According to Deborah McGregor, the term “environment” encompasses many different aspects of nature. From a contemporary perspective, the environment means the components of the earth such as: land, all layers of the atmosphere, all organic and inorganic material, and interacting natural systems. However, for indigenous populations, “environment” is more than the surrounding physical attributes of nature. The term “world view” emerges from the intense bond between indigenous populations and the environment. As a result environment also encompasses how one views and experiences the world (McGregor, 2015). Unfortunately, McGregor (2004) finds that traditional ecological knowledge surrounding environmental
As Professor Foster explained the core of the needed ecological revolution is in viewing the world ecologically, which involves recognizing that modern human societies are ecosystem-dependent and thus rejecting the assumption that societies are “exempt” from the forces of nature. The wrong conceptual thinking that our technology and economic system can find solutions to our problems, recalls the Midas Effect in which Gold (THE CAPITAL) becomes more important than Life (Human beings and Planet Earth), where “the logic of capital accumulation runs in direct opposition to environmental sustainability” (The Ecological Rift, Foster,
It encourages human beings to see themselves as part of the ecological system and to be one with nature. It questions the hierarchies of empires and of the human and natural world itself, suggesting that we must learn to love and transcend with the natural world, instead of seeking domination over it.
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.
Ecological perspective is a useful framework in which to view the individual in context with their environment. According to Rogers (2013) ecological theory was originally developed by a psychologist, Urie Bronfenbrenner in 1979 (p. 42). A fundamental tenet of ecological theory is that people are actively involved with their environments and their perceptions of the environment “significantly affects their well-being” (p. 42).
He personifies nature as a human being by giving him the ability to hug and give warmth to others. He also says that people should have no worries in him because the beauty of nature is not the temporary happiness of sadness that life brings you, but the ability to breathe in air. The ability to stand up and walk. Nature has the ability to bring the best out of the worst. The narrator also says that people can truly see nature when they are isolated from society due to the fact that they can think take their time to analyze
Earth is always constantly changing and developing, especially the organisms that habitat on Earth. As a result, Earth is very biodiverse and has many different types of ecosystem. For instance, Earth has eight ecosystems (Tropical forest, Savanna, Desert, Chaparral, Temperate Grassland, Temperate Deciduous forest, Coniferous forest, and Tundra) and seven biomes (Wetland, Lakes, River and Streams, Intertidal zones, Oceanic pelagic biome, Coral reefs, Benthos). In these many different areas on Earth, there are many organisms, life, and valued nature. For example, Santa Cruz’s ocean are immensely important and valuable to the Cruz community because of its beautiful cinematic views and sea animals. Therefore, there are environmental justice
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
Chris McCandless probably wasn’t the first to think, “When you want something in life, you just gotta reach out and grab it.” In the book Into the Wild by Jon Krakauer and the short story “Nature” by Ralph Waldo Emerson, they both have the belief that by living off of nature and preserving it, the closer one will come to understanding the nature of nature.
There are a few different approaches to modern Ecology including behavioral, cognitive, and evolutionary psychology. I thought that behavioral Ecology was interesting because it looked at the environment that certain behaviors take place (Petri & Govern, 2012). Even among animals, they adapt to the surrounding they are in and change their behaviors so that they may survive (Petri & Govern, 2012). This was interesting because it made me think of how my thoughts and reactions have changed as my surroundings have changed. While I lived in Puerto Rico I was depressed because of the environment that I was in until I was able to change departments. I was able to readjust to my surroundings and was motivated to do more and better.
Arne Naess, a Norwegian philosopher and the founding editor of the journal Inquiry authored and published a paper in Inquiry "The Shallow and the Deep, Long-Range Ecology Movement" in 1973, which was the beginning of the deep ecology movement. Important writers in this movement include George Sessions, Bill DeVall, Warwick Fox, and, in some respects, Max Oelschlaeger.
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)
After traveling over 9000 miles, and accruing numerous scars and bruises, my image now reflects my passion. An insatiable hunger for knowledge and life-altering experiences take me across the world to environments which are worlds apart; the spectrum of ecosystems and complex webs of interaction that this exposes, only fuel my desire to continue exploring them. My research interests lie in Earth system relationships as well as human-environment interactions, and the cascading effects throughout nature and society alike. The principle which guides me through all of my experiences is the inter-connectivity of the natural world; working as an entomologist in the Swiss Alps, in
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
A photograph of Earth reveals a great deal, but it does not convey the complexity of our environment. Our environment (a term that comes from the French environner, “to surround”) is more than water, land, and air; it is the sum total of our surroundings. It includes all of the biotic factors, or living things, with which we interact. It also includes the abiotic factors, or nonliving things, with which we interact. Our environment includes the continents, oceans, clouds, and ice caps you can see in the photo of Earth from space, as well as the animals, plants, forests, and farms that comprise the landscapes around us. In a more inclusive sense, it also encompasses our built