Çevre Sorunlarinin Çözümü İçin Radikal Bir Öneri: Derin Ekoloji A Radical Suggestion for the Solution of Environmental Problems: Deep Ecology

The environmental problems described as the devastation of natural balance is one of the most important problems in the world today. For the solution of this problem, there are two basic axels mentioned. The first axel whose basic reference is the environmental protecting is an approach suggesting removing the specific pollution that appears as an environmental problem. The most important approach for this is sustainable development approach. The other axel for the solution of the environmental problems is the radical ecology approach suggesting an altogether paradigm change from the current production and consumption forms. Deep ecology is accepted in the radical ecology actions and admits that the man has perceived the nature as a tool and this is the base of environmental problems, and it suggests a biocentric paradigm for the solution. Norwegian Philosopher Arne Naess, the father of Deep ecology, firstly talked about the deep-shallow ecology in “the conference about the future of the third world” in Bukres in 1972. In his article published in 1973 “The Shallow and the Deep, Long-Range Ecology Movements: A Summary”, he brought up the differences between the deep and shallow ecologies and determined the principles of deep ecology, and in his article published in 1986 “The Deep Ecological Movement: Some Philosophical Aspects”, he explained these principles in details. This article in which the differences between the deep and shallow approaches to the basic environmental problems were expressed is very important for summarizing the basic arguments of deep ecologists and bringing up the perspectives developed on the sources of environmental problems. Naess was considering the shallow ecology as protective-environmental action developed for the health and welfare of people in developed countries and thinking that there is a struggle against pollution and running out of sources under the shallow ecology concept. Also, the shallow ecology has intensified on the first effects of environmental crisis. The shallow ecology considered to have a human centered opinion has thought the nature as a lifeless thing and has been giving the man the right of ruling the nature. It gives the value of a tool to the nature. So, the shallow ecology has been considered as a type of “intellectual despotism”. Yet, the deep ecology has believed the need of deep changes. As mentioned, the deep ecology refuses the human centered dualism separating nature and man, and considers man and nature as a whole. According to it, nature isn’t the gathering of things independent from each other, but actions net attached to each other. According to it, there is a value in the nature without man. In this respect, man is the only one part of life net. Deep ecology approach has an approach of ecocentric (biocentric). The protection of nature and the diversity in the nature is based on the nature’s own value not the benefit it gives to humanity. It is obligatory to protect the goodness of the world without man beside the goodness of humanity. The relationship between man and nature has to be ethical and esthetical instead of economical. The biocentric deep ecology needs a new viewpoint that man isn’t separated from the nature or over it but in it. This function has been met by Gaia hypothesis that identifies the earth as not a settlement place but as a living organism and living forms that