self-realization potentials than through the material standard of living of the ple in the ministries of oil and energy! Nearly all average citizens of industrial states. were willing to let their written answers be widely The simple formulations of the deep ecology published. It is an open question, however, as to platform and Ecosophy T are not meant primarily what extent they will try to influence their col- to be used among philosophers, but also in dia- leagues who use only shallow argumentation. But logues with the "experts." When I wrote to the "ex- the main conclusion to be drawn is moderately en- perts" and environmental professionals personally, couraging: there are views of the human/nature re- asking whether they accept the eight points of the lationship, widely accepted among established ex- platform, many answered positively in relation to perts responsible for environmental decisions, most or all of the points. And this includes top peo- which require a pervasive, substantial change ofBroader Concerns: Thoreau, Deep Ecology, and Ecofeminism 415 present policies in favor of our "living" planet, and 7. The "shallow/deep" dichotomy is rough. Richard these views are held not only on the basis of short- Sylvan has proposed a much more subtle classifi- sighted human interests. cation; see his "A Critique of Deep Ecology," Discussion Papers in Environmental Philosophy. RSSS, Australian National University, No. 12 (1985). NOTES 8. World Conservation Strategy, section 13 (concluding 1. For more about interspecific community relation- paragraph). ships, see Arne Naess, "Self-realization in Mixed Communities of Humans, Bears, Sheep, and 9. The term atman is not taken in its absolutistic Wolves," Inquiry 22 (1979): 321-41; Naess and Ivar senses (not as a permanent indestructible Mysterud, "Philosophy of Wolf Policies I: General "soul"). This makes it consistent with those Principles and Preliminary Exploration of Selected Buddhist denials (the avatman doctrine) that the Norms," Conservation Biology 1, 1 (1987): 22-34. atman is to be taken in absolutist senses. Within the Christian tradition some theologians distin- 2. These problems are discussed further in Naess's guish "ego" and "true self" in ways similar to keynote address to the second international these distinctions in Eastern religions. See the Conference Conservation on Biology held at the ecophilosophical interpretation of the gospel of University of Michigan in May 1985; published as Luke in Stephen Verney's Onto the New Age "Intrinsic Value: Will the Defenders of Nature (Glasgow: Collins, 1976), pp. 33-41. Please Rise?" Conservation Biology (1986): 504-15. 3. IUCN, World Conservation Strategy: Living Resource 10. Many authors take some steps toward derivational Conservation for Sustainable Development (Gland, structures, offering mild systematizations. The Switzerland, 1980), section 13 ("Building chapter "Environmental Ethics and Hope" (in G. Support for Conservation"). Tyler Miller, Living in the Environment, 3rd ed. [Belmont: Wadsworth, 1983]) is a valuable start, 4. The deep ecology principles (or platform) were but the derivational relations are unclear. The agreed upon during a camping trip in Death logic and semantics of simple models of Valley, California (April 1984) and first published normative systems are briefly discussed in my in George Sessions (ed.), Ecophilosophy VI "Notes on the Methodology of Normative newsletter (May 1984). They have subsequently Systems," Methodology and Science 10 (1977): 64-79. appeared in a number of publications. For a defense of the thesis that as soon as people 5. Tom Regan, "The Nature and Possibility of an assert anything at all, they assume a total view, Environmental Ethics," Environmental Ethics 3 implicitly involving an ontology, methodology, (1981): 19-34, citation on p. 30. epistemology, and ethics, see my "Reflections 6. I proposed the name "Deep, Long-Range Ecology about Total Views," Philosophy and Phenomenolog- Movement" in a lecture at the Third World ical Research 25 (1964-65): 16-29. The best and Future Research conference in Bucharest in wittiest warning against taking systematizations September 1972. A summary of that lecture ("The too seriously is to be found in Søren Kierkegaard, Shallow and the Deep, Long-Range Ecology Concluding Unscientific Postscript. Movement") was published in Inquiry 16 (1973): For criticism and defense of my fundamental 95-100. Within the deep ecology movement it is norm ("Self-realization"), together with my fairly common to use the term "deep ecologist," answer, see In Sceptical Wonder: Essays in Honor of early all whereas "shallow ecologist," I am glad to say, is Arne Naess (Oslo: University Press, 1982). My widely rather uncommon. Both terms may be considered main exposition of Ecosophy T was originally as to arrogant and slightly misleading. I prefer to use offered in the Norwegian work, Okologi, samfunn eir col- the awkward, but more egalitarian expression og livsstil (Oslo: University Press, 5th ed., 1976). on. But "supporter of the deep (or shallow) ecology Even there, the exposition is sketchy. (Editor's ately en- movement," avoiding personification. Also, it is note: Naess's Norwegian book has been revised re- common to call deep ecology consistently anti- and reissued as Arne Naess (translated and hed ex- anthropocentric. This has led to misconceptions: edited by David Rothenberg), Ecology, Community see my "A Defense of the Deep Ecology and Lifestyle [Cambridge: Cambridge University ange of Movement," Environmental Ethics 5 (1983). Press, 1989].)416 Chapter 10 DISCUSSION QUESTIONS 1. Is it possible to live according to the deep ecology platform? 2. Can you derive the platform from Naess' fundamental norm Self-realization? 3. Is Self-realization possible? Is it good? Why? 4. As a social and political movement, which seems "best," deep or shallow environmentalism? The Power and the Promise of Ecological Feminism Karen Warren's now classic article, "The Power and Promise of Ecological Feminism," sets out the ecofeminist agenda and philosophical framework. Warren and fellow ecophilosopher Val Plumwood have been instrumental in developing ecofeminism as a contribution to both feminism and environmental philosophy. In 1991, under Warren's editorship, the academic journal Hypatia: A Journal of Feminist Philosophy devoted an en- tire issue to ecofeminism. Warren has subsequently edited several books and written other important articles developing the fundamental insights articulated in "The Power and the Promise of Ecological Feminism." As she notes, "There are important connec- tions between feminism and environmentalism, an appreciation of which is essential for the success of the women's and ecological movements." CRITICAL READING QUESTIONS 1. What does Warren mean by a "feminist issue"? 2. What does Warren mean by patriarchy and oppressive conceptual frameworks, and what is their relation? 3. Why, according to Warren, must all feminists oppose the logic of domination? 4. According to Warren, what justifies including "naturism" among the forms of domi- nation that feminism opposes? 5. What does the narrative about rock climbing show, according to Warren? INTRODUCTION tive feminism and environmental Since Françoise d'Eaubonne introduced the term ecofémin- Ecological feminism (ecofeminism) has begun to re- isme in 1974 to bring attention to women's potential ceive a fair amount of attention lately as an alterna- for bringing about an ecological the term has been used in a variety of ways. As I use the term in this paper, ecological feminism is the posi- This essay originally appreared in Environmental Ethics 12, 3 tion that there are important connections-histori- (Summer 1990): 125-46. Reprinted with permission. cal, experiential, symbolic, theoretical-between the