M. Katičić Holism in Deep Ecology and Gaia-Theory: A Contribution to Eco-Geological... ISSN 1848-0071 UDC 171+179.3=111 Recieved: 2013-02-25 Accepted: 2013-03-25 Original scientific paper HOLISM IN DEEP ECOLOGY AND GAIA-THEORY: A CONTRIBUTION TO ECO-GEOLOGICAL SCIENCE, A PHILOSOPHY OF LIFE OR A NEW AGE STREAM? MARINA KATINIĆ Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Zagreb, Croatia e-mail: [email protected] In the second half of 20th century three approaches to phenomenon of life and environmental crisis relying to a holistic method arose: ecosophy that gave impetus to the deep ecology movement, Gaia-hypothesis that evolved into an acceptable scientific theory and gaianism as one of the New Age spiritual streams. All of this approaches have had different methodologies, but came to analogous conclusions on relation man-ecosystem. The goal of the paper is to introduce the three approaches' theoretical and practical outcomes, compare them and evaluate their potency to stranghten responsibility of man towards Earth ecosystem which is a self-regulating whole which humanity is part of. Key words: holism, ecosophy, deep ecology movement, gaia-theory, new age, responsibility. Holizam u dubinskoj ekologiji i teoriji Geje: doprinos ekogeološkoj znanosti, filozofija života ili struja New agea? U drugoj polovici 20. stoljeća pojavila su se tri pristupa fenomenu života i ekološkoj krizi s osloncem u holističkoj metodi: ekozofija koja je dala poticaj razvoju pokreta dubinske ekologije, hipoteza Geje koja se razvila u prihvatljivu znanstvenu teoriju i gajanizam kao jedna od New Age duhovnih struja. Ova su se tri pristupa služila različitim metodama, no došla su do analognih zaključaka o odnosu čovjek-ekosustav. Cilj je rada predstaviti navedena tri pristupa, usporediti ih i vrednovati njihovu snagu u podupiranju čovjekove pdgovornosti prema sustavu Zemlje, samoregulativnoj cjelini koje je čovječanstvo dio. Ključne riječi: holizam, ekozofija, pokret dubinske ekologije, teorija geje, new age, odgovornost. INTRODUCTION After having observed the Earth from „tribalistic“ as microbiology and ecology space in 1966, J. Lovelock, English chemist investigated geoevolution and bioevolution and inventor, started to ponder upon a as two separated objects of research. definition and metamechanism of life as a Eventually, he developed a certain global phenomenon. As such he philosophy of life that depends on an metaphorically described the Planet as a integral epistemology – comprising intuition, superorganism./and had a metaphorical experimental science and aesthetical vision of the Planet as a superorganism. fascination. Starting from that vision, not only did he The ideas of A. Naess' ecosophy T come to significant results in Gaia-theory, and the deep ecology movement turned to but he also gave a constructive critic of a have many parallels with Lovelock's notion modern scientific methodology. He criticised of Gaia. Interestingly, both conceptions got the methodology as being reductive and their spiritual and (pseudo)religious The Holistic Approach to Environment 3(2013)1, 3-14 Page 3 M. Katičić Holism in Deep Ecology and Gaia-Theory: A Contribution to Eco-Geological... recognition and interpretation in some New establishing a solid theoretical ground to Age discourses, as they both suggest not just human responsability towards life [1:25]. a cosmic interdependency of beings, but a The paper aims to expose and briefly certain holism refering to human self. compare the two variants of eco-holism; A philosophical approach to an deep ecology and Gaia theory, with special ecological crisis comes down to a regard to position of Croatian historian and fundamental question which relies on a ecological writer Tomislav Markus. It also paradoxical question: how can life, at a aims to shortly consider the relation between certain stage of its natural existence in time – all the three dimensions of relation man – the subjectivity of homo faber – come to the Earth System – scientific, philosophical and point of addressing its own life in form of (pseudo) religious, as well as between threat to his survival? The solution to this is holism and reductionism, in order to value it highly problematic as it deals with critically as possible theoretical paths contradictory moments in human condition. towards responsibility and sustainability. However, it is a crucial question to DEEP ECOLOGY AND EVOLUTIONARY DARWINISM Terms ecosophy and deep ecology framework cosmos is perceived as an were introduced in 1972 by Norwegian organic whole, with species being equal philosopher and environmental activist Arne partners in maintenance of the equilibrium, Naess, meaning philosophy of ecological which opposes ecoanthropocentric paradigm. harmony or equilibrium: Naess differs two possible types of “A philosophy as a kind of sofia (or) environmetalism which need not be wisdom, is openly normative, it contains neccessarily compatible: a long-range, deep both norms, rules, postulates, value priority ecology and a shallow ecological movement announcements and hypotheses concerning based on mainstream anthropocentric and the state of affairs in our universe. Wisdom technoconsumer thinking, that rely on is policy wisdom, prescription, not only instrumental rationality. In Naess the scientific description and prediction. The attribute „deep“ suggests a grade of details of an ecosophy will show many theoretical questioning on purposes and variations due to significant differences norms.[3] The proccess that he advocates concerning not only the „facts‟ of pollution, seeks to move from initial theoretical resources, population, etc. but also value (“deep”) assumptions towards practical priorities.” [2:8] actions – a cyclic method having a deductive Naess‟ precursors were Aldo beginning that strives towards concrete, to Leopold‟s land ethics (1887-1848) and come again to the original point. Rachel Carson‟s environmentalism (1907- However, deep ecology gives primate 1964) that suggested that man should hold to ontology, not ethics, arguing that back from deserting nature for short-term settlement of a mentality preceeds social purposes of civilisation. action. Deep means an ecology asking basic However, ecosophy must be distinguished philosophical questions such as man's from deep ecology movement which, position in the cosmos, mehcanism and although related to it, is theoretically broader meaning of life as a complex and global and practice-driven. In ecosophical phenomenon. At the other hand, Naess was The Holistic Approach to Environment 3(2013)1, 3-14 Page 4 M. Katičić Holism in Deep Ecology and Gaia-Theory: A Contribution to Eco-Geological... aware that ecological movements often have argues be a fundamental human attitude populistic and international character, having towards life. Flourishing of mankind is their actors starting from different possible only if the other species fulfill their philosophies and worldviews, implying full evolutionary potential, too. variety of cultural and social structures that Consequently, deep ecology aim to solve ecological conflicts, depending advocates biospheric egalitarianism, on local context – so more peculiar diversity, social symbiosis, anticlass posture, ecosophies are possible. complexity instead of complication, local The core of Naess‟ concept of any authonomy and decentralisation.[5] possible ecosophy is thesis that all beings The other authors have developed have value in themselves and that somewhat different ecosophies oriented biodiversity and cultural variety are values towards social theory of communication, per se. He calls his personal philosophy transpersonal psychology or religious ecosophy T [4], as being influenced by thought. As being aware of the differences Norwegian movement of living in the open between various deep ecological air (friluftsliv), Mahayana buddhism (all backgrounds, in 1984 Naess has developed world is unity) and Spinozian pantheism. (in cooperation with George Sessions) well- This means understanding an known eight fundamental principles that ecosystem in terms of interdependence, integrate deep ecology movement providing interconnectedness and life network in a platform, distinguishing it from more opposition to anthropocentrism which general ecological movement. Four of them suggests a hierarchy of beings and are highlighted as directly relevant for the instrumentalizing the other species to man's topic: purposes. The underlying goal that Naess 1. The well-being and flourishing of promotes is self-realization – the obsession human and non-human life on Earth have of modern man – however, not only for value in themselves. These values are humanity, but for all living beings. The independent of the usefulness of the non- author distinguishes a narrow egoistic self human world for human purposes. from a broadened, ecological Self. The 2. Richness and diversity of life broadend self can be reached in more ways: forms contribute to the realization of these Naess mostly speaks of extension of values and are also values in themselves. identification. Man has a natural capacity to 3. Humans have no right to reduce identify with the other and should cherish this richness and diversity except to satisfy this. Insofar he manages to identify with vital needs. other human nonhuman beings, he 7. The ideological change is mainly acomplishes an inner integration and a sane, that of appreciating quality (dwelling in extended ego. Thus, Self-realization for all situations of inherent worth) rather than beings!