Arne Naess

The shallow and the deep, long‐range ecology movement. A summary∗

Ecologically responsible policies are concerned only in part with pollution and resource depletion. There are deeper concerns which touch upon principles of diversity, complexity, autonomy, decentralization, symbiosis, egalitarianism, and classlessness.

Self‐realization in mixed communities of Humans, bears, Sheep, and Wolves

The paper assumes as a general abstract norm that the specific potentialities of living beings be fulfilled. No being has a priority in principle in the realizing of its possibilities, but norms of increasing diversity or richness of potentialities put limits on the development of destructive life‐styles. Application is made to the mixed Norwegian communities of certain mammals and humans. A kind of modus vivendi is established which is firmly based on cultural tradition. It is fairly unimportant whether the term ‘rights (of animals)’ is or is not used in the fight for human peaceful coexistence with a rich fauna.

The pluralist and possibilist aspect of the scientific enterprise

In what case do you like reading so much? What about the type of the the pluralist and possibilist aspect of the scientific enterprise book? The needs to read? Well, everybody has their own reason why should read some books. Mostly, it will relate to their necessity to get knowledge from the book and want to read just to get entertainment. Novels, story book, and other entertaining books become so popular this day. Besides, the scientific books will also be the best reason to choose, especially for the students, teachers, doctors, businessman, and other professions who are fond of reading.

A systematization of Gandhian ethics of conflict resolution

I. Introductory Remarks Since 1947 a great number of publications in the social sciences (taken in a broad sense) and in philosophy have had peaceful co-operation between the major power constellations of today as a main or subsidiary topic. Various surveys, such as the UNESCO publication The Nature of Comflict, show a reassuring richness in aspects and approaches. There has been little done, however, to utilize the vast potential of those attitudes of non-violence which have

Beautiful Action. Its Function in the Ecological Crisis

PHOTO ABOVE: JØRN MOEN W e have, most of us, a stupid reluctance to learn from philosophers who belong to “trends” or “schools” that we find lead us astray. For me, the so-called critical philosophy of Kant and Kantians belongs to such a set of trends. I say so-called critical. Most trend-setting philosophers have been fiercely critical of other trends, but only Kant has been fortunate enough to influence historians in the last century to such an amazing degree that in their surveys they call Kant’s philosophy critical and Spinoza’s dogmatic. This is a rather arbitrary distinction. Already in the introduction to his Critique of Pure Reason (1963) Kant makes assumptions with far-reaching consequences without any attempt to justify them. They may well be said to be “uncritical” and “dogmatic,” at least for some plausible and important interpretations of these terms. Both Spinoza and Kant were firm believers in fundamental ideas that they do not justify in their writings. To compare their levels of criticalness in a timeless, absolute sense presupposes that one has a third system that must be accepted uncritically. Or perhaps we don’t need that? Who knows? In spite of Kant’s—in my opinion unfortunate— influence, in some ways his works are and will continue to be a major source of inspiration. In what follows I borrow his distinction between moral and beautiful actions. I foresee a bright future for this terminology. It offers a fairly new perspective on our actions within the realm of radical environmentalism, or more specifically within the deep ecology movement. The distinction was introduced by Kant in a work published in 1759, Versuch einiger Betrachtungen über den Optimismus (An attempt at some reflections on optimism), written in the period that uncritically is called his uncritical period. The distinction has been neglected by historians. Beautiful Action Its Function in the Ecological Crisis BY ARNE NAESS

The world of concrete contents

An attempt is made to find a coherent verbal expression of the intuition that reality is a manifold of more or less comprehensive wholes (gestalts), all discernible in terms of qualities. Quantitative natural science is thought to describe abstract structures of reality, not contents. The qualities are neither subjective nor objective, they belong to concrete contents with structures comprising at least three abstract relata: object, subject, and medium. Their status is that of entia rationis, not content of reality. Recent developments in physics suggest that we shall look in vain for physical ‘things’ of which reality is composed. Adequate expressions of concrete contents form designations rather than declarative sentences. They may obviously contain value terms. The attempt to formulate an ontology along the suggested lines seems to be closely related to phenomenology of a Heideggerian rather than Cartesian kind. It serves the endeavour to change the conception of the man‐nature relationship.

Paul Feyerabend — a Green Hero?

It is not without a certain feeling of guilt that some of us admit to always finding great pleasure in reading Feyerabend, including his many digressions and footnotes. Speaking of footnotes, who else has managed to place a footnote on his title page, which refers to yet other footnotes? (See the title page of Against Method. Outline of an Anarchistic Theory of Knowledge).

Ecology, community and lifestyle: Introduction: Ecosophy T – from intuition to system

The system begins with the immediate … The beginning of the system is the absolute beginning … How does the system begin with the immediate? Does it begin with it immediately? The answer to this question must be an unqualified no. Soren Kierkegaard Concluding Unscientific Postscript We feel our world in crisis. We walk around and sense an emptiness in our way of living and the course which we follow. Immediate, spontaneous experience tells us this: intuition. And not only intuition, but information, speaking of the dangers, comes to us daily in staggering quantities. How can we respond? Has civilisation simply broken away hopelessly from a perfection of nature? All points to a bleak and negative resignation. But this is only one kind of intuition – there is also the intuition of joy. Arne Naess gives a lecture somewhere in Oslo. After an hour he suddenly stops, glances quickly around the stage, and suddenly leaves the podium and approaches a potted plant to his left. He quickly pulls off a leaf, scurries back to the microphone, and gazes sincerely at the audience as he holds the leaf in the light so all can see. ‘You can spend a lifetime contemplating this’, he comments. ‘It is enough. Thank you.’ In 1969, Naess resigned his professorship in philosophy after over thirty years of work in semantics, philosophy of science, and the systematic exposition of the philosophies of Spinoza and Gandhi.

Environmental ethics and spinoza's ethics. Comments on genevieve lloyd's article

The sheer complexity of Spinozas thinking makes it impossible for any movement to use him as a patron. But philosophically engaged ecologists and environmentalists may find in his system an inexhaustible source of inspiration. This holds good even if he was personally a ‘speciesist’ and uninterested in animals or landscapes. Underestimation of his potential help is due to a variety of factors: failure to pay enough attention to the structure of his system, belief in its close resemblance to that of Hobbes, and interpretation of ‘understanding love of God’ as a contemplative, general attitude incompatible with environmentalist activism and interest in every living being. The system of Spinoza is compatible with activism ‐ like that of Jan de Witt ‐ and with respect for all things as ‘expressions of the power of God or Nature’.

From ecology to ecosophy, from science to wisdom

Abstract Eco‐science (ecology) is not enough. Eco‐wisdom (ecosophy) is needed: How to live on Earth enjoying and respecting the full richness and diversity of life‐forms of the ecosphere. The cold acknowledgement of dependency upon ecosystems is not enough to motivate responsible policies. To replenish the Earth, we need thejoy of interaction with life and within life. This implies deep reaction against the narrowly utilitarian outlook. We need integration of all levels: abstract and fundamental premises of a philosophy or religion, the derivation of general guideline of global action from these premises, and the conclusion of particular decisions in concrete situations in everyday life. In short: ecosophical total views are called for.