Deep Ecology

Naess' beliefs are rooted in the idea of the interconnection of all life. Naess believes that a shift in attitude is needed rather than an act of technology. I agree with Naess. However this is where the problem is found, today people's attitudes and ways of life need to change, which doesn't seem like it is going to happen in today’s world because individuals are all about technology. The reading then goes on to talk about deep ecology and shallow ecology and the comparisons between the two.

The reading about deep ecology is about the comparison between “shallow” and “deep” ecology. Naess says that according to “deep” ecologist anyone who does not accept certain conceptions of human identity must be “shallow” pg 109. I however disagree with this because some individuals may have different beliefs on some issues for a reason and still be a deep ecologist. Naess describes “shallow” ecology as being cosmetic, that it is concerned to assure a pleasant environment for the privileged. That shallow ecology also struggles with pollution, and that it overlooks the deep roots of ecological threat in the successes of consumer “progress” pg.110. Naess then goes on to describe deep ecology being rooted in the ecological damage in human attitudes and their behaviors pg.111.

Naess says that a better way however to define a deep ecology movement is to meet a number of conditions such as rejecting the idea of external relations, supporting biotic equality, etc. Naess believes that for an individual to discover their inner oneness with the world they should engage in yoga or meditation. By engaging in yoga or meditation, one can “harmonize” or connect with the being of the earth around them. This may help individuals recognize that one is continuous with the world. That their actions effect the world. If they harm or hurt the world they are harming and hurting themselves according to Naess. I found this reading very hard to understand because the way he used words to define things seemed very complex to me. I do not believe I got the main point out of this reading, because it was hard to understand in my opinion.