THE DEEP ECOLOGY MOVEMENT*

BILL DEVALL**

There are two great streams of environmentalism in the latter half

of the twentieth century. One stream is reformist, attempting to
control some of the worst of the air and water pollution and ineffi-
cient land use practices in industrialized nations and to save a few of
the remaining pieces of wildlands as "designated wilderness areas."
The other stream supports many of the reformist goals but is revolu-
tionary, seeking a new metaphysics, epistemology, cosmology, and
environmental ethics of person/planet. This paper is an intellectual
archeology of the second of these streams of environmentalism,
which I will call deep ecology.
There are several other phrases that some writers are using for the
perspective I am describing in this paper. Some call it "eco-philos-
ophy" or "foundational ecology" or the "new natural philosophy." I
use "deep ecology" as the shortest label. Although I am convinced
that deep ecology is radically different from the perspective of the
dominant social paradigm, I do not use the phrase "radical ecology"
or "revolutionary ecology" because I think those labels have such a
burden of emotive associations that many people would not hear
what is being said about deep ecology because of their projection of
other meanings of "revolution" onto the perspective of deep ecol-
ogy.
I contend that both streams of environmentalism are reactions to
the successes and excesses of the implementation of the dominant
social paradigm. Although reformist environmentalism treats some of
the symptoms of the environmental crisis and challenges some of the
assumptions of the dominant social paradigm (such as growth of the
economy at any cost), deep ecology questions the fundamental
premises of the dominant social paradigm. In the future, as the limits
of reform are reached and environmental problems become more

*Thanks and acknowledgement to George Sessions, Philosophy Department, Sierra Col-

lege, Rocklin, California. His sympathetic support and ideas made it possible to develop and
deepen many of the ideas expressed in this paper.
**Professor of Sociology, Humboldt State University, Arcata, California 95521. An ex-
tensive discussion of "Reformist Environmentalism" written by Professor Devall was pub-
lished in the Fall/Winter 1979 issue of the Humboldt Journal of Social Relations. This is
available from the Dept. of Sociology, Humboldt State University.
 NATURAL RESOURCESJOURNAL [Vol. 20

serious, the reform environmental movement will have to come to

terms with deep ecology.
The analysis in the present paper was inspired by Arne Naess'
paper on "shallow and deep, long-range" environmentalism.' The
methods used are patterned after John Rodman's seminal critique of
the resources conservation and development movement in the United
States.2 The data are the writings of a diverse group of thinkers who
have been developing a theory of deep ecology, especially during the
last quarter of a century. Relatively few of these writings have
appeared in popular journals or in books published by mainstream
publishers. I have searched these writings for common threads or
themes much as Max Weber searched the sermons of Protestant min-
isters for themes which reflected from and back to the intellectual
and social crisis of the emerging Protestant ethic and the spirit of
capitalism.' Several questions are addressed in this paper: What are
the sources of deep ecology? How do the premises of deep ecology
differ from those of the dominant social paradigm? What are the
areas of disagreement between reformist environmentalism and deep
ecology? What is the likely future role of the deep ecology move-
ment?

THE DOMINANT PARADIGM

A paradigm is a shorthand description of the world view, the
collection of values, beliefs, habits, and norms which form the frame
of reference of a collectivity of people-those who share a nation, a
religion, a social class. According to one writer, a dominant social
paradigm is the mental image of social reality that guides expecta-
tions in a society.
The dominant paradigm in North America includes the belief that
"economic growth," as measured by the Gross National Product, is a
measure of Progress, the belief that the primary goal of the govern-
ments of nation-states, after national defense, should be to create
conditions that will increase production of commodities and satisfy
material wants of citizens, and the belief that "technology can solve
our problems." Nature, in this paradigm, is only a storehouse of
resources which should be "developed" to satisfy ever increasing
numbers of humans and ever increasing demands of humans. Science
1. Naess, The Shallow and the Deep, Long-Range Ecology Movement, 16 INQUIRY 95
(1973).
2. J. Rodman, Four Forms of Ecological Consciousness: Beyond Economics, Resource
Conservation, (1977) Pitzer College.
3. M. WEBER, THE PROTESTANT ETHIC AND THE SPIRIT OF CAPITALISM
(1930).
April 1980] THE DEEP ECOLOGY MOVEMENT

is wedded to technology, the development of techniques for control

of natural processes (such as weather modification). Change
("planned obsolescence") is an end in itself. The new is valued over
the old and the present over future generations. The goal of persons
is personal satisfaction of wants and a higher standard of living as
measured by possession of commodities (houses, autos, recreation
vehicles, etc.). 4 Whatever its origin, this paradigm continues to be
dominant, to be preached through publicity (i.e., advertising), and to
be part of the world view of most citizens in North America.'
For some writers, the dominant social paradigm derives from
Judeo-Christian origins." For others, the excesses of air and water
pollution, the demand for more and more centralization of political
and economic power and the disregard for future generations, and
the unwise use of natural resources derive from the ideology and
structure of capitalism or from the Lockean view that property must
be "improved" to make it valuable to the "owner" and to society. 7
For others, the dominant social paradigm derives from the "scien-
tism" of the modern West (Europe and North America) as applied to
the technique of domination. 8
Following Thomas Kuhn's theory of the dominance of paradigms
in modern science and the operation of scientists doing what he calls
normal science within a paradigm, it can be argued that (1) those
who subscribe to a given paradigm share a definition of what prob-
lems are and their priorities; (2) the general heuristics, or rules of the
game, for approaching problems is widely agreed upon, (3) there is a
definite, underlying confidence among believers of the paradigm that
solutions within the paradigm do exist; and (4) those who believe the
assumptions of the paradigm may argue about the validity of data,
but rarely are their debates about the definition of what the problem
is or whether there are solutions or not. Proposed solutions to prob-

4. D. PIRAGES & P. EHRLICH, ARK II: SOCIAL RESPONSE TO ENVIRONMENTAL

IMPERATIVES 43 (1974). See also THE FUTURE OF THE GREAT PLAINS, H.R. DOC.
NO. 144, 75th Cong., 1st Sess. (1937).
5. On the history of the paradigm see V. FERKISS, THE FUTURE OF TECHNO-
LOGICAL CIVILIZATION (1974). For a critique of the "me now" consumerism of the
1970's see C. LASCH, THE CULTURE OF NARCISSISM: AMERICAN LIFE IN AN AGE
OF DIMINISHING EXPECTATIONS (1979). See also Manager's Journal, Monitoring Amer-
ica, Values of Americans, Wall St. J., Oct. 2, 1978.
6. White, Jr., The HistoricalRoots of Our Ecologic Crisis, 155 SCIENCE 1203 (1967).
7. B. WEISBERG, BEYOND REPAIR: THE ECOLOGY OF CAPITALISM (1971);
England & Bluestone, Ecology and Class Conflict, 3 REV. RADICAL POLITICAL ECON.
31 (1971). On Locke's view of "property," see FERKISS, supra note 5.
8. L. MARX, THE MACHINE IN THE GARDEN: TECHNOLOGY AND THE PAS-
TORAL IDEAL IN AMERICA (1967); and L. MUMFORD, THE PENTAGON OF POWER
(1970).
 NATURAL RESOURCESJOURNAL [Vol. 20

lems arising from following the assumptions of the paradigms are

evaluated as "reasonable," "realistic," or "valid" in terms of the
agreed upon "rules of the game." When the data is difficult to fit to
the paradigm, frequently there is dissonance disavowal, an attempt to
explain away the inconsistency. 9
It is possible for a paradigm shift to occur when a group of persons
finds in comparing its data with generally accepted theory that the
conclusions become "weird" when compared with expectations. In
terms of the shared views of the goals, rules, and perceptions of
reality in a nation, a tribe, or a religious group, for example, a charis-
matic leader, a social movement, or a formation of social networks of
persons exploring a new social paradigm may be at the vanguard of a
paradigm shift.
Reformist environmentalism in this paper refers to several social
movements which are related in that the goal of all of them is to
change society for "better living" without attacking the premises of
the dominant social paradigm. These reform movements each defined
a problem-such as need for more open space-and voluntary orga-
nizations were formed to agitate for social changes. There has also
been considerable coalition building between different voluntary
organizations espousing reform environmentalism. Several reformist
environmental movements, including at least the following, have
been active during the last century: (1) the movement to establish
urban parks, designated wilderness areas, and national parks; 1 0 (2) the
movement to mitigate the health and public safety hazards created
by the technology which was applied to create the so-called indus-
trial revolution.' I The Union of Concerned Scientists, for example,
has brought to the attention of the general public some of the haz-
ards to public health and safety of the use of nuclear power to
generate electricity; (3) the movement to develop "proper" land-use
planning. This includes the city beautiful movement of the late nine-
teenth century and the movement to zone and plan land use such as
the currently controversial attempts to zone uses along the coastal
zones;' 2 (4) the resources conservation and development movement
9. T. KUHN, THE STRUCTURE OF SCIENTIFIC REVOLUTIONS (2d ed. 1970). For
criticism of Kuhn, I. LAKATOS & A. MUSGRAVE, CRITICISMS AND THE GROWTH OF
KNOWLEDGE (1970).
10. R. NASH, WILDERNESS AND THE AMERICAN MIND (rev. ed. 1973); Sax, Amer-
ica's National Parks: Their Principles, Purposes and Their Prospects, 35 NAT. HIST. 57
(1976).
11. B. COMMONER, THE CLOSING CIRCLE (1971); J. RIDGEWAY, THE POLITICS
OF ECOLOGY (1970).
12. NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL, LAND USE CONTROLS IN THE
UNITED STATES: A HANDBOOK OF LEGAL RIGHTS OF CITIZENS (1977); I. MC-
HARG, DESIGN WITH NATURE (1971).
April 19801 THE DEEPECOLOGY MO VEMENT

symbolized by the philosophy of multiple use of Gifford Pinchot and

the U.S. Forest Service;' 1 (5) the "back to the land" movement of
the 1960s and 1970s and the "organic farming" ideology; (6) the
concern with exponential growth of human population and forma-
tion of such groups as Zero Population Growth; 1" (7) the "humane"
and "animal liberation" movement directed at changing the attitudes
and behavior of humans towards some other aspects of animals;' I
and (8) the "limits to growth" movement which emphasizes we
should control human population and move towards a "steady-state"
1
or "conserver society" as rapidly as possible. 6
SOURCES OF DEEP ECOLOGY
What I call deep ecology in this paper is premised on a gestalt of
person-in-nature. The person is not above or outside of nature. The
person is part of creation on-going. The person cares for and about
nature, shows reverence towards and respect for nonhuman nature,
loves and lives with nonhuman nature, is a person in the "earth house-
hold" and "lets being be," lets nonhuman nature follow separate
evolutionary destinies. Deep ecology, unlike reform environmental-
ism, is not just a pragmatic, short-term social movement with a goal
like stopping nuclear power or cleaning up the waterways. Deep
ecology first attempts to question and present alternatives to conven-
tional ways of thinking in the modern West. Deep ecology under-
stands that some of the "solutions" of reform environmentalism are
counter-productive. Deep ecology seeks transformation of values and
social organization.
The historian Lynn White, Jr., in his influential 1967 article, "The
Historical Roots of Our Ecological Crisis," provided one impetus for
the current upwelling of interest in deep ecology by criticizing what
he saw as the dominant Judeo-Christian view of man versus nature,
or man at war with nature. But there are other writers, coming from
diverse intellectual and spiritual disciplines, who have provided, in
13. Rodman, supra note 2; S. HAYS, CONSERVATION AND THE GOSPEL OF EFFI-
CIENCY (1959); G. PINCHOT, BREAKING NEW GROUND (1947).
14. P. EHRLICH, THE POPULATION BOMB (1968). See generally publications of the
organization Zero Population Growth. POPULATION AND THE AMERICAN FUTURE:
REPORT OF THE COMMISSION ON POPULATION GROWTH AND THE AMERICAN
FUTURE (1972).
15. T. REGAN & P. SINGER, ANIMAL RIGHTS AND HUMAN OBLIGATION (1976);
P. SINGER, ANIMAL LIBERATION (1977).
16. D. L. MEADOWS & D. H. MEADOWS, THE LIMITS TO GROWTH (2d ed. 1974);
M. MESAROVIC & E. PESTEL, MANKIND AT THE TURNING POINT: SECOND RE-
PORT OF THE CLUB OF ROME (1974); D. MEADOWS, ALTERNATIVES TO GROWTH
(1977). For a critique of the limits to growth model see MODELS OF DOOM: A CRI-
TIQUE OF THE LIMITS TO GROWTH (H. Cole ed. 1973); TOWARD A STEADY-STATE
ECONOMY (H. Daly ed. 1973).
 NATURAL RESOURCESJOURNAL [Vol. 20

the cumulative impact of their work, a profound critique of the

dominant social paradigm 1 and the "single vision" of science in the
modern (post- 1500) West.' 7
One major stream of thought influencing the development of deep
ecology has been the influx of Eastern spiritual traditions into the
West which began in the 1950s with the writings of such people as
Alan Watts' ' and Daisetz Suzuki.' I Eastern traditions provided a
radically different man/nature vision than that of the dominant
social paradigm of the West. During the 1950s the so-called "beat
poets" such as Alan Ginsberg seemed to be groping for a way
through Eastern philosophy to cope with the violence, insanity, and
alienation of people from people and people from nature they ex-
perienced in North America. Except for Gary Snyder, who developed
into one of the most influential eco-philosophers of the 1970s, these
beat poets, from the perspective of the 1970s, were naive in their
understanding of both Eastern philosophy, ecology, and the philo-
sophical traditions of the West.
During the late 1960s and 1970s, however, philosophers, scien-
tists, and social critics have begun to compare Eastern and Western
philosophic traditions as they relate to science, technology, and man/
nature relations. Fritjoff Capra's Tao of Physics, for example, empha-
sizes the parallels between Eastern philosophies and the theories of
twentieth century physics.2 Joseph Needham's massive work,
Science and Civilization in China, brought to the consciousness of
the West the incredibly high level of science, technology, and civiliza-
tion achieved in the East for millenia and made available to Western
readers an alternative approach to science and human values. 2 ' More
recently, Needham has suggested that modern Westerners take the
philosophies of the East as a spiritual and ethical basis for modern
science." Works by Huston Smith, among others, have also con-
tributed to this resurgent interest in relating the environmental crisis
to the values expressed in the dominant Western paradigm. Smith
and others have looked to the Eastern philosophies for spiritual-
religious guidance. 23
17. White, supra note 6.
18. A. WATTS, PSYCHOTHERAPY EAST AND WEST (1975); A. WATTS, NATURE,
MAN AND WOMAN (1970); A. WATTS, THE SPIRIT OF ZEN: A WAY OF LIFE, WORK
AND ART IN THE FAR EAST (1955); A. WATTS, THE ESSENCE OF ALAN WATTS
(1977).
19. D. SUZUKI, ESSAYS IN ZEN BUDDHISM (1961).
20. F. CAPRA, THE TAO OF PHYSICS (1975).
21. J. NEEDHAM, SCIENCE AND CIVILIZATION IN CHINA (multi. vol. 1954-1976).
22. Needham, History and Human Values: A Chinese Perspective for World Science and
Technology, 20 CENTENNIAL REV. 1 (1976).
23. H. SMITH, FORGOTTEN TRUTH (1976); Smith, Tao Now: An Ecological Testa-
ment, in EARTH MIGHT BE FAIR (I. Barbour ed. 1972).
April 19801 THE DEEP ECOLOGY MOVEMENT

Several social philosophers have written brilliant critiques of West-

ern societies but have not presented a new metaphysical basis for
their philosophy nor attempted to incorporate Eastern philosophy
into their analyses. Jacques Eulel wrote on technique and the techno-
logical society. 2 4 Paul Goodman discussed the question "can there
be a humane technology?" '2 s Herbert Marcuse analyzed "one dimen-
sional man" as the prototypical "modern" urbanite.2 6 The works of
Theodore Roszak have also had considerable impact on those
thinkers interested in understanding the malaise and contradictions
of modern societies by examining the premises of the dominant
social paradigm. 2 7
A second stream of thought contributing to deep ecology has been
the re-evaluation of Native Americans (and other preliterate peoples)
during the 1960s and 1970s. This is not a revival of the Romantic
view of Native Americans as "noble savages" but rather an attempt
to evaluate traditional religions, philosophies, and social organiza-
tions of Native Americans in objective, comparative, analytic, and
critical ways.
A number of questions have been asked. How did different tribes
at different times cope with changes in their natural environment
(such as prolonged drought) and with technological innovation?
What were the "separate realities" of Native Americans and can mod-
ern Western man understand and know, in a phenomenological sense,
these "separate realities"? The experiences of Carlos Castenada, for
example, indicate it may be very difficult for modern man to develop
such understanding since this requires a major perceptual shift of
man/nature. Robert Ornstein concludes, "Castenada's experience
demonstrates primarily that the Western-trained intellectual, even a
'seeker' is by his culture almost completely unprepared to under-
stand esoteric traditions." 2
From the many sources on Native Americans which have become
available during the 1970s, I quote a statement by Luther Standing

24. J. ELLUL, THE TECHNOLOGICAL SOCIETY (1964).

25. Goodman, Can Technology Be Humane? in WESTERN MAN AND ENVIRON-
MENTAL ETHICS 225 (I. Barbour ed. 1973).
26. H. MARCUSE, ONE-DIMENSIONAL MAN (1964).
27. T. ROSZAK, THE MAKING OF A COUNTER-CULTURE (1969); T. ROSZAK,
WHERE THE WASTELAND ENDS: POLITICS AND TRANSCENDENCE IN POST-
INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY (1972); T. ROSZAK, UNFINISHED ANIMAL: THE AQUARIAN
FRONTIER AND THE EVOLUTION OF CONSCIOUSNESS (1975); T. ROSZAK, PER-
SON/PLANET (1978).
28. R. ORNSTEIN, THE MIND FIELD 105 (1976). The works of Carlos Castaneda have
been influential. They include THE TEACHINGS OF DON JUAN (1968); A SEPARATE
REALITY (1971); JOURNEY TO IXTLAN (1972); TALES OF POWER (1974).
 NATURAL RESOURCESJOURNAL [Vol. 20

Bear, an Oglala Sioux, from Touch the Earth to illustrate the con-
trast with the modern paradigm of the West:
We do not think of the great open plains, the beautiful rolling hills,
and winding streams with tangled growth, as "wild." Only to the
white man was nature a "wilderness" and only to him was the land
"infested" with "wild" animals and "savage" people. To us it was
tame. Earth was bountiful and we were surrounded with the bless-
ings of the Great Mystery. Not until the hairy man from the east
came and with brutal frenzy heaped injustices upon us and the fam-
ilies we loved was it "wild" for us. When the very animals of the
forest began fleeing from his approach, then it was that for us the
"wild west" began. 2 9
A third source of deep ecology is found in the "minority tradi-
tion" of Western religious and philosophical traditions. The philos-
opher George Sessions has claimed that:
[I n the civilized West, a tenuous thread can be drawn through the
Presocratics, Theophrastus, Lucretius, St. Francis, Bruno and other
neo-Platonic mystics, Spinoza, Thoreau, John Muir, Santayana, Rob-
inson Jeffers, Aldo Leopold, Loren Eiseley, Gary Snyder, Paul Shep-
ard, Arne Naess, and maybe that desert rat, Edward Abbey. This
minority tradition, despite differences, could have provided the West
with a healthy basis for a realistic portrayal of the balance and
interconnectedness of three artificially separable components (God/
Nature/Man) of an untimely seamless and inseparable Whole. 30
Sessions, together with Arne Naess and Stuart Hampshire, has seen
the philosopher Spinoza as providing a unique fusion of an integrated
man/nature metaphysic with modern European science. 3 ' Spinoza's
ethics is most naturally interpreted as implying biospheric egalitarian-
ism, and science is endorsed by Spinoza as valuable primarily for
contemplation of a pantheistic, sacred universe and for spiritual dis-
cipline and development. Spinoza stands out in a unique way in
opposition to other 17th century philosophers-e.g., Bacon, Des-
cartes, and Leibniz-who were at that time laying the foundations for
the technocratic-industrial social paradigm and the fulfillment of the
Christian imperative that man must dominate and control all nature.
29. L. Standing Bear, in TOUCH THE EARTH (T. McLuhan ed. 1971). Among the most
significant and original theories of Native Americans and non-human nature see V. DE-
LORIA, GOD IS RED (1975); C. MARTIN, KEEPERS OF THE GAME (1978); S.
STEINER, THE VANISHING WHITE MAN (1976).
30. Sessions, Spinoza and Jeffers on Man in Nature, 20 INQUIRY 481 (1977); G. Ses-
sions, Spinoza, Perennial Philosophy and Deep Ecology (1979) (unpublished paper, Sierra
College).
31. S. HAMPSHIRE, TWO THEORIES OF MORALITY (1977); S. HAMPSHIRE, SPIN-
OZA (1956); Naess, Spinoza and Ecology, 7 PHILOSOPHIA 45 (1977).
April 19801 THE DEEPECOLOGY MOVEMENT

It has been claimed by several writers that the poet-philosopher

Robinson Jeffers, who lived most of his life on the California coast-
line at Big Sur, was Spinoza's twentieth century "evangelist" and
that Jeffers gave Spinoza's philosophy an explicitly ecological inter-
pretation. 32
Among contemporary European philosophers, the two most influ-
ential have been Alfred North Whitehead and Martin Heidegger . 3 3 In
particular, more American philosophers, both those with an interest
in ecological consciousness and those interested in contemporary
philosophers, are discussing Heidegger's critique of Western phil-
osophy and contemporary Western societies. Because Heidegger's
approach to philosophy and language is so different from the language
we are accustomed to in American academia, any summary of his
ideas would distort the theory he is presenting. The3 4reader is referred
to the books and articles on Heidegger cited below.
A fourth source of reference for the deep ecology movement has
been the scientific discipline of ecology. For some ecology is a sci-
ence of the "home," of the "relationships between," while for others
ecology is a perspective. The difference is important, for ecology as a
science is open for co-optation by the engineers, the "technological
fixers" who want to "enhance," "manage," or "humanize" the bio-
sphere. At the beginning of the "environmental decade" of the
1970s, two ecologists issued a warning against this approach:
Even if we dispense with the idea that ecologists are some sort of
environmental engineers and compare them to the pure physicists
who provide scientific rules for engineers, do the tentative under-
standings we have outlined (in their article) provide a sound basis for
action by those who would manage the environment? It is self-
evident that they do not. ... We submit that ecology as such prob-

32. Sessions, supra note 30. See also A. COFFIN, ROBINSON JEFFERS: POET OF
INHUMANISM (1971); B. HOTCHKISS, JEFFERS: THE SIVIASTIC VISION (1975); R.
Brophy, Robinson Jeffers, Metaphysician of the West (unpublished paper, dept. of English,
Long Beach State University, Long Beach, California).
33. J. COBB, JR., IS IT TOO LATE? A THEOLOGY OF ECOLOGY (1972); C. HART-
SHORNE, BEYOND HUMANISM: ESSAYS IN THE PHILOSOPHY OF NATURE (1937);
A. WHITEHEAD, SCIENCE AND THE MODERN WORLD, chs. 5, 13 (1925); Griffin,
Whitehead's Contribution to the Theology of Nature, 20 BUCKNELL REV. 95 (1972).
34. M. HEIDEGGER, THE QUESTION CONCERNING TECHNOLOGY AND OTHER
ESSAYS (W. Lovitt trans. 1977); G. STEINER, MARTIN HEIDEGGER (1979); V.
VYCINAS, EARTH AND GODS: AN INTRODUCTION TO THE PHILOSOPHY OF MAR-
TIN HEIDEGGER (1961). On the approach taken by Heidegger and the contemporary
ecological consciousness, see D. LACHAPELLE, EARTH WISDOM (1978) (Chapter 9,
"Martin Heidegger and the Quest for Being"). The writings of Michael Zimmerman on
Heidegger are also useful, including his Beyond "Humanism": Heidegger's Understandingof
Technology, 12 LISTENING 74 (1977). See also Zimmerman, Marx and Heidegger on the
TechnologicalDomination of Nature, 12 PHILOSOPHY TODAY 99 (Summer 1979).
 NATURAL RESOURCESJOURNAL [Vol. 20

ably cannot do what many people expect it to do; it cannot provide

35
a set of "rules" of the kind needed to manage the environment.
Donald Worster, at the conclusion of his scholarly and brilliant his-
3
tory of ecological thinking in the West, is of the same opinion. 6
But ecologists do have an important task in the deep ecology
movement. They can be subversive in their perspective. For human
ecologist Paul Shepard, "the ideological status of ecology is that of a
resistance movement" because its intellectual leaders such as Aldo
Leopold challenge the major premises of the dominant social para-
digm. 37 As Worster in his history of ecology points out:
[A] 11science, though primarily concerned with the "Is," becomes
implicated at some point with the "Ought." The continuing environ-
mental crisis makes it obvious that man's moral visions and utopias
are little more than empty enterprise when they depart too far from
nature's ways. This is the major lesson we have learned from study-
ing the effects of men's hands on environment. An ecological ethic
of interdependence, man in nature may be3 the outcome of a dialec-
tical relation between scientist and ethicist. 1
A final source of inspiration for the deep, long-range ecology
movement is those artists who have tried to maintain a sense of place
in their work. 3 9 Some artists, standing against the tide of mid-
century pop art, mini-malist art, and conceptual art have shown
remarkable clarity and objectivity in their perception of nature. This
spiritual-mystical objectivism is found, for example, in the photo-
graphs of Ansel Adams. 4 0 For these artists, including Morris Graves,
who introduced concepts of Eastern thought (including Zen Bud-
dhism) into his art, and Larry Gray, who reveals the eloquent light of
revelation of nature in his skyscapes, men reaffirm their spiritual
kinship with the eternity of God in nature through art. 4 1

35. Murdoch & Connell, All About Ecology in WESTERN MAN AND ENVIRON-
MENTAL ETHICS (I. Barbour ed. 1973).
36. DONALD WORSTER, epilogue, NATURE'S ECONOMY (1977). The importance of
the thinking of ecologist Aldo Leopold should be emphasized. There are many articles
interpreting Leopold's message. See e.g., Jung, The Splendor of the Wild: Zen and Aldo
Leopold, 29 ATLANTIC NATURALIST 5 (1974).
37. Shepard, Introduction: Man and Ecology, in THE SUBVERSIVE SCIENCE 1 (P.
Shepard & D. McKinley eds. 1969). See also Everndon, Beyond Ecology, 263 N. AM. REV.
16(1978).
38. D. WORSTER, supra note 36.
39. Huth, Wilderness and Art, in WILDERNESS, AMERICA'S LIVING HERITAGE 60
(D. Brower ed. 1961); Shepard, A Sense of Place 262 N. AM. REV. 22 (1977).
40. Adams, The Artist and the Ideals of Wilderness, in WILDERNESS, AMERICA'S
LIVING HERITAGE 49 (D. Brower ed. 1961).
41. M. GRAVES, THE DRAWINGS OF MORRIS GRAVES (1974).
April 1980] THE DEEPECOLOGY MOVEMENT

THEMES OF DEEP ECOLOGY

I indicated in preceding pages that many thinkers are questioning
some of the premises of the dominant social paradigm of the modern
societies. They are attempting to extend on an appropriate meta-
physics, epistemology, and ethics for what I call an "ecological con-
sciousness." Some of these writers are very supportive of reformist
environmental social movements, but they feel reform while neces-
sary is not sufficient. They suggest a new paradigm is required and a
new utopian vision of "right livelihood" and the "good society."
Utopia stimulates our thinking concerning alternatives to present
society. 4 2 Some persons, such as Aldo Leopold, have suggested that
we begin our thinking on utopia not with a statement of "human
nature" or "needs of humans" but by trying to "think like a moun-
tain." This profound extending, "thinking like a mountain," is part
and parcel of the phenomenology of ecological consciousness. 4 3
Deep ecology begins with Unity rather than dualism which has been
the dominant theme of Western philosophy. 4 4
Philosopher Henryk Skolimowski, who has written several papers
on the options for the ecology movements, asserts:
[W] e are in a period of ferment and turmoil, in which we have to
challenge the limits of the analytical and empiricist comprehension
of the world as we must work out a new conceptual and philo-
sophical framework in which the multitude of new social, ethical,
ecological, epistemological, and ontological problems can be accom-
modated and fruitfully tackled. The need for a new philosophical
framework is felt by nearly everybody. It would be lamentable if
professional philosophers were among the last to recognize this. 45

Numerous other writers on deep ecology, including William

Ophuls, E. F. Schumacher, George Sessions, Theodore Roszak, Paul
Shepard, Gary Snyder, and Arne Naess, have in one way or another

42. M. SIBLEY, NATURE AND CIVILIZATION: SOME IMPLICATIONS FOR POLI-

TICS 251 (1977) (chapter 7, "Nature, Civilization and the Problem of Utopia"). Sibley
makes a case for more utopian visions from contemporary intellectuals. Although many
people have been revulsed by the visions of Marxism and Fascist dictatorships, "the student
of politics has an obligation not only to explain and criticize but also to propose and
explicate ideals. We need more utopian visions, not fewer. For if politics be that activity
through which man seeks consciously and deliberately to order and control his collective
life, then one of the salient questions in all politics must be: Order and control for what
ends? Without utopian visions these ends cannot be stated as wholes; and even a discussion
of means and strategies will be clouded unless ends are at least relatively clear." Id. at 47.
43. Jung, To Save the Earth 8 PHILOSOPHY TODAY 108 (1975).
44. Sessions, supra note 30.
45. Skolimowski, Ecology Movement Re-examined, 6 ECOLOGIST 298 (1976); Skoli-
mowski, Options for the Ecology Movement, 7 ECOLOGIST 318 (1977).
 NATURAL RESO UR CES JOURNAL [Vol. 20

called for a new social paradigm or a new environmental ethic. We

must "think like a mountain" according to Aldo Leopold. And Rob-
erick Nash says:
Do rocks have rights? If the time comes when to any considerable
group of us such a question is no longer ridiculous, we may be on
the verge of a change of value structures that will make possible
measures to cope4 with
6
the growing ecologic crisis. One hopes there is
enough time left.
Any attempt to create artificially a "new ecological ethics" or a
''new ontology of man's place in nature" out of the diverse strands
of thought which make up the deep ecology movement is likely to be
forced and futile. However, by explicating some of the major themes
embodied in and presupposed by the intellectual movement I am
calling deep ecology, some groundwork can be laid for further discus-
sion and clarification.4'7 Following the general outline of perennial
philosophy, the order of the following statements summarizing deep
ecology's basic principles are metaphysical-religious, psychological-
epistemological, ethical, and social-economic-political. These con-
cerns of deep ecology encompass most of reformist environmental-
ism's concerns but subsume them in its fundamental critique of the
dominant paradigm.
According to deep ecology:
(1) A new cosmic/ecological metaphysics which stresses the iden-
tity (I/thou) of humans with non-human nature is a necessary condi-
tion for a viable approach to building an eco-philosophy. In deep
ecology, the wholeness and integrity of person/planet together with
the principle of what Arne Naess calls "biological equalitarianism"
are the most important ideas. Man is an integral part of nature, not
over or apart from nature. Man is a "plain citizen" of the biosphere,
not its conqueror or manager. There should be a "democracy of all
God's creatures" according to St. Francis; or as Spinoza said, man is
a "temporary and dependent mode of the whole of God/Nature."
Man flows with the system of nature rather than attempting to con-
trol all of the rest of nature. The hand of man lies lightly on the land.
Man does not perfect4 nature, nor is man's primary duty to make
nature more efficient. 8
(2) An objective approach to nature is required. This approach is
found, for example, in Spinoza and in the works of Spinoza's twen-

46. Nash, Do Rocks Have Rights, 10 CENTER MAGAZINE 2 (1977).

47. Skolinowski, supra note 45.
48. J. NEEDLEMAN, A SENSE OF THE COSMOS 76-77,100-02 (1975).
April 1980) THE DEEP ECOLOGY MOVEMENT

tieth century disciple, Robinson Jeffers. Jeffers describes his orien-

tation as a philosophy of "inhumanism" to draw a sharp and shock-
ing contrast with the subjective anthropocentrism of the prevailing
humanistic philosophy, art, and culture of the 20th century West.4 9
(3) A new psychology is needed to integrate the metaphysics in
the mind field of post-industrial society. A major paradigm shift
results from psychological changes of perception. The new paradigm
requires rejection of subject/object, man/nature dualisms and will
require a pervasive awareness of total intermingling of the planet
earth. Psychotherapy seen as adjustment to ego-oriented society is
replaced by a new ideal of psychotherapy as spiritual develop-
ment."0 The new metaphysics and psychology leads logically to a
posture of biospheric egalitarianism and liberation in the sense of
autonomy, psychological/emotional freedom of the individual, spiri-
tual development for Homo sapiens, and the right of other species to
pursue their own evolutionary destinies.' 1
(4) There is an objective basisfor environmentalism, but objective
science in the new paradigm is different from the narrow, analytic
conception of the "scientific method" currently popular. Based on
"ancient wisdom," science should be both objective and participa-
tory without modern science's subject/object dualism. The main
value of science is seen in its ancient perspective as contemplation of
the cosmos and the enhancement of understanding of self and crea-
tion." 2
(5) There is wisdom in the stability of natural processes un-
changed by human intervention. Massive human-induced disruptions
of ecosystems will be unethical and harmful to men. Design for
human settlement should be with nature, not against nature.
(6) The quality and human existence and human welfare should
not be measured only by quantity of products. Technology is re-
turned to its ancient place as an appropriate tool for human welfare,
not an end in itself. 54
(7) Optimal human carrying capacity should be determined for
the planet as a biosphere and for specific islands, valleys, and con tin-
ents. A drastic reduction of the rate of growth of population of

49. Sessions, supra note 30. Spinoza is one of the important philosophers for deep
ecology. The new translations of Spinoza's work are absolutely essential for understanding
his thought. See P. WEINPAHL, THE RADICAL SPINOZA (1979).
50. R. ORNSTEIN, supra note 28.
51. Sessions, supra note 30; G. SNYDER, THE OLD WAYS (1977).
52. CAPRA, supra note 20; Sessions, supra note 30; NEEDLEMAN, supra note 48.
53. Commoner, supra note 11; McHarg, supra note 12.
54. NEEDLEMAN, supra note 48; Sessions, supra note 30.
 NATURAL RESO UR CES JOURNAL [Vol. 20

Homo sapiens through humane birth control programs is required.' 5

(8) Treating the symptoms of man/nature conflict, such as air or
water pollution, may divert attention from more important issues
and thus be counter-productive to "solving" the problems. Eco-
nomics must be subordinate to ecological-ethical criteria. Economics
is to be treated as a small sub-branch of ecology and will assume a
rightfully minor role in the new paradigm.5 6
(9) A new philosophical anthropology will draw on data of
hunting/gathering societies for principles of healthy, ecologically
viable societies. Industrial society is not the end toward which all
societies should aim or try to aim.' 7 Therefore, the notion of "re-
inhabitating the land" with hunting-gathering, and gardening as a
goal and standard for post-industrial society should be seriously con-
sidered.5 8
(10) Diversity is inherently desirable both culturally and as a prin-
ciple of health and stability of ecosystems. ' 9
(11) There should be a rapid movement toward "soft" energy
paths and "appropriate technology" and toward lifestyles which will
result in a drastic decrease in per capita energy consumption in ad-
vanced industrial societies while increasing appropriate energy in
decentralized villages in so-called "third world" nations.60 Deep
ecologists are committed to rapid movement to a "steady-state" or
"conservor society" both from ethical principles of harmonious inte-
gration of humans with nature and from appreciation of ecological
realities. 6 1 Integration of sophisticated, elegant, unobtrusive, eco-
logically sound, appropriate technology with greatly scaled down,
diversified, organic,62 labor-intensive agriculture, hunting, and gather-
ing is another goal.
(12) Education should have as its goal encouraging the spiritual
development and personhood development of the members of a com-
55. E. SCHUMACHER, SMALL IS BEAUTIFUL, ECONOMICS AS IF PEOPLE MAT-
TERED (1973). See as an example of this argument P. EHRLICH, A. EHRLICH & J.
HOLDREN, ECOSCIENCE (1977).
56. W. OPHULS, ECOLOGY AND THE POLITICS OF SCARCITY (1977). SCHU-
MACHER, supra note 55.
57. S. STEINER, supra note 29; SNYDER, supra note 51; P. SHEPARD, THE TENDER
CARNIVORE AND THE SACRED GAME (1974).
58. P. BERG, REINHABITING A SEPARATE COUNTRY (1978).
59. R. DASMANN, A DIFFERENT KIND OF COUNTRY (1968); N. MYERS, THE
SINKING ARK: A NEW LOOK AT THE PROBLEMS OF DISAPPEARING SPECIES
(1979).
60. R. DASMANN, ECOLOGICAL PRINCIPLES FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
(1973).
61. W. OPHULS, supra note 56. On the "steady-state" see TOWARD A STEADY-
STATE ECONOMY (H. Daly ed. 1973).
62. E. SCHUMACHER, supra note 55.
April 19801 THE DEEPECOLOGY MOVEMENT

munity, not just training them in occupations appropriatefor oli-

garchic bureaucracies and for consumerism in advanced industrial
societies.63
(13) More leisure as contemplation in art, dance, music, and
physical skills will return play to its place as the nursery of individual
64
fulfillment and culturalachievement.
(14) Local autonomy and decentralization of power is preferred
over centralized political control through oligarchic bureaucracies.
Even if bureaucratic modes of organization are more "efficient,"
other modes of organization for small scale human communities
6
are
more "effective" in terms of the principles of deep ecology. I
(15) In the interim, before the steady-state economy and radically
changed social structure are instituted, vast areas of the planet bio-
spheres will be zoned "off limits" to further industrial exploitation
and large-scale human settlement; these should be protected by
defensive groups of people. One ecologist has called such groups a
"world wilderness police. ' 6 6

COMPETING POLITICAL SOLUTIONS TO THE

CONTINUING ENVIRONMENTAL CRISIS
Major theorists in both reformist environmentalism and deep ecol-
ogy are of the opinion that the environmental crisis is continuing and
becoming more severe. Reformist environmentalists continue to
argue, however, that the problems can be solved within the dominant
social paradigm. For example, they advocate redefining some private
property rights and responsibilities. 6 Reformers advocate passing
more laws to regulate polluters or provide incentives to "clean up the
mess.,"6 s Some reformers seek to extend the idea of legal rights to
63. T. ROSZAK, supra note 27.
64. J. HUIZINGA, HOMO LUDENS: THE PLAY ELEMENT IN CULTURE (1950).
Collier, The Fullness of Life Through Leisure, in THE SUBVERSIVE SCIENCE 416 (P.
Shepard & D. McKinley eds. 1969).
65. W. OPHULS, supra note 56; THE SUSTAINABLE SOCIETY (D. Pirages ed. 1977);
P. BERG & R. DASMANN, REINHABITATING A SEPARATE COUNTRY (1978).
66. Editorial, GREENPEACE CHRONICLES 3 (March, 1979), 1, No. 14. On the sugges-
tion for a "world wilderness police" see Iltis, Wilderness, can man do without it?, in
RECYCLE THIS BOOK: ECOLOGY, SOCIETY AND MAN 167 (J. Allan & A. Hanson eds.
1972). On "earth festivals" and getting in touch with nature again, see D. LaCHAPELLE,
supra note 34.
The world wilderness police is a defensive force. The defense of nature against despoilers
is the goal. I think the prototype of this policeman is Morel, the hero of Romain Gary's
novel THE ROOTS OF HEAVEN (1958). Only after all appeals to the United Nations, to all
nations, to all reasonable men have failed does Morel turn to force of arms to defend the
elephants of central Africa from poachers.
67. MANAGING THE COMMONS (G. Hardin & J. Baden eds. 1977).
68. J. PASSMORE, MAN'S RESPONSIBILITY FOR NATURE (1974).
314 NATURAL RESOURCES JOURNAL [Vol. 20

the natural environment, broadening common-law precedents to in-

clude a legal recognition of every person's right to a habitable en-
vironment.6 9 Some reformist writers argue that incremental changes
in laws and social institutions is the most that can be done at the
present point in developing our political traditions to include some
idea of environmental quality. 7" Even a leading ecologist such as
Eugene Odum does not suggest that a change in metaphysics or
epistemology is necessary, 7 1 and the most radical "blueprints" of a
"conserver society," such as the Friends of the Earth book Progress
as if Survival Mattered and Amory Lovins' treatise on soft energy
paths as an alternative to reliance on nuclear and coal-fired electric
generation, do not base their political-economic programs on any
new metaphysics or epistemology nor call for a religious conver-
sion. 7 2 Neither reformists nor deep ecologists call for violent over-
throw of the established institutions or governments.
Reformist environmentalists such as Bond argue that visionaries
are of limited use in battles for power, and that "as long as the
discussion remains at the theoretical level it runs the risk of being
both unrealistic and irrelevant as the basis of an effective environ-
mental ethic." ' Reformers claim they are "realistic" and "prag-
matic" and suggest "extension, elaboration and refinement of exist-
ing social and political traditions and attitudes, which even if not
now dominant, are not beyond the realm of our common experi-
74
ence" and would best serve the environmentalist cause.
Even some reformers are suggesting, however, at the beginning of
the 1980s, that more dramatic action must be taken to change
society and protect the environment. An editorial in the Greenpeace
Chronicles in 1979 says:
[H]umanistic value systems must be replaced by supra-humanistic
values that bring all plant and animal life into the sphere of legal,
moral and ethical consideration. And in the long run, whether any-
one likes it or not, force will eventually have to be brought to bear
against those who would continue to desecrate the environment. 75

69. J. SAX, DEFENDING THE ENVIRONMENT: A STRATEGY FOR CITIZEN AC-

TION (1971).
70. Bond, Salvationists, Utilitarians,and Environmental Justice, 6 ALTERNATIVES 31
(Spring 1977).
71. E. ODUM, FUNDAMENTALS OF ECOLOGY 516 (2d ed. 1973).
72. PROGRESS AS IF SURVIVAL MATTERED (D. Brower ed. 1977). See also, W.
LEISS, THE LIMITS TO SATISFACTION (1978); A. LOVINS & J. PRICE, NON-
NUCLEAR FUTURES: THE CASE FOR AN ETHICAL ENERGY STRATEGY (1975).
73. Bond, supra note 70, at 33.
74. R. CAHN, FOOTPRINTS ON THE PLANET (1978).
75. Hunter, editorial, GREENPEACE CHRONICLES 3, No. 15 (April 1979). Greenpeace
Foundation has sponsored confrontations with France over atmospheric testing of atomic
April 19801 THE DEEPECOLOGY MOVEMENT

As to the tactics of ecological resistance, peaceful but direct confron-

tations with whalers (by Greenpeace Foundation) and at nuclear
power plants (by a number of anti-nuclear groups) have been in-
creasing in frequency during the 1970s.1 6
Theorists of deep ecology argue that the best of reform environ-
mentalism can be incorporated into deep ecology.7 However, just
changing laws to control air and water pollution, or providing pro-
cedures for safety of nuclear reactors, or setting aside small areas of
land as "designated wilderness areas" is not enough. Indeed, in treat-
ing the symptoms of the malaise some of these actions may be
counter-productive. At best they are temporary, limited stop-gap
measures attempting to handle the problem of the environment
within the values of the dominant social paradigm.
Although deep ecology requires fundamental change, the move-
ment does not have a fully articulated political-economic program,
and many theorists would consider such a program to be sterile and
inappropriate at this time. Instead, most deep ecologists have limited
themselves to critiques of the dominant social paradigm and to sug-
gesting alternative visions of man-in-nature without specifying how
these visions may be realized. This is the case with Gary Snyder's
"Four Changes," which was written at the beginning of the "environ-
mental decade" of the 1970s and remains one of the most cognant
political statements of deep ecology.7 8
At the end of the 1970s, writers such as Theodore Roszak and
Raymond Dasmann were making specific recommendations for
changes in lifestyles. Both Roszak and Dasmann prefer small-scale
communities. Roszak suggests revival of the "household economy."
He links the search for "personhood" with the development of eco-
logical consciousness. 7 9 Dasmann elaborates on the process of "re-
inhabitating" landscapes which have been exploited and degraded by
previous-generations of humans. He wants a decentralized, small-
scale, caring community.
How can such "creative disintegration" be brought about? Some
writers, such as Peter Berg and Raymond Dassmann, have suggested
exemplary roles for the post-industrial society. Taking inspiration

devices in the South Pacific, with the Russian whaling fleet over the killing of whales and
with seal killers on islands in the St. Lawrence River. See also R. RODDEWIG, GREEN
BANS, THE BIRTH OF AUSTRALIAN ENVIRONMENTAL POLITICS (1978).
76. Barkan, Strategic, tactical and organizational dilemmas of the protest movement
against nuclearpower, 27 SOCIAL PROB. 19 (1979).
77. Naess, supra note 1.
78. G. Snyder, Four Changes, in THE ENVIRONMENTAL HANDBOOK 323 (G. Debell
ed. 1970).
79. ROSZAK, supra note 27.
 NATURAL RESOURCES JOURNAL [Vol. 20

from Native Americans who lived in relative comfort and with plenti-
ful food in northwestern California for many thousands of years
before the invasions of white men, Berg and Dasmann have refined
the idea of the "future primitive," of "living-in-place." They develop
a theory of "reinhabitation" whereby men undertake "activities and
evolving social behavior that will enrich the life of the place, restore
its life-supporting systems, and establish an ecologically and socially
sustainable pattern of existence within it." 8 0 Dasmann is a human
ecologist whose career has spanned the range from university pro-
fessor to international bureaucrat. He concludes, after spending
much time in international travel, that his experiences led him to lose
faith in governments and laws and institutions, but restored his faith
in the individual person. Changing persons, he suggests, is more
important than changing governments in the 1980s. 81
In contrast to leading exemplary lives, other deep ecologists argue
that the appropriate tactic is to join those reformers who would
pursue "ecological resistance," to help confront, confound, and
dramatize the ecological crisis with direct action. John Rodman calls
ecological resistance
an affirmation of the integrity of a naturally diverse self-and-world.
Its meaning is not exchanged by its success or failure in the linear
sequence of events, since its meaning lies also in the multi-dimen-
sional depth of an act in one realm that simultaneously affirms a
principle valid in many realms. Ecological resistance thus has some-
thing of the character of a ritual action whereby one aligns the self
with the ultimate order of things.8 2
In sum, the paradigm of deep ecology is revolutionary in its meta-
physics, epistemology, and cosmology, but deep ecologists do not
seek to overthrow governments by force of arms or to issue anything
like a comprehensive, all-embracing political program for bringing
about the new order. 8 3 The contemporary deep ecology movement
seems to be what Robert Nisbet has called a "withdrawal and re-
newal" movement such as has periodically arisen in Western society
since the fall of the Roman Empire. In this discussion of different
types of communities, Nisbet wrote of the ecological community
that:
80. BERG & DASMANN, supra note 65.
81. Dasmann, Conservation, Counter-culture, and Separate Realities 1 ENVT'L CON-
SERVATION 133 (1974).
82. Rodman, Theory and Practice in the Environmental Movement: Notes Towards an
Ecology of Experience, in THE INTERNATIONAL CULTURAL FOUNDATION, THE
SEARCH FOR ABSOLUTE VALUES IN A CHANGING WORLD 54 (1978).
83. Many writers on deep ecology have been personally involved in the practical politics
of reformist environmentalism.
April 19801 THE DEEPECOLOGY MOVEMENT

It would be a mistake, I believe, to refer to this pattern of the

search for community as politically revolutionary ...But there can
be no questions of the inherent radicalism of this type of commu-
nity. Even so, revolution is not its essential character; for whereas
the overriding objective of revolutionary action is the overthrow and
capture of an existing social order, with immediate forced adaptation
of human behavior to revolutionary power and design, the objectives
of the action and thought with which [the ecological community] is
concerned are, with rare exceptions, peaceful, not concerned with
capture and forced adaptation, noncoercive and seeking fulfillment
through example or vision rather than through revolutionary force
and centralization of power. The uncovering of those autonomous
and free interdependences among human beings which are believed
to be natural to man and his morality: this-not the violent capture
of government, army, and police-is the most fundamental aim of
the tradition
4
of community in Western social thought I call eco-
logical.1
There is no political party of "deep ecology," no cadre of political
revolutionaries. This is not an appropriate approach for deep ecolo-
gists. No frontal confrontations with reformist environmentalists or
with the dominant social/political order is desired. It would be
counter-productive by making people more defensive of their ideo-
logical position. Deep ecology is not an attempt to add one more
ideology in the crowded field of modern ideologies. Deep ecologists
are questing for ways to liberate and cultivate the ecological con-
sciousness. From ecological consciousness will naturally flow an eco-
logical resistance. John Rodman uses the concept of "receptive
capacity" from Herbert Marcuse to express this questing for ecolog-
ical consciousness and the liberating of nature. As Rodman says,
however:
[T] he "receptive" capacity by itself does not lead to action. Action
is made possible by the recognition that, beyond the perception of
otherness lies the perception of psyche, polity, and cosmos as meta-
phors of one another, and that the ancient dictum to "live according
to Nature" now translates into Thoreau's
8
maxim, "Let your life be a
counter friction to stop the machine." 5
As their contribution to the development of ecological conscious-
ness, deep ecologists seem to prefer to act as exemplary models and
to teach through acting. Teaching is a process of conserving in itself

84. R. Nisbet, The Ecological Community, THE SOCIAL PHILOSOPHERS: COMMU-

NITY AND CONFLICT IN WESTERN THOUGHT 319 (1973).
85. Rodman, The liberation of nature?, 20 INQUIRY 83 (1977). P. WEINPAHL, THE
RADICAL SPINOZA (1979).
318 NATURAL RESOURCES JOURNAL [Vol. 20

and of cultivating one's own ecological sonsciousness and the con-

sciousness of others. Some deep ecologists, such as Gary Snyder,
advocate taking roles which are not highly valued in society. As Alan
Watts suggests in his Psycho-therapy East and West, if the teacher
wants to change the perception, the world view, the "basic assump-
tions" of ego, it is best not to confront, challenge directly, assault, or
preach at Ego. Ego will become hostile, fearful, and rejecting when
directly confronted. Watts suggests the model of Orpheus,
the priest, the mouthpiece of the gods, who tames both men and
beasts by the allure and magic of his harp. His method is not that of
the preacher or the politician but that, in its wildest sense, of the
artist. For in the value system of civilization, of compulsive survival,
the artist is irrelevant. He is seen as a mere decorator who entertains
us while we labor. As strolling minstrel, player, clown,8 or poet he
can pass everywhere because no one takes him seriously. 6
The poet-philosopher Gary Snyder has assumed this role in the
deep ecology movement. He lives an exemplary life of "re-inhabita-
tion" on a mountain near Grass Valley, California, and travels here
and there reading his poetry and giving talks. He has written of the
revival of Coyote Man-the trickster, the man/beast of Native Amer-
icans who appears again and again in stories within stories of the oral
traditions of many Native American nations. The parables and stories
of Coyote man are frequently unexpected in their endings. There is a
message within the story that is not obvious-subtle, yet profound.
In his essay on Coyote, Snyder says:
Coyote ... was interesting to me and some of my colleagues be-
cause he spoke to us of place, because he clearly belonged to the
place and became almost like a guardian, a protector spirit. The
other part of it has to come out of something inside of us. The
fascination with the trickster. A world fold image of the trickster,
suppressed or altered in some cultures; more clearly developed in
others. For me I think the most interesting psychological things
about the trickster, and what drew me to it for my own personal
reasons was that there wasn't a clear dualism of good and evil estab-
lished there, that he clearly manifested benevolence compassion,
help to human beings, something, and had a certain dignity; and on
other occasions he was the silliest utmost fool; the overriding picture
is old Coyote Man, he's just always traveling along doing the best he
can. ... So, when the Coyote figure comes into modern American
poetry, it is not just for a sense of place. It is also a play on the
world-wide myth, tale, and motif storehouse. Poetry has always
86. A. WATTS, PSYCHOTHERAPY EAST AND WEST 182 (Vintage ed. 1975).
April 1980) THE DEEP ECOLOGY MOVEMENT

done this-drawing out, recreating subtly altering for each time and
place the fundamental images. 8 7

SOCIAL ORGANIZATION OF DEEP ECOLOGY

While reformist environmentalism is content to work with the
bureaucracies and legislatures of modern societies and within large-
scale voluntary environmental organizations such as the Sierra Club,
Audubon, etc., deep ecologists harbor a deep distrust of big organiza-
tions. 8 8 Indeed, deep ecologists see that during the 1970s reform
environmentalists have spent great amounts of time and resources
maintaining the "images" of their organizations and that political
leaders view environmentalists as "just another constituency" in the
balancing of interest groups.
As a "constituency," reformist environmentalists had "push"
during the early 1970s to obtain normative changes-wilderness des-
ignations, standards for air and water quality, land use legislation,
nuclear power plant safety legislation, etc. The leaders of these vol-
untary associations negotiated with leaders of unions, oil companies,
etc., for "compromise" legislation. New bureaucracies, such as the
Environmental Protection Agency, were established in the United
States to implement some environmental legislation. Many commen-
tators, of course, recognize there has been and is unequal power
between environmental associations and oligarchic business organiza-
tions. John Quarles in his excellent analysis of the operations of the
Environmental Protection Agency wrote:
Left alone, our government will always not look after the public
interest. In the environmental area there is a natural, built-in imbal-
ance. Private industry, driven by its own profit incentives to exploit
and pollute our natural resources uses its inherent advantage to exert
political pressure to resist environmental requirements. The machina-
tions of industry explain at least in part why the abuses of pollution
8
become so severe before steps are taken to establish controls. 9
Even though the reformist environmental movements have been
remarkably free from the bitter fights between leaders found in
87. G. SNYDER, supra note 51, at 83, 84, especially his essays "Re-inhabitation" and
"The incredible survival of coyote." For a critical explanation of Snyder's work before the
publication of THE OLD WAYS see B. STEUDING, GARY SNYDER (1976).
88. T. ROSZAK, PERSON/PLANET (1978). Roszak's thesis that "bigness" in govern-
ment, corporation, size of cities, etc., is one of the causes of our contemporary problems
had inherently a solution in "appropriate scale," in local community, small groups, concern
by a person with a particular place.
89. J. QUARLES, CLEANING UP AMERICA 174 (1976). See also Train, The Environ-
ment Today, 201 SCI. 320 (1978).
 NATURAL RESOURCESJOURNAL [Vol. 20

many other social movements, and even though there is a constant

process of building coalitions between reformist groups over legisla-
tion of common concern (such as clean air and water legislation,
Alaska national interest lands legislation, etc.), these reformist groups
cannot equally compete dollar for dollar and lobbyist for lobbyist
with any of the major industries (such as the oil industry). In some
of these groups, as well as in government agencies dealing with en-
vironmental concerns, there has been a tendency for a cadre of pro-
fessional environmentalists to develop. The Sierra Club and other
large reformist organizations replicate the staff of government agen-
cies, with their own energy experts, urban transportation specialists,
wilderness experts, etc. 9 0
Some deep ecology writers warn that such a trend toward "profes-
sional environmentalists" is detrimental to radical transformation of
society. Raymond Dasmann calls these people "eight to five environ-
mentalists" and says:
The traditional conservationist narrows his vision down to those wild
species or areas that are of interest or concern to him. ... [He]
probably likes to be respectable and acceptable to governments and
to the Establishment, and welcome in good society. He does not like
to raise embarrassing issues, since he feels dependent upon the sup-
port of rich people or the government. He certainly does not ques-
tion the System-the political/social/economic basis on which his
country operates. He may get along well as a fellow professional or
club member with those who are destroying most of the natural
world, since his demands are limited, and of course he recognizes
"economic necessity," "the needs of the real world." 9 1
Being distrustful of hierarchical-bureaucratic or charismatic-
fascistic organizations and models (such as People's Temple), deep
ecologists have formed loosely organized social networks. These
social networks can be as extensive as the limits of shared commu-
nications and can take a variety of forms. For example, a "tutorial
college" modeled after medieval universities, is now offering experi-
ential learning in "the new natural philosophy." 9 2 Some deep ecolo-
gists exchange ideas at conferences such as the one on the rights of
nonhuman nature held at Claremont, California, in 1974. One eco-
90. W. DEVALL, THE GOVERNING OF A VOLUNTARY ORGANIZATION: OLI-
GARCHY AND DEMOCRACY IN THE SIERRA CLUB (1970).
91. Raymond Dasmann, Horace Albright Memorial Lecture, XVI, University of Califor-
nia, Berkeley (1976). On the relation of scientists in university settings and support for the
dominant social paradigm see Livingston & Mason, Ecological Crisis and the Autonomy of
Science in Capitalist Society: A Canadian Case Study, 8 ALTERNATIVES 3 (1979).
92. Catalogue on New Natural Philosophy, International College, Los Angeles, California.
See also Carey & Abbs, Proposal for a New Ecological College, 7 THE ECOLOGIST 56
(1977).
April 19801 THE DEEPECOLOGY MOVEMENT 321

philosopher, George Sessions of Sierra College in Rocklin, California,

has published, irregularly, an ecophilosophy newsletter for those
reading and writing in ecophilosophy. The first issue was in April
1976, the most recent in May 1979. Some conferences and work-
shops, such as the "Reminding" conference at Dominican College in
San Rafael, California, in June 1979, attract some eco-philosophers
who share ideas with each other.
Much of the intellectual ferment which makes up deep ecology is
found in articles published in journals such as Inquiry, Environ-
mental Ethics and the occasionally published Eco-philosophy News-
letter. Only within the past two years have major books been pub-
lished which may be as important for deep ecology perspectives as
Rachel Carson's Silent Spring was for reformist environmentalism
during the 1960s. In particular, David Ehrenfeld's The Arrogance of
Humanism (1979) and John Lovelock's Gaia (1979) may be such books.
At the end of the 1970s, many articles are being written on the
possibility of an environmental ethic, and Robert Cahn subtitles his
review of environmentalism in the 1970s "a search for an environ-
mental ethic" in his Footprintson the Planet (1978).
Articles utilizing deep ecology perspectives did not appear during
the 1970s in periodicals published by major reformist environmental
groups such as the Sierra Club and the National Audubon Society.
Deep ecologists are concerned with developing appropriate ap-
proaches for discussions with leaders of environmental organizations.
Conferences and meetings, such as the national conference on
philosophy sponsored by Reminding in San Rafael, California, in
June 1979 bring together some persons interested in cultivating deep
ecological consciousness.
Social networks among deep ecologists are forming but there is no
formal organization with a name. There are some attempts among
social scientists to suggest a new paradigm for the "environmental"
social scientists, but the positivistic orientations of social science in
America make it difficult to obtain understanding for ecological con-
sciousness among American social scientists. 9 ' Social scientists have

93. An early conference on deep ecology was titled, "The Rights of Non-Human Nature"
(An invitational conference held at Claremont, California, April 18-20, 1974). Sponsored by
Pitzer College, The School of Theology at Claremont and National Audubon Society.
Speakers included John Cobb, Jr., Vine Deloria, Jr., Joel Feinberg, Garrett Hardin, Charles
Hartshorne, William Leiss and John Lilly.
94. For a critique of positivist science see Nielsen, Some theses in search of an argument:
reflections on Habermas, 69 NAT. FORUM 27 (1979). See also, Naess, Notes on the
methodology of normative systems, in 10 METHODOLOGY & SCIENCE 64 (1977). On the
development of an environmental paradigm in sociology see Dunlap & Catton, Jr., Environ-
mental Sociology: a Frameworkfor Analysis, in 1 PROGRESS IN RESOURCE MANAGE-
MENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING 57 (T. O'Riordan & R. D'Arge eds. 1979).
 NATURAL RESOURCES JOURNAL (Vol. 20

tended to pigeonhole reformist environmentalism as "just another

social movement" active in the spectrum of interest-group politics in
the "liberal" state, as Theodore Lowi calls contemporary American
politics. 9 I Deep ecology is not just another interest group represent-
ing just another ideology.
In sum, then, the role of deep ecology in contemporary society is
liberating, transforming, questing. There is Utopia in deep ecology, a
Utopia based not on man's continued and intensified conquest or
domination of nonhuman nature but based on a questing for self-
realization. 9 6
In his theory of "the coming of post-industrial society," sociolo-
gist Daniel Bell suggests that Utopia is a vision of the most vanguard
prophets and intellectuals of an era. He writes:
Inevitably, a post-industrial society gives rise to a new Utopian-
ism, both engineering and psychedelic. . . . Utopia has always been
conceived as a design of harmony and perfection in the relations
between men. In the wisdom of the ancients, Utopia was a fruitful
impossibility, a conception of the desirable which men should
always strive to attain but which, in the nature of things, could not
be achieved. And yet, by its very idea, Utopia would serve as a
standard of judgment on men, an ideal by which to measure the end.
The modern hubris has sought to cross that gap and embody the
ideal in the real; and in the effort the perspective of the ideal has
become diminished and the idea of Utopia has become tarnished. 97
Perhaps it would be wiser to return to the classic conception.
Deep ecology is liberating ecological consciousness. The writers I
have cited in this paper provide radical critiques of modern society
and of the dominant values of this society. They also provide, or
some of them do, a profound Utopian alternative. The elaborating of
or deepening of ecological consciousness is a continuing process. The
goal is to have action and consciousness as one. But the development
of ecological consciousness is seen as prior to ecological resistance in
many of the writings cited. This ecological consciousness may not be
very well articulated except by intellectuals who are in the business
of verbalizing. But they, as much as anyone, realize the limitation of
just verbalizing. Consciousness is knowing. From the perspective of
deep ecology, ecological resistance will naturally flow from and with
a developing ecological consciousness.
95. T. LOWI, THE END OF LIBERALISM (1969).
96. On Spinoza's theory of "self-realization" versus "ego-gratification" as the goal of
society see P. WEINPAHL, supra note 49. See also Naess, The place of joy in a world of
fact, 258 N. AM. REV. 53 (Summer 1973).
97. D. BELL, THE COMING OF POST-INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY 488 (1976).