Seite 84 [84]
OCR
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.
