This work examines the representations of the Perennial Philosophy in the literature of the Deep Ecology movement, and the negative response of critics to the Self-realisation approach. It then goes on to suggest that a deeper engagement with the nondualistic doctrines Naess embraced could lift environmental philosophy out of the Cartesian framework in which it appears to be bogged down. Deep Ecology has been accused of being politically ineffective, and letting down the environmental movement, because it remains insufficiently engaged with debates concerning power, class, sex, and other hegemonies that occupy the minds of social ecologists, ecofeminists, and cultural studies theorists. I argue that Deep Ecology is not as ineffective as detractors claim, but that it remains philosophically undeveloped, and has not provided sound foundations for environmental ethics. The qualified nondualism I advance, based on Ved??nta, the work of David Bohm, and (to a lesser extent) Platonic thought, treats cosmos, society and the individual as intelligent creative systems in which the interrelated parts are expressions of a vital generative order to which each is actively related. The Self is a mirror of the cosmos, engaged in the process of becoming a more complete reflection of the totality. In all of this the nature of consciousness as vast creative intelligence is paramount, and freedom dominates the entire process from beginning to end. This thesis offers an opportunity to rethink ideas of value, moral considerability, and the nature of the empirical self, from a nondualistic perspective. It proposes that "intrinsic unity" might replace the community as the foundational moral concept for environmental ethics. In the process, emphasis shifts away from the objective sphere and settles firmly on the thinker and thought. Following Bohm and Krishnamurti, I argue that conditioned thought is the only barrier to (inner) freedom and creativity. Most important, the metaphysics of nondualism privileges processes of universal Self-realisation, and reveals the limitations of the empirical self. Understanding thought as a process then becomes something of a moral imperative.

This work examines the representations of the Perennial Philosophy in the literature of the Deep Ecology movement, and the negative response of critics to the Self-realisation approach. It then goes on to suggest that a deeper engagement with the nondualistic doctrines Naess embraced could lift environmental philosophy out of the Cartesian framework in which it appears to be bogged down. Deep Ecology has been accused of being politically ineffective, and letting down the environmental movement, because it remains insufficiently engaged with debates concerning power, class, sex, and other hegemonies that occupy the minds of social ecologists, ecofeminists, and cultural studies theorists. I argue that Deep Ecology is not as ineffective as detractors claim, but that it remains philosophically undeveloped, and has not provided sound foundations for environmental ethics. The qualified nondualism I advance, based on Ved??nta, the work of David Bohm, and (to a lesser extent) Platonic thought, treats cosmos, society and the individual as intelligent creative systems in which the interrelated parts are expressions of a vital generative order to which each is actively related. The Self is a mirror of the cosmos, engaged in the process of becoming a more complete reflection of the totality. In all of this the nature of consciousness as vast creative intelligence is paramount, and freedom dominates the entire process from beginning to end. This thesis offers an opportunity to rethink ideas of value, moral considerability, and the nature of the empirical self, from a nondualistic perspective. It proposes that "intrinsic unity" might replace the community as the foundational moral concept for environmental ethics. In the process, emphasis shifts away from the objective sphere and settles firmly on the thinker and thought. Following Bohm and Krishnamurti, I argue that conditioned thought is the only barrier to (inner) freedom and creativity. Most important, the metaphysics of nondualism privileges processes of universal Self-realisation, and reveals the limitations of the empirical self. Understanding thought as a process then becomes something of a moral imperative.

Title from PDF of title page. / Document formatted into pages; contains 90 pages. / Thesis (M.A.)--University of South Florida, 2003. / Includes bibliographical references. / Text (Electronic thesis) in PDF format. / ABSTRACT: This thesis examines the connections between Arne Naess's Deep Ecology and Martin Heidegger's Phenomenology. The latter provides a philosophical basis for the former. Martin Heidegger's critique of traditional metaphysics and his call for an "event" ontology that is deeper than the traditional substance ontology opens a philosophical space in which a different conception of what it is to be emerges. Heidegger's view of humans also provides a basis for the wider and deeper conception of self Arne Naess seeks: one that gets rid of the presupposition that human beings are isolated subjects embedded in a framework of objects distinct from them. Both Heidegger and Naess illustrate how the substance-ontological dogma affects human culture, encouraging humans to live as if they were divorced from their environmental surroundings. / ABSTRACT: When humans live according to an atomistic conception of themselves as independent from their context, alienation results, not only from each other, and not only of humans from the surrounding environment, but from themselves as well. This thesis focuses on Heidegger's employment of the conception of poiesis or self-bringing-forth as clarifying the "root" of such ecosystemic processes as growth, maturation, reproduction, and death. Thus, Heidegger's call to phenomenology -- "to the things themselves" -- is a call away from the objectifying dichotomies through which substance ontology articulates the world into isolated components. / ABSTRACT: It is the purpose of this thesis to demonstrate not only the connections between the later Heidegger and Naess, but also to argue in favor of their claims that traditional philosophical perspectives regarding humans, the environment, and ethics need to be re-appropriated in a new way in order to avoid further ecological degradation and provide for the health and well being of the future generations that will inevitably inherit the effects of our present actions. / System requirements: World Wide Web browser and PDF reader. / Mode of access: World Wide Web.

The planet is in a dismal environmental state. This state may be remedied by way of an integrated approach based on a holistic vision. This research examines which ecological ideology best suits current conditions for humans to re-examine their metaphysical understanding of nature; how we can better motivate people to embrace a more intrinsic ecological ideology; and finally, how we can motivate people to be active participants in their chosen ideology. I will attempt to show that Deep Ecology is the most suitable ecosophy (ecological philosophy) to embrace; in doing so I will look at how Oriental and occidental religion and philosophy altered (and continues to alter) the way we perceive nature. I will show how destructive, but also caring and constructive, humanity can be when interacting with the environment. The Deep Ecological and Shallow Ecological principles will be look at, as well as criticism and counter-criticism of these ecosophies. KEY TERMS: Deep Ecology, Shallow Ecology, anthropocentrism, ecocentrism, extrinsic values, intrinsic values, motivational drive, ecosophy © University / Philosophy, Practical and Systematic Theology / M.A. (Philosophy)