# 6

Kohak begins this section by discussing various ways humans can view the environment, and how this determines our place in it. He discusses how only looking at the world scientifically, causes us to percieve it as having no meaning or value with be no point for us to save it. We could understand the changes that are going on around us, but we would be unable to view them as good or bad. He states that we need not only tp view the world from a scientific point, but through a "human" perspective as well. If we see good and value in the world, it will be something worth protecting. He presents the view that if all creation is "good", then that would mean we leave nature as it is and for what it is. He states if nature is good, then it is natural, and everything we do is natural; thus, there is no point resisting destroying it for human necessity. Leopold's view is different, where he views all life as something good, but flawed. It is the unnatural that endangers the Earth; our actions of meaningless production alienate us from nature. He describes this as subjective, while looking at the causes and not the reasons is objective.

Naess uses the term "deep ecology" to decribes his view. He believes that technology to fix the environment is not enough; there needs to be a change of attitude. He discusses the root of the problem being in either the advancement of technology, or in human greed. Naess's deep ecology deals with the results of human actions, rather than their source. He states that the destruction of the environment is something deeper, something that ties into our assumption that humans are above all else. Deep ecology addresses our understanding that all of creation is connected one way or another, and all of our actions affect everything around us. It addresses the equality of all living beings to rejoice and be free from unjust suffering. It realizes that the meaning of life is to live without having to struggle to do so, and to reject the idea that humans are ultimately superior. Improving ecological habits is something that needs to be worldwide, and viewed as important universally. All of these theories describe deep ecology, which centers its focus on "acting in the interest of life..." (pg. 112). The ultimate goal is to "tred lightly" on the world around us and to live in harmony.

I thought that this section was harder to understand than the previous sections that Kohak explained. It was not as stragihtforward, but I found a lot that I was able to agree with relating to the way deep ecology calls us to act in relation to the Earth. Once agian Kohak has opened my eyes to the problems in the environment around us, and the various ways I can attribute to its improvement.