EVALUATION OF DEEP ECOLOGY MOVEMENT ASSUMPTIONS IN MANAGEMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CRISES

Deep ecology is a philosophical thought that does not separate humans from the nature in which they live, that considers humans and nature as equal, and does not accept the superiority of humans over nature. It is also characterized as a movement with a high spiritual dimension, as it treats nature and humans as "one and whole". The aim of this study is what will be the perspective and effect of this philosophical thought, which has very sharp and clear lines in its view of human, nature, society, state, hierarchy and consumption, in the solution of environmental crises. For this purpose, it is important to try to examine the assumptions of deep ecology theoretically one by one. In this context, deep ecology treats nature and other living things in nature as pieces of a puzzle that complement each other rather than as servants in front of human beings, does not accept a hierarchical structure, emphasizes the fragmented state of power, and supports a pluralistic structure dominated by cultural and social diversity and cooperation. With the basic philosophy of protecting the diversity in nature, the prevailing opinion is that human beings should be content with what they can survive and definitely refuse to consume more than they need. It is underlined that the end of the road will lead to the search for new resources, based on the understanding that more consumption necessitates more production, that each production destroys the raw materials that exist in nature and consumes limited and finite resources. Thus the search for new resources is one of the most important factors of environmental destruction. It has been tried to examine how these views put forward by the deep ecology movement, which has very sharp lines, will have an effect on the cause or result of today's environmental crises, through the assumptions of this thought. It would not be a mistake to state that consumption and the perception of consumption are the main cause of today's environmental crises. It does not seem possible to eliminate environmental threats as long as the perception that sees human beings as a being for consumption by keeping them separate and superior to other living things in nature is not abandoned.

PDF

___

Bramwell, A. (1994). The Fading of the Greens: The Decline of Environmental Politics ın the West, Yale University Press.
Capra, F. (1995). Deep Ecology a New Paradigm, Deep Ecology for the Twenty-First Century, (Edited by George Sessions), Shambhala Publications, 19-25.
Des Jardins J. R. (2006). Çevre Etiği, [Environmental Ethics], (Translated by Ruşen Keleş), İmge Publishing House.
Demirer, G., Torunoğlu, E., & Duran, M. (1997). Radikal Ekolojik Akımlar Üzerine Düşünceler, Ve Kirlendi Dünya, Reflections on Radical Ecological Currents, And Dirty World, Editor: F. Başkaya, Öteki Publications.
Eray Sarıtas, Ş. (2020). Yeni Paradigma Tartışmaları Ekseninde Derin Ekoloji, Deep Ecology in the Context of New-Paradigm Debates, Journal of Contemporary Local Governments, Editor: Kemal Görmez, 29(3), 99-115.
Görmez, K. (2020). Çevre Sorunları, Environmental Issues, 5th Edition, Nobel Publishing House.
İmga, O. (2006). Deep Ecological Approach as a view excluding Dominant Paradigm to the Global Environmental Crisis. Süleyman Demirel University Journal of Social Sciences Institute 2(4), 84-97, https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/215648 22.01.2022
Kaya,Y., & Bıckı, D. (2006). The ‘Sustainablity’ Argument and The Objection of ‘Deep Ecology’. Journal of Gazi University Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, 8(3), 231-249. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/287551 11.12.2021
Keles, I., Ozkan Sancak, H., & Metin, H. (2005). Çevre Kalkınma ve Etik, -Environmental Development and Ethics, Birlik Printing.
Luke, T. (2003). The Dreams of Deep Ecology, Telos, 76, Summer 1988.
Mellor, M. (1993). Breaking Borders: Toward a Feminist, Green Socialism Sınırları Yıkmak: Feminist, Yeşil Bir Sosyalizme Doğru, Ayrıntı Publishing.
Naess, A. (1994). Fundamentals of Deep Ecology, Deep Ecology, (Compiled by Günseli Tamkoç, Ege Publishing.
Naess, A. (1995a). The Shallow and the Deep, Long-Range Ecology Movements a Summery, Deep Ecology for the Twenty-First Century, (Edited by George Sessions), Boston& London, Shambhala Publications, 151- 156.
Naess, A. (1995b). Self-Realization: An Ecological Approach to Being in the World, Deep Ecology for the Twenty First Century, (Edited by George Sessions), Shambhala Publications, 225-239.
Naess A. (1995c). The Deep Ecological Movement Some Philosophical Aspects, Deep Ecology for the Twenty First Century, (Edited by George Sessions), Shambhala Publications, 64-84
Önder, T. (2003). Ekoloji, Toplum ve Siyaset, Ecology, Society and Politics, Odak Publishing.
Özer, M. A. (2001). Derin Ekoloji, Deep Ecology, Contemporary Local Governments, 10(4), 61-79.
Pepper, D. (1999). Modern Environmentalism: An Introduction, Routledge.
Tamkoc, G. (1994). Derin Ekolojinin Genel Çizgileri, General Lines of Deep Ecology, Deep Ecology, (Compiled by Günseli Tamkoç), Ege Publishing.
Ünder, H. (1996). Çevre Felsefesi, Environmental Philosophy, Doruk Publishing.
Yaylı, H., & Celik, V. (2011). Çevre Sorunlarının Çözümü için Radikal Bir Öneri: Derin Ekoloji, A Radical Proposal for the Solution of Environmental Problems: Deep Ecology, Selcuk University Journal of Social Sciences Institute, 26/2011, 369-377.