Page 36 [36]
34 — JUDIT FARKAS
The three best-known ecophilosophical trends of the 20" century are Naess’s
deep ecology, Bookchin’s social ecology and ecofeminism.
Deep ecology is associated with the name of Norwegian philosopher Arne Naess
(1912-2009). Naess was deeply influenced by Rachel Carson's Silent Spring, the
principles of Buddhist teachings on self-fulfillment, and Mahatma Gandhi's
(1869-1948) non-violent resistance. He justified the name deep ecology by
claiming that the environmental movement started in the 1970s and the
philosophical thoughts that underlay it were shallow. They were not actually aimed
at the interests, survival and wellbeing of the natural environment, but instead set
the human being and its welfare in the foreground. In contrast, the deep ecological
position and all movements and actors that adopt it are characterized by the
position of biosphere egalitarianism. This means that all things are in deep,
fundamental connection with one another and with everything else. All living
beings have a right to life; nature, the richness and variety of the forms of life have
a value of their own; all existing beings are equal and interdependent; all forms of
life in the biosphere are entitled to survival and preservation, irrespective of their
utility for human beings. He emphasized that humans have no distinguished value
or role in the biosphere. The above statements apply to them just as they do to all
other beings. Human interests are not superior to the interests of other species,
and only to survive are they allowed to take other beings’ lives, similarly to all
other species. The social concept of deep ecology is against classes; it supports
diversity, local autonomy, decentralization and self-government. Deep ecology is
a theoretical framework which wishes to rally different worldviews, gather those
of identical conceptual positions and promote their action. It has indeed linked
up several worldviews, but also elicited criticism precisely for its excessively radical
views on the world verging on the esoteric, which may discredit the whole
environmental movement (see Hubbell — Ryan 2022: 118; Téth 2005: 199-230).
As noted above, trends in 20"-century environmental philosophy often function
as bases for concrete movements. This is true of deep ecology as well: it motivated
the foundation of the Earth First! movement (1980), Deep Green Resistance
(DGR, 2011) and some anarcho-primitivist groups. The latter reject civilisation
and wish to return to a pre-modern way of living (rewilding) (Hubbell — Ryan
2011: 118; Naess 1988, 1993).
The next trend of eco-radicalism, social ecology, is associated with the political
philosopher, historian and social theoretician Murray Bookchin (1921-2006).
Social ecology is a radical political movement whose aim is to create an ecological
society. Though close to several political trends, Bookchin mainly regarded himself
as an anarchist. The fundamental tenets of anarchist social theory are extremely
noticeable in his philosophical work, and his views on the ideal society.‘
Bookchin largely relied on Rousseau’s image of the noble savage and on traditional societies when
arguing that man is innately good and that an ecological society can be realized. His critics argue
that he reasoned deductively, and that, moreover, in justifying his thoughts, he used etiological
examples to verify his presuppositions. For instance, he denied the existence of hierarchy in
traditional tribal societies (Kirkman 1997: 202-203).