Oldal 84 [84]
82 | Tue Puitosopny or Eco-Pouirics
4. Deep ecology and ecophenomenology
The founder and name-giver of the Deep Ecology movement, the
Norwegian philosopher Arne Naess, aimed, in contrast to the majority
of his peers, not to cast doubt over but to rethink man’s privileged
position: “...a life form has developed on Earth which is capable of
understanding and appreciating its relations with all other life-forms
and the Earth as a whole,” he claims in his work explaining Ecosophy
T, his own philosophical system. He holds that the capacity of
understanding does not entitle us to dominion over other beings, but
rather obliges to care about them. Man’s constitutional particularity is
that he is able to consciously take in the attempts of other living beings
for self-realisation. He must therefore take some kind of responsibility
for his behaviour towards them. “Human beings who wish to attain a
maximum perspective in the comprehension of their cosmic condition
can scarcely refrain from a proud feeling of genuine participation in
something immensely greater than their individual and social career.”™
Naess’ most original recognitions relate to his critique on the static
conception of the Self. Appealing to the lessons of the revolution in the
theory of living systems (e.g., Bertalanffy, G. H. Mead, Maturana,
Capra), he claims that the I is not something that exists in itself,
independently of its peers, society or nature. It can only be realised in
its relationships: a knot in the web of interactions. “Speaking of
interaction between organisms and the milieu gives rise to the wrong
associations, as an organism is interaction. Organisms and milieux are
not two things...”°> (The savannah belongs to the elephant as much as
its trunk, claims Holmes Rolston as well.) The conscious self is realised
in such interactions; its way of self-realisation is to identify with others.
We underestimate ourselves, Naess warns his reader, when we seek to
master and rule the world. We would incorporate it into ourselves if we
could, instead of identifying ourselves with everything that awakens
desire, respect and wonder in us. In this latter case we could discover
the limitless broadness of our Self and the spiritual unity of the world,
to which we ourselves also belong." If we call the elimination of the
Self-boundaries advaita (not-doubling) and the cosmic Self Atman, we
53
Arne Naess: Ecosophy T: unity and diversity of life. In: Arne Naess: Ecology,
Community and Lifestyles. Cambridge University Press, 1989. p.166.
"4 Ibid. p.165.
°° Arne Naess: From Ecology to Ecosophy. Ibid.p.56.
56 Arne Naess: Se/f-realization, ibid.