Thursday, February 14, 2013
Deep Ecology
I think Deep Ecology is on the right track - as in I agree with basically everything Naess says in his essay. I think that humans really should be focusing on the overall health of the planet-wide ecosystem, mainly because the earth really is a closed ecosystem (excluding sunlight.) What I found most interesting was the absence of fossil fuels in the philosophy. It seems to me that the fuel, literally, for the explosion of human activity and population is oil, coal, and gas. Our indiscriminate use of these limited and dirty resources is the only thing that has allowed for the balance of the biosphere to get so badly out of whack. While certainly not the only problem humans need to address in regards to the biosphere, it is certainly the most pressing. We really should be making the transition away from fossil fuels our worldwide priority - not unlike the "space race" of the 1950s & 60s.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Keith,
ReplyDeleteI really liked your take on the exclusion of fossil fuels. This was something that I had not considered before but is very important. Because deep ecology is a biocentric approach, meaning that all is connected, this would include our natural resources that we're depleting. Maybe if this was applied or explained more others would have a better idea of deep ecology and why it is important.