The Need for Deep Ecology

Ryan Hubbard
Jul 30, 2019 · 7 min read

Climate Change, Ecological Degradation, and Environmental Ethics

Photo by Yohanes Dicky Yuniar

Here’s a video version of this piece

In his book, Sapiens, historian Yuval Noah Harari concludes by writing, “We [humans] are more powerful than ever before, but have very little idea what to do with all that power. Worse still, humans seem to be more irresponsible than ever…we are accountable to no one. We are consequently wreaking havoc on our fellow animals and on the surrounding ecosystem, seeking little more than our own comfort and amusement, yet never finding satisfaction.”

Harari’s insight suggests that we need to rethink our ethical relationship with nature. It’s clear now more than ever that we are, indeed, wreaking havoc on Earth. In his book, The Synthetic Age, philosopher Christopher Preston shows that there is no place on earth that is free from human impact. For the first time, our footprint covers the entire planet.

We need to radically change the way we regard our relationship with nature. I suggest that the environmental ethic called ‘deep ecology’ is the best candidate for animating this change.

Our vast amount of pollution and waste result in the degradation of ecosystems, depletion of species diversity, and climate change. The consequences of climate change alone are dire. Consider these statistics:

· By 2050 the number of climate refugees is expected to grow to 200 million.

· 150 million more people would die from air pollution in a 2-degree warmer planet than in a 1.5-degree warmer plant.

· Globally, there has been a fiftyfold increase in the number of dangerous heatwaves since 1980.

· Flooding across the planet has quadrupled since 1980 and has doubled since 2004.

· The melt rate of the Antarctic ice sheet has tripled in the last decade.

· Wildfire seasons are about 20% longer than in 1970.

· Destruction from wildfires is expected to double by 2050.

· Landmass burned by wildfires in the United States has doubled since 1970.

· Globally, deforestation produces 12% of carbon emissions; forest fires produce up to 25%.

· In 1850 Glacier National Park in Montana has 150 glaciers; today it’s 26.

· There are 40% more intense rainstorms in the US than in the middle of last century.

· Damages from normal thunderstorms have increased more than sevenfold since the 1980s in the US.

· The proportion of Category 4 and 5 hurricanes has doubled in Asia in the last four decades.

· The number of marine species adversely affected by plastic pollution rose from 260 in 1995 to 1,450 in 2018.

· 2.4 million homes and businesses in the US are expected to be affected by chronic flooding by 2100.

These figures paint a bleak picture.

What do we do?

This is where environmental ethics enters the picture. This area of philosophy investigates how we should regard the natural environment, especially in terms of its value. This conversation is largely missing from the public discourse on environmental policy. For example, most debates regarding socio-economic policy tacitly assume that we should protect the environment just because it’s good for us. Indeed, even among green-friendly folks, one of the biggest concerns of climate change is how it will affect future generations.

Photo by Victor Garcia

The deeper issue here is what really matters: environmental degradation’s impact only on human interests or its impact on nature as a whole. An important philosophical question here is whether the natural environment, ecosystems, and animals are intrinsically valuable: are they valuable in themselves, independent of how they relate to human interests? In an earlier piece, I address the inherent value of animals and whether humans are morally superior.

A good philosophical justification for the intrinsic value of the natural environment is hard to come by. This could be because it’s an axiomatic fact closed to justification. In any case, I won’t pursue that issue here. Rather, I want to suggest that we have a good practical reason to endorse an environmental ethic that regards nature as intrinsically valuable. This is because broad adoption of such an ethic is critical for the bottom-up approach to mitigating environmental degradation.

The Need for an Environmental Ethic

Deep ecology was popularized by philosopher Arne Naess. Naess claimed that there are two strands in the environmentalist movement. On the one hand, we have shallow ecology. This approach is mainly concerned with addressing the bad environmental effects of industry and how this affects human interests. Shallow ecology also focuses on promoting sustainable activities such as recycling and green technology.

Proponents of deep ecology claim this is all well and good, but shallow ecology doesn’t go far enough. It’s shallow in the sense that it neglects what deep ecologists consider the underlying causes of environmental problems.

Unlike shallow ecology, deep ecology emphasizes the cultural and ideological dimensions of ecological problems. For example, our socio-economic system may cultivate an attitude in which we view nature as merely an object that we can use. For deep ecology, this attitude about our relationship toward nature is a root cause of environmental problems. So, ultimately, people need to change their consciousness to address the fundamental cause of environmental problems.

Let’s look at this idea in more detail.

For deep ecology, a common, but mistaken view of our own nature is the fundamental cause of environmental problems. It’s a mistake to view ourselves as distinct from the natural environment and it’s a mistake to conceive of our egos as atomistic and isolated from other beings. This common view is also fundamentally anthropocentric: it encourages us to erroneously see ourselves as the center of ecological systems.

For the deep ecologist, addressing environmental problems ultimately requires correcting this view by attaining a deeper understanding of our true selves. Unfortunately, correcting this misunderstanding of our nature will be difficult, since it’s deeply ingrained in our culture.

The practical benefit of deep ecology is that it cultivates ecological awareness and intimate knowledge of our relationship with the natural environment.

According to deep ecology, pursuing self-realization is the key to understanding our true nature. In this process, we gradually become aware of ourselves as fundamentally interconnected with all life. We start to see ourselves as more than a narrow ego and to identify with all other beings. Self-realization is a process of ego expansion.

Through self-realization, we begin to see our self as an ecological self. As Arne Naess puts it, the ecological self is a self that is “in, of, and for nature from our very beginning.”

Photo by Joe deSousa

The Principles of Deep Ecology

1. All life has value in itself, independent of its usefulness to humans.

2. Richness and diversity of life help the realization of these values and are valuable in themselves.

3. Humans have no right to reduce this richness and diversity except to satisfy vital needs.

4. The impact of humans in the world is excessive and getting worse. Human lifestyles and population are key elements of this impact.

5. The diversity of life and cultures can flourish only with reduced human impact.

6. Policies affecting basic economic, technological, and ideological structures must change. The resulting state of affairs will be deeply different from our own.

7. The ideological change involves appreciating life quality 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 these points have an obligation to participate in the attempt to implement the necessary changes.

A Copernican Turn

I don’t think it’s enough to merely know the statistics illustrating our impact on the planet or the mechanisms governing ecosystems. Just as we cannot truly know and appreciate the value of friendship without experiencing it, we cannot know the true value of nature without the kind of self-realization advanced by deep-ecology.

A broad acceptance of deep ecology, however, will involve a paradigmatic, Copernican shift in our world view. This is a tall order, but such shifts have happened during the course of human history. We should be optimistic that it will happen again.

Ryan Hubbard

Written by

A philosophy professor who works in practical ethics. @ryankhubbard

Welcome to a place where words matter. On Medium, smart voices and original ideas take center stage - with no ads in sight. Watch
Follow all the topics you care about, and we’ll deliver the best stories for you to your homepage and inbox. Explore
Get unlimited access to the best stories on Medium — and support writers while you’re at it. Just $5/month. Upgrade