Arne Naess’s Ecological Theory: We Are The Environment We Inhabit
Until well into the 20th century, both psychology and the rest of the disciplines in charge of studying different aspects of human existence understood that, as people, we are disconnected from the environment in which we live ; That is, we are individuals, in the most literal sense of the term. This idea may seem very bizarre put forward in this way, but in fact it continues to make itself felt in our way of thinking.
For example, when we say that each person makes their destiny, or that each person’s life depends mainly on how they manage their willpower, we are treating human life as if it were something disconnected from context.
This idea was also predominant in Western philosophy and, therefore, led us to assume a lifestyle based on the use of nature as if it were a simple collection of resources. But this ended, among other things, thanks to the work of environmental philosophers among whom highlighted the Norwegian thinker Arne Naess Below we will see how he thought and how he conceived our way of living.
This philosopher was born in Oslo in 1912, and in 1933 He became the youngest professor at the University of Oslo ; He dedicated himself to teaching philosophy classes.
From a young age, Naess showed interest in the environment and the protection of nature, even at a time when environmentalism was practically non-existent. However, he began to put his ideas into practice after he retired.
In 1970, he chained himself to an area near a waterfall located in a fjord where they were planning to build a dam and demanded that the project be stopped, and also helped promote many other actions of environmentalists based on direct action
These types of experiences led Arne Naess to form a philosophy about the relationship between humans and nature.
The ecological theory of Arne Naess
Naess’s philosophy It is usually summarized with the motto “think like a mountain.” , which this environmentalist used occasionally, although it was first used by another activist, Aldo Leopold. This phrase, reminiscent of Buddhist proverbs, does not actually express an idea that is difficult to understand: this Norwegian thinker believed that treating human beings as if they were something separate from the rest of nature responds to an illusion, a mirage.
The cause of this collective delirium It has to do with anthropocentrism , the belief that everything material exists to respond to the needs of human beings, as if it were part of a hotel garden. As historically our species has had some success in adapting the environment to its interests, we have believed that this will always be the case, and that this is the reason for the environment: to provide us with resources that we can consume.
Another derivation of the idea that we should think like a mountain is that among our main interests should be the protection of the environment; thus, we reduce the chances of natural disasters occurring and, with this, we improve our prospects of enjoying quality of life in a notable way.
Both Arne Naess and Aldo Leopold believed that, because we have the ability to think in abstract terms, we must take responsibility for the environment. Unlike animals with reduced cognitive abilities, we can think about the long-term consequences of things and, therefore, it is an ethical necessity to do everything possible to reduce our negative impact on the environment.
So, in harmony with nature is the key to coexistence in a correct way and in which the majority of the planet’s inhabitants benefit from the fact that evolution has created a species capable of thinking about everything. Instead of focusing our concerns on banal aspects of everyday life, we should look back and protect the place we come from: the biosphere.
The “deep self”
Arne Naess proposed the concept of the “ecological self” to refer to this self-image in which the concept we have of ourselves is linked to the natural environment to which it belongs and the community of living beings that cohabit in them. The defense of this form of self-recognition can lead us to see ourselves not as individuals, but as part of a network of living beings and forms of expression of nature : eagles, fish, wolves, etc.
Of course, it seems that this way of thinking was influenced by the philosophies of Amerindian and animist peoples, although Naess did not put much emphasis on the spiritual dimension that he is reluctant to give to this perspective. In any case, it is clear that it is a way of thinking that would currently be accepted by many people.
