Deep Ecology Research Paper

Though the connection may change throughout the years, humans have a connection the natural world. This connection is fluid and changing and may yield different connections between the two dependent on when in history or where geographically in the world we look. If we look through an anthropologic lens at humans thousands of years ago, we see a much different connection to nature than our current bond in modern western society. Other regions of the world may have different connection to nature than we in the western modern world do. However, it is the objective of this paper is to demonstrate how humans of the modern western world are connected to the natural world around us through the interpretation of a photograph. In this paper, through

This way of thinking regards the whole ecosphere as deserving consideration, making all humans, organisms, animals, have equal rights and should be valued and cared for.

Transcendentalism has been linked to the birth of deep ecology, given the "emotion and spiritual philosophy" that connects the two movements. Both transcendentalism and deep ecology romanticize the natural world, and critique the way industrialization, modernization, and urbanization encroach on ecological and spiritual purity. The eco-centric worldview and value system espoused by deep ecology has its roots in transcendentalism (Hicks, n.d.). Both transcendentalists and deep ecologists disparage the ways individuals, communities, and whole cultures present the human being as being entitled to rape and plunder the earth.

This paper will begin with an exposition of the article, “Radical Environmentalism and Wilderness Preservation: A Third World Critique” written by Ramachendra Guha, a sociologist and historian involved in ecological conflict in the East and the West. In this article, he refers to American environmentalism as “deep ecology”, a modern theory founded by Arne Naess. Guha’s argues that based on a comparison of the concepts of deep ecology and other cultural environmentalisms, deep ecology is strictly rooted in American culture and thus, leads to negative social consequences when it is applied to the Third World. This argument will be achieved by first defining deep ecology and its principles.

The article discussed the changes in many habitats due to anthropogenic activity. Anthropogenic is an adjective that describes changes in nature due to the people. Next, this article discussed climate change and the impact that it is having on species like clams, and fish due to ocean temperatures rising. The article also addressed carbon dating of fossils to look for cause of extinctions. Human development and agriculture have had a tremendous impact on the population of many species that are terrestrial. Deforestation is a big problem that has caused a decline in the bird species. Commercial fishing in many areas has led to a decline in fish populations. Furthermore this article

The Industrial Revolution was a period that changed the course of human history in many ways. People often think of the positive outcomes rather than the negative consequences, for example, the creation of a more efficient manufacturing process that resulted in more products and profits. However, the industrial revolution also paved ways for humans to increase the amount of pollution being put into the atmosphere immensely. Evidence of this is seen in various graphs of Carbon Dioxide, Methane, and Nitrous Oxide. In these graphs, there is a notable spike in these levels starting around the mid 1800s, which is also around the time the Industrial Revolution started to take off and spread around the world. In the data of CO2 emissions, Carbon Dioxide was about 280 ppm (parts per million) in the pre-industrial time period, since then CO2 levels have increased rapidly resulting in around 407 ppm, which is the highest level humans have ever experienced. This being said, the whole human race needs to be self-conscious of what get exposed to Earth’s atmosphere.

The audience of this book is presumed to be the general person who is not fully intact with the ideas that he or she is disrupting the ecosystem and is not aware of the effects they are doing as a whole. The book argues that no ecosystem is completely inert as things such as climate changes or drought can also affect the enviorment. Without human interaction an environment can still have issues, but the introduction of human life and economy does take a grave toll on the climate. These are irreversible effects that mankind are doing to the ecosystem. The English

These principles value diversity and strive for a plan that will lead to the best outcomes for both humans and nonhumans. From the reading, I conclude that the deep ecology movement is striving for a better quality of life that will lead to an increase of happiness rather than an increase in material things. I almost feel like it resembles a utilitarian idea, since it wanted the greatest amount of happiness for everyone. I agree with several of Naess’s points on taking the fight to the deeper causes and considering all outcomes which is the cautious approach, but the appropriate one in my opinion. Furthermore, the deep ecology movement is demanding major changes that would reconstruct all aspects of human lives. It falls on humans to change their way of life and not concern themselves with a higher standard of living, but better quality of life for everyone. The main goal is of this movement is deny anthropocentrism which is the best decision to help with our ecological

Similar to the ideas of Evernden and Cronon that are discussed above, Hinchliffe attempts to define, or redefine, the term “nature.” The author begins by identifying and defining three possible concepts of the term: nature as an independent state; nature as a dependent colony; and as a co-production. The first idea, nature as an independent state, means nature is something that is separate and in danger. The second, nature as a dependent colony, defines nature as an idea. The final concept, nature as a co-production, describes nature and society as intertwined.

Val Plumwood in her essay “Paths Beyond Human-Centeredness,” illustrates the impact that humans have on nature and non-animals when it comes to preserving environments. Understanding that nature has it’s living properties that let it thrive among its resources allows for people to grasp the complexities that come about when construction companies destroy the environment in which they work. Plumwood uses the term dualism to refer to the sharp distinction between two classes of individuals. There is the high class, which is considered as the “One.” In contrast, the other side of the division consists of individuals that are classified as lower and are subordinates to the “One” as “Others.” This account on dualism allows the reader to understand how humans can significantly alter the environment because of the way they perceive its resources and inhabitants. Plumwood defines five characteristics that illustrate the oppressive actions that change the connection between human relations and the relationship between humans and nature.

Deep ecology is used to describe different environmental philosophies. Deep ecology is similar to biocentric because it also believes that the flourishing of human and nonhuman life on earth has intrinsic value. In addition, deep ecology sees that the diversity of life forms have value also. Deep ecology and biocentric is very similar.

Another adjustment to the microscope, and we can examine Leopold's biocentric opinion of how environmental ethics should be governed. His approach enlarges the moral category to include soils, waters, plants and animals and claims our obligation is to preserve the integrity, stability and beauty of the biotic community. Philosophers Devall and Sessions further define the biocentric view with the concept of deep ecology. Devall and Sessions argue that "the well-being and flourishing of human and non-human life have value in themselves. These values are independent of the usefulness of the non-human world for human purposes." (503)

White’s thesis in The Historical Roots of our Ecological Crisis states that in order to confront the expanding environmental crises, humans must begin to analyze and alter their treatment and attitudes towards nature. The slow destruction of the environment derives from the Western scientific and technological advancements made since the Medieval time period. “What people do about their ecology depends on what they think about themselves in relation to things around them” (RON p.7). Technology and science alone will not be able to save humans until we adjust the way of thinking and suppress the old ideas of humans power above nature. Instead, we need to learn how to think of ourselves as being

The Earth is a dynamic, constantly changing environment in which the hydrosphere, atmosphere, and biosphere all interact. When one changes slightly the change is then felt through out the spheres. Humans need to understand that the change they cause can have a potential for a disastrous affect on the environment. From injecting the atmosphere with greenhouse gas, or deforestation, all the unnatural things done to the environment will have an unnatural affect that will have to be dealt with. We as humans have a moral responsibility to reduce global warming gasses by changing our modes of transportation, to stop deforestation, and increase government funding into research to inhibit global warming for

Deep ecology is more meditative and goes beyond the factual scientific level, to the level of self and Earth wisdom. It goes beyond a shallow approach to environmental problems. It articulates a comprehensive religious and philosophical worldview, along with ecological consciousness.