Seite 111 [111]
OCR
What can I hope for (from politics)? 1109 approach, because they are capable of changing their inner state in response to the external challenges they face. In the case of beings capable of symbolic communication, these internal changes take place primarily in response to contact with their peers, "... through the formation of interdependencies among the members of the population", claims Amos Hawley, who formulated the human ecological paradigm in the mid-twentieth century." Their autonomy is therefore no independence from others, but rather a mode of mutual dependence, the only mode worthy of man. It is a state in which we do not live separately from others with the freedom of personal choice. Instead, we consider the effects of our decisions on others, from whom we hope for recognition and support. From an ecological perspective, confusing freedom with the independence of individual decisions is already absurd with regard to the possible objects of the decision. Goods accessible in limited quantities, especially natural resources, are available to us or not depending on others’ behaviour. For instance, the possibilities of future generations are drastically impacted by the behaviour of those alive today. The situation is similar for those interested in modes of profitseeking utilisation, when they realise that they can acquire the material conditions of their choices only at each other’s expense. Those who wish to build a line of hotels and a yacht harbour on the lakeshore and those who wish to preserve the reed marshes and their species cannot freely pursue their goals independently of each other. I decide in vain to live a healthy life worthy of a human being in my town of birth if I cannot convince the majority of my fellow citizens of its advantages. However, the example of dwindling natural resources warns us not only that there exist indivisible goods that can only be enjoyed together. For the pressure of public opinion also has a far-reaching impact on my decisions regarding the goods which, in theory, I should be able to enjoy without the cooperation of others. But let one try to buy only healthy, traceably sourced, local food where the majority are not interested in this and therefore it is not produced. Or to oppose the religious, sexual, etc. prejudices of the majority in an intolerant social environment. One will immediately discover that the dominant view of the good life is itself a common good. It is even possible that our chief good is itself the Good — the social consensus regarding forms of 97 Amos Hawley: Human Ecology — a theoretical essay, p.7. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1986.
