10. Problems with Eco-centrism:
• May actually be homocentric at its
root – assigning values of species,
etc.
• Fuzziness between facts and
values, is and ought.
• Assumption of moral progress.
• Feminist critique – glosses over
issues of race, gender, class,
species difference.
11. Problems with Eco-centrism:
• May actually be homocentric at its
root – assigning values of species,
etc.
• Fuzziness between facts and
values, is and ought.
• Assumption of moral progress.
• Feminist critique – glosses over
issues of race, gender, class,
species difference.
12. Problems with Eco-centrism:
• May actually be homocentric at its
root – assigning values of species,
etc.
• Fuzziness between facts and
values, is and ought.
• Assumption of moral progress.
• Feminist critique – glosses over
issues of race, gender, class,
species difference.
13. Problems with Eco-centrism:
• May actually be homocentric at its
root – assigning values of species,
etc.
• Fuzziness between facts and
values, is and ought.
• Assumption of moral progress.
• Feminist critique – glosses over
issues of race, gender, class,
species difference.
19. The Principles of Deep Ecology
Arne Naess, “The Shallow and the Deep, Long-Range Ecology Movement: A Summary,” Inquiry, 16 (1972): 95-100.
Carolyn Merchant, Radical Ecology, p.87.
• Rejection of the man-in-environment image
in favor of the relational, total-field image.
• Biospherical egalitarianism.
• Principles of diversity and of symbiosis.
• Anti-class posture.
• Fight against pollution and resource
depletion.
• Complexity, not complication.
• Local autonomy and decentralization.
20. The Principles of Deep Ecology
Arne Naess, “The Shallow and the Deep, Long-Range Ecology Movement: A Summary,” Inquiry, 16 (1972): 95-100.
Carolyn Merchant, Radical Ecology, p.87.
• Rejection of the man-in-environment image
in favor of the relational, total-field image.
• Biospherical egalitarianism.
• Principles of diversity and of symbiosis.
• Anti-class posture.
• Fight against pollution and resource
depletion.
• Complexity, not complication.
• Local autonomy and decentralization.
21. The Principles of Deep Ecology
Arne Naess, “The Shallow and the Deep, Long-Range Ecology Movement: A Summary,” Inquiry, 16 (1972): 95-100.
Carolyn Merchant, Radical Ecology, p.87.
• Rejection of the man-in-environment image
in favor of the relational, total-field image.
• Biospherical egalitarianism.
• Principles of diversity and of symbiosis.
• Anti-class posture.
• Fight against pollution and resource
depletion.
• Complexity, not complication.
• Local autonomy and decentralization.
22. The Principles of Deep Ecology
Arne Naess, “The Shallow and the Deep, Long-Range Ecology Movement: A Summary,” Inquiry, 16 (1972): 95-100.
Carolyn Merchant, Radical Ecology, p.87.
• Rejection of the man-in-environment image
in favor of the relational, total-field image.
• Biospherical egalitarianism.
• Principles of diversity and of symbiosis.
• Anti-class posture.
• Fight against pollution and resource
depletion.
• Complexity, not complication.
• Local autonomy and decentralization.
23. The Principles of Deep Ecology
Arne Naess, “The Shallow and the Deep, Long-Range Ecology Movement: A Summary,” Inquiry, 16 (1972): 95-100.
Carolyn Merchant, Radical Ecology, p.87.
• Rejection of the man-in-environment image
in favor of the relational, total-field image.
• Biospherical egalitarianism.
• Principles of diversity and of symbiosis.
• Anti-class posture.
• Fight against pollution and resource
depletion.
• Complexity, not complication.
• Local autonomy and decentralization.
24. The Principles of Deep Ecology
Arne Naess, “The Shallow and the Deep, Long-Range Ecology Movement: A Summary,” Inquiry, 16 (1972): 95-100.
Carolyn Merchant, Radical Ecology, p.87.
• Rejection of the man-in-environment image
in favor of the relational, total-field image.
• Biospherical egalitarianism.
• Principles of diversity and of symbiosis.
• Anti-class posture.
• Fight against pollution and resource
depletion.
• Complexity, not complication.
• Local autonomy and decentralization.
25. The Principles of Deep Ecology
Arne Naess, “The Shallow and the Deep, Long-Range Ecology Movement: A Summary,” Inquiry, 16 (1972): 95-100.
Carolyn Merchant, Radical Ecology, p.87.
• Rejection of the man-in-environment image
in favor of the relational, total-field image.
• Biospherical egalitarianism.
• Principles of diversity and of symbiosis.
• Anti-class posture.
• Fight against pollution and resource
depletion.
• Complexity, not complication.
• Local autonomy and decentralization.
26.
27.
28.
29. Dominant Western Worldview
(DWW)
+
Human Exceptionalism Paradigm
(HPP)
vs.
New Ecological Paradigm (NEP)
30. Source: William R. Catton, Jr. and Riley Dunlap. “A New Ecological Paradigm for Post-Exuberant Sociology,” American
Behavioral Scientist, 24, no. 1 (Sept./Oct. 1980): 34. Also Carolyn Merchant, Radical Ecology, pp. 90-91.
44. How social ecology and
deep ecology differ:
• Deep ecology focuses on organic/
mechanistic dialectic, social ecology on
society/ecology dialectic.
• Social ecology focuses on an
anthropocentric ethics.
• Social ecology less radical on issue of
population stabilization.
45. How social ecology and
deep ecology differ:
• Deep ecology focuses on organic/
mechanistic dialectic, social ecology on
society/ecology dialectic.
• Social ecology focuses on an
anthropocentric ethics.
• Social ecology less radical on issue of
population stabilization.
46. How social ecology and
deep ecology differ:
• Deep ecology focuses on organic/
mechanistic dialectic, social ecology on
society/ecology dialectic.
• Social ecology focuses on an
anthropocentric ethics.
• Social ecology less radical on issue of
population stabilization.
53. “An immanent dialectic
within phenomena”
• Humans are transformed by their relations
with nature, even as they transform nature by
their interactions with it.
• Nature is not just the passive receptor of
human action, but the active transformer of
human labor.
• Nature interacts with humanity to yield the
actualization of their common potentialities
in the natural and social worlds.
54. “An immanent dialectic
within phenomena”
• Humans are transformed by their relations
with nature, even as they transform nature by
their interactions with it.
• Nature is not just the passive receptor of
human action, but the active transformer of
human labor.
• Nature interacts with humanity to yield the
actualization of their common potentialities
in the natural and social worlds.
55. “An immanent dialectic
within phenomena”
• Humans are transformed by their relations
with nature, even as they transform nature by
their interactions with it.
• Nature is not just the passive receptor of
human action, but the active transformer of
human labor.
• Nature interacts with humanity to yield the
actualization of their common potentialities
in the natural and social worlds.
60. Ecosystem
A distinct human and natural community
including the social as well as the organic
factors that interrelate with each other to
provide the basis for an ecologically
rounded and balanced community.
65. Ecology is the basis of
3 conditions of production
• The external physical
conditions.
• The personal conditions of
laborers.
• The social conditions of
production.
66. Ecology is the basis of
3 conditions of production
• The external physical
conditions.
• The personal conditions of
laborers.
• The social conditions of
production.
67. Ecology is the basis of
3 conditions of production
• The external physical
conditions.
• The personal conditions of
laborers.
• The social conditions of
production.
68. Resultant changes in Marxism
• Where First Contradiction lead to
overproduction, Second Contradiction leads
to underproduction.
• Traditionally, labor and socialist movements
are agents of transformation. In EM,
ecological social movements are the agents
of change.
• State socialism rejected in favor of
localization and appropriate technologies
and systems.
69. Resultant changes in Marxism
• Where First Contradiction lead to
overproduction, Second Contradiction leads
to underproduction.
• Traditionally, labor and socialist movements
are agents of transformation. In EM,
ecological social movements are the agents
of change.
• State socialism rejected in favor of
localization and appropriate technologies
and systems.
70. Resultant changes in Marxism
• Where First Contradiction lead to
overproduction, Second Contradiction leads
to underproduction.
• Traditionally, labor and socialist movements
are agents of transformation. In EM,
ecological social movements are the agents
of change.
• State socialism rejected in favor of
localization and appropriate technologies
and systems.
73. “Email burns oil and
shits filth into your
air”
~ Bruce Sterling,
Viridiandesign.org
74. They're all about creating irresistible
consumer demand for cool objects that will
yield a global atmosphere upgrade. It's the Net
vs. the 20th-century fossil order in a fight that
the cybergreens are winning. Why? Because
they're not about spiritual potential, human
decency, small is beautiful, peace, justice or
anything else unattainable. The cybergreens
are about stuff people want, such as health,
sex, glamour, hot products, awesome
bandwidth, tech innovation and tons of
money. We're gonna glam, spend and
consume our way into planetary survival.
~ Bruce Sterling
