Showing posts with label Thoreau. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Thoreau. Show all posts

2021/01/20

알라딘: [전자책] 나의 헨리 데이비드 소로 박홍규

알라딘: [전자책] 나의 헨리 데이비드 소로

나의 헨리 데이비드 소로  epub 
박홍규 (지은이)필맥2013-02-20 


나의 헨리 데이비드 소로






















전자책 미리 읽기  종이책으로 미리보기
종이책
8,000원 7,200원 (마일리지400원) 
전자책정가
4,800원
판매가
4,800원 (종이책 정가 대비 40% 할인)
쿠폰할인가
4,320원 
10% 할인쿠폰 받기 
마일리지
240원(5%) + 144원(멤버십 3%)
+ 5만원이상 구매시 2,000원
세액절감액
220원 (도서구입비 소득공제 대상 및 조건 충족 시) 
Sales Point : 31 
 9.3 100자평(0)리뷰(3)
이 책 어때요?
카드/간편결제 할인무이자 할부
eBook 장바구니 담기
eBook 바로구매
선물하기
보관함 +
배송상품이 아닌 다운로드 받는 디지털상품이며, 프린트가 불가합니다.
이용 안내
다운로드
 iOS APP Android APP PC 크레마

기본정보
제공 파일 : ePub(28.74 MB)
TTS 여부 : 지원 
종이책 페이지수 215쪽, 약 13.9만자, 약 3.4만 단어
가능 기기 : 크레마 그랑데, 크레마 사운드, 크레마 카르타, PC, 아이폰, 아이패드, 안드로이드 폰/탭,E-ink(크레마 터치,크레마 샤인, 페이지원, SNE-60)
ISBN : 9788997751174
주제 분류 
신간알림 신청
eBook > 인문학 > 사상가/인문학자
eBook > 인문학 > 인문 에세이
이벤트

1월 특별 선물! 둘리/피너츠 노트 (이벤트 도서 포함, 국내서.외서 5만원 이상)

오늘의 추천 eBook(일반) + 1월 쿠폰북 (매일 적립금, 10% 쿠폰)

오늘의 추천 eBook(장르) + 1월 쿠폰북 (매일 적립금, 10% 쿠폰)
책소개미국의 작가이자 철학자인 헨리 데이비드 소로에 대한 평전. 소로를 ‘숲 속에 들어가 살았던 자연주의자 내지 환경보호론자’ 로만 이해하는 것을 비판, 소로를 물질만능주의, 노예제, 전쟁을 야기하는 정의롭지 못한 지배질서에 항거한 반항아이자 자유인으로 그리며 그의 삶과 저작을 종합적으로 서술한다.
목차
머리말
인용에 대해
1. 내 친구 소로
2. 시대와 청년 소로
3. 소로의 자연
4. 소로의 저항과 희망
5. 소로가 끼친 영향
맺음말

책속에서
《윌든》을 읽고서 전원생활을 꿈꾸게 되어 귀농했다는 사람들은 《월든》을 무슨 성경인 것처럼, 소로를 무슨 성인인 것처럼 떠받드는 경향이 있다. 그러나 소로는 귀농은커녕 제멋대로 호숫가에 통나무집을 짓고 대략 2년 정도 건들건들 놀았을 뿐이다. 그 기간에 그는 심심해지면 마을에 가서 놀았고, 세금을 내지 않아 감옥에 갇히기도 했다. 그가 숲 속 호숫가로 잠시 은둔한 이유는 농촌생활을 동경해서도 아니었고, 농사짓는 일을 무슨 대단하고 특별한 일로 여겨서도 아니었다. 돈독이 오른 사람들이 돈벌이에 미치는 것밖에 달리 사는 방법이 없다고들 하는 통에 화가 나서 그렇지 않다는 것을 보여주기 위해서였다. 죽어라 일에 매달리는 것을 싫어한 그는 일주일에 엿새 일하고 하루 쉴 게 아니라 하루 일하고 엿새 놀자고 말하기도 했다. 물론 그렇게 말한 것도 그가 숲으로 간 행위와 마찬가지로 하나의 실험, 하나의 모험일 뿐이었다. 그에게 중요한 것은 물질만능주의에서 벗어나 늘 정신적인 여유를 갖고 살아가는 ‘멋대로의 삶’이었다. - p.24~25 중에서  접기
1844년 4월에 소로는 낚시를 하고 고기를 굽다가 숲에 불을 냈다. 소로는 마을로 지원을 요청하러 갔다가 현장으로 돌아가지 않고 가까운 언덕 위에 올라가 숲이 불타고 사람들이 불을 끄는 모습을 바라보았다. 그는 불을 끄는 사람들이 보여준 넘치는 에너지의 아름다움이 숲의 소멸을 충분히 보상했다는 식으로 일기를 썼다. 함께 불을 낸 사람이 마을 유력자의 아들이어서 구속은 면했다. 이 사건 이후 그는 ‘숲을 태운 자’라고 불렸다. - p.96 중에서  접기
저자 및 역자소개
박홍규 (지은이) 
저자파일
 
최고의 작품 투표
 
신간알림 신청

1952년 경북 구미에서 태어나 영남대학교 법학과와 같은 대학원을 졸업하고 일본 오사카시립대학에서 법학 박사학 위를 받았다. 미국 하버드대학 법대·영국 노팅엄대학 법대·독일 프랑크푸르트대학에서 연구하고, 일본 오사카대학·고베대학·리쓰메이칸대학에서 강의했다. 현재 영남대학교 명예교수로 재직하고 있으며, 노동법을 전공한 진보적인 법학자로 전공뿐만 아니라 정보사회에서 절실히 필요한 인문·예술학의 부활을 꿈꾸며 왕성한 저술 활동을 펼치고 있다. 민주주의 법학연구회 회장을 지냈으며 전공인 노동법 외에 헌법과 사법 개혁에 관한 책을 썼다. 1... 더보기
최근작 : <혼돈의 시대, 리더의 길>,<인문학의 거짓말 두 번째 이야기>,<저항하는 지성, 고야> … 총 217종 (모두보기)
출판사 제공 책소개
19세기 미국의 작가이자 철학자인 헨리 데이비드 소로(Henry David Thoreau, 1817~ 1862)에 대한 평전이다. 숲 속 생활 체험기인 《월든》을 비롯한 소로의 일부 저작은 그동안 국내에서 여러 차례 번역, 출간되어 널리 읽혔지만 소로에 대한 평전은 이 책이 국내에서 처음이다. 이 책의 지은이는 소로를 ‘숲 속에 들어가 살았던 자연주의자 내지 환경보호론자’ 정도로만 이해하고 마는 것은 잘못이라고 지적한다. 소로는 물질만능주의, 노예제, 전쟁을 야기하는 정의롭지 못한 지배질서에 항거한 반항아이자 자유인이었다는 것이다. 이 책은 소로의 삶과 저작에 대한 종합적인 이해에 도움을 준다.

평전 작가로서 독보적인 위상을 굳히고 있는 영남대 박홍규 교수가 이번에는 《월든》의 저자인 헨리 데이비드 소로(Henry David Thoreau)에 대한 평전을 내놓았다. 지은이 박 교수는 《월든》을 ‘전원생활 기록’이나 ‘자연예찬의 책’ 정도로만 간주하고 소로를 자연주의자나 환경보호론자 정도로만 이해하고 마는 우리의 독서풍토에 이의를 제기하고 싶었다고 한다. 《월든》의 보다 중요한 메시지는 물질문명에 의해 타락한 인간사회에 대한 비판이고, 소로는 인간성을 억압하는 권력과 제도의 개혁을 추구한 저항의 사상가이자 실천가였다는 것이다.

사실 소로가 작품 《월든》의 배경인 미국 매사추세츠 주 콩코드 시 인근 숲 속의 월든 호숫가에서 오두막을 짓고 거기서 생활한 기간은 2년 2개월여에 지나지 않았고, 그 기간 중에도 종종 마을로 내려가 사람들과 세상일에 대해 대화를 나누었다. 게다가 그는 당대 미국사회의 최대 쟁점이었던 노예제 문제에 대해 누구보다도 철저한 노예제 폐지론자의 입장에서 강연도 하고, 글도 쓰고, 심지어는 도망치는 흑인노예를 직접 돕기도 했다. 이 책에서 부각되는 이런 사실들은 소로가 은둔자이기는커녕 현실비판에 적극적으로 나선 지식인이었음을 보여준다.

죽은 뒤에도 오랫동안 그다지 주목을 받지 못했던 소로가 20세기 들어 재평가되면서 주목받게 된 과정도 흥미로운 동시에 소로의 진면목이 어디에 있는지를 알게 해준다. 지은이에 따르면 소로는 자신의 나라인 미국이 아닌 외국에서 먼저 재평가되기 시작했고, 특히 “소로를 스타로 만드는 데 처음으로 기여한 외국인”은 러시아의 작가인 레오 톨스토이였다. 톨스토이는 1900년경에 우연히 소로의 《시민저항》을 읽었고, 이 글에 감동을 받은 그는 “미국인은 왜 국가를 거부하는 모범을 보인 소로의 말에는 귀를 기울이지 않고 백만장자나 장군 등의 말에만 귀를 기울이느냐”고 물었다고 한다. 또한 인도의 민족운동 지도자인 마하트마 간디는 소로의 《시민저항》을 언제나 곁에 두고 읽었다고 하고, 미국의 흑인인권 운동 지도자인 마틴 루서 킹도 《시민저항》에 표현된 저항사상의 영향을 받았다.

이어 보수화의 기류가 지배적이었던 1970년대 미국에서는 소로가 거의 망각됐지만 1980년대 이후 자연주의, 생태주의가 세를 얻게 되면서 소로가 자연문학(Nature Writing)의 선구자로 부활했고, 우리나라에서도 1990년대 이후에 소로의 책을 찾아 읽는 독자가 크게 늘어났다. 그러나 이렇게 부활한 소로의 모습은 그 전과 달리 자연주의자의 색채가 강한 반면에 정의롭지 못한 기존질서에 맞섰던 저항적 자유인의 이미지는 탈색된 것이라는 점에서 “마치 박제된 표본 같은 느낌을 준다”고 지은이는 지적한다. 그래서 지은이는 ‘반문명의 자연인 소로’도 중요하지만 ‘반체제의 자유인 소로’를 보지 않고는 소로를 제대로 이해할 수가 없다고 말한다.
이런 관점에서 지은이는 소로의 삶을 살펴보고 그가 남긴 저작의 주요 내용과 의미를 친절하게 설명함으로써 ‘소로 읽기’의 길안내를 해준다. 이 책을 읽다보면 소로의 저작을 다시 읽어보고 싶은 충동을 느끼게 된다. 그동안 소로를 알지 못했던 사람이라면 소로의 저작을 읽기에 앞서 이 책을 먼저 읽으면 ‘보다 깊이 있는 소로 읽기’에 도움을 받을 것으로 여겨진다. 지은이는 자신이 관심을 두는 소로의 측면은 그가 관습과 제도에 얽매이지 않고 ‘멋대로 살았다’는 측면이라면서 “나는 소로를 위인이나 영웅이 아니라 ‘멋대로’ 산 수많은 인간들 가운데 한 사람으로 소개하고 싶을 뿐이다. 여러분 중 이미 ‘멋대로’ 살고 있거나 앞으로 ‘멋대로’ 살기를 원하는 사람이 있어 이 책을 읽고 소로를 친구로 삼게 된다면 그것으로 충분하리라”라고 말한다. 소로가 부쩍 친근하게 느껴진다. 접기
북플 bookple
이 책의 마니아가 남긴 글
친구가 남긴 글
내가 남긴 글
친구가 남긴 글이 아직 없습니다.
마니아 읽고 싶어요 (2) 읽고 있어요 (0) 읽었어요 (4) 
이 책 어때요?
구매자
분포
0% 10대 0%
0% 20대 0%
25.0% 30대 8.3%
8.3% 40대 33.3%
0% 50대 25.0%
0% 60대 0%
여성 남성
100자평
    
 
등록
마이페이퍼 > 마이페이퍼
스포일러 포함 글 작성 유의사항 
구매자 (0)
전체 (0)
공감순 
등록된 구매자평이 없습니다.
마이리뷰
구매자 (2)
전체 (3)
리뷰쓰기
공감순 
     
자기 자신의 삶에 충실한 소로를 기억하며... 새창으로 보기 구매
사실 신문에 소로의 책이 소개되기까지 소로는 나에게 낯선 존재였다.

늘 그렇지만 책을 선택하고 만족스런 책을 만나기가 쉽지 않다. 하지만 이 책에서

내 삶의 한 방향을 제시해줄 수 있는 인물을 만났다.

자기 자신의 완성을 위해서 애쓴 소로를

어느 한 쪽에 치우치지 않고 전체를 보고 이야기하는 박홍규 선생님의 글 속에서

소로를 향한 애정을 키울 수 있었다.

단지, 소주제들의 집합으로 이루어진 글에서 다소 반복적인 느낌이 들지만

소주제를 끌고 나가기 위한 어쩔 수 없는 선택이리라.

이 책을 지인에게 소개해줬더니 몇시간 후에 가슴 뛰며 책을 읽은 것이 얼마만이냐며

밤늦게 문자가 들어왔다.

또 한 지인은 이미 소로에 대해 심취해 있었고

책 읽는 모임에서 소로를 하자고 했더니 만면에 웃음이 ....

 

- 접기
juji 2008-03-22 공감(2) 댓글(0)
Thanks to
 
공감
     
<월든>의 소로가 그런 사람이었어? 새창으로 보기 구매
<월든>의 소로가 그런 사람이었어?

박홍규, <나의 헨리 데이비드 소로>, 필맥, 2008.



돌아가고 싶어 하는 건 비단 영화 속의 그 인간만도 아니고 내 나이쯤 되는 사람들이면 대부분 그럴 것이다. 물론 잘 나가는 인간들이야 여전히 앞만 보고 가느라 정신없을 터이니 귀환희망족(?) 부류에서 빼드려야겠다.
그렇게 돌아가고 싶은 사람들은 돌아가는 데 있어서 지침이 될 선생을 찾았다. 나 역시 열심히 찾아 다녔다. 몸은 빼고 머리로만. 그렇게 대리 만족만 했다. 그래도 그게 하나의 큰 경향이었다. 특히 웰빙이니 귀농이니 마음 수련이니 하는 단어가 강아지 입에 물린 핸드폰 마냥 낯설지 않을 만큼 생태주의가 상업화된 2008년 대한민국에선 더욱더. 그래서 10년 전쯤부터 니어링이니 타샤 튜터 같은 사람들을 많이 찾았다. 소로 역시 예외는 아니다 싶었다. 아니 소로가 원조처럼 보였다. 니어링 부부나 타샤 투터보다 앞선 세대에 ‘월든’ 숲 속에서 생활했던 사람이니.
그래서 소로를 환경보호론자, 동식물연구가, 박물학자, 시인, 금욕주의자 등으로 묘사하기도 했단다. 근데 내가 좋아하는 이단자 박홍규가 이런 시각을 완전히 비틀며 소로에 대한 평전을 냈단다. 호기심. 나는 박홍규의 그 올바른 비틀기를 좋아하니까 당연히 읽어야지. 그래 놓고 책을 사긴 했는데 처박아 두었다. 몸이 안 따라줘서 그랬다.
방학을 하니까 그래도 여유가 생겨 이 책을 들었다. 역시 박홍규. 물론 오버 하는 느낌이 전혀 없진 않지만 그래도 재미있다. 소로가 살아있는 모습으로 다가 온다.
박홍규의 주장을 간단히 정리하면 그동안 소로가 한국에는 너무 일면적으로 알려져 왔다는 것. <월든>만 많이 소개되고 <시민저항>은 별로 소개되지 않은 관계로 ‘자연’만 알려지고 그의 ‘저항’ 특히 폭력적 저항은 거의 알려지지 않았다는 것이다. 알려져도 그렇게 ‘생태주의 운동’과 ‘근원적 민주주의’적인 면만 주목을 받았을 뿐, 그의 반체제적 성향은 그리 알려지지 않았다는 것이다. 그러니 소로는 禪僧같은 사람이 아니라고 한다. 오히려 한마디로 정의하면 ‘제멋대로 살기의 달인’이라고 한다.
재미있는 규정이다. 과격한 규정 같아 보이기도 한다. 그러나 책을 찬찬히 읽어보면 그것이 결코 헛말이 아님을 알게 된다. 확실히 우린 지금까지 소로를 잘못 본 것 같다. 웰빙이니 자연이니 하는 시대 조류에 맞게 그를 요리해서 먹었을 뿐이다. 그러니 그는 성자이기는 커녕 반역자이고 성인이 아니라 무법자라는 것이다.
이러면 거부감이 드는가. 아니다. 나는 이런 규정이 좋다. 나의 성격 결함? 설마. 소로가 그때 그렇게 살았던 것은 당시 미국 사회가 완전히 ‘돈에 미쳐 돌아가는 세상’ 그 속의 이웃들은 ‘돈에 미쳐 싸우는 짐승’ 같았기 때문에 소로가 그렇게 그 틀을 벗어나 제멋대로 살았던 것이다. ‘돈에 미쳐’라는 대목은 2008년 한국사회를 닮았다. 그러니 땡기는 것 아니겠는가. 이런 세태에 소로는 미리부터 경고했다.
“생계를 위해 인생의 대부분을 소비하는 인간만큼 치명적인 실패자는 없다”고. 맞는 말이다. 예전에 공선옥의 글에서 읽은 ‘생존 이상의 부에 연연해하지 말 것’과 상통한다. 예전엔 말로만 이해했는데 요즘은 제법 몸으로 이해한다. 그렇게 살아질 것 같다.
그런 소로이건만 사람들은 그를 전원생활의 모범으로 생각하기까지 했다. 고급 승용차에 골프채를 싣고 다니면서 경치 좋은 변두리에 별장 지어 놓고 사는 사람들까지 ‘소로’를 입에 올리고 있으니 박홍규가 열 받을 만도 했겠다.
책 마무리에서 그가 강조하는 바도 바로 그것이다. “고급 아파트, 고급 승용차, 골프, 별장, 성형수술, 고급 브랜드, 사치스러운 관광여행, 상업적인 텔레비전 프로그램, 대중을 현혹하는 저급한 공연물 등 모든 천박한 사치와 허영 그리고 퇴폐를 당장 거부해야 한다. 그 모든 것을 등지고 시골이나 산속으로 들어가는 것도 괜찮다. 다만 그런 것들 가운데 일부를 갖고 가서 안락한 전원생활을 하는 것은 위선이며 해악을 초래한다. 이 책의 결론은 간단하다. 모든 물질문명을 거부할 수는 없고 그럴 필요도 없지만 물질문명의 지배를 받게 되지 않을 정도로는 그것을 거부해야 인간의 순수함을 되찾을 수 있다는 것이다.”

그래야 자유다. 돈이 많아야 자유가 아니라 그 돈을 추구하는 미친 풍토에서 벗어날 때 자유다. 그렇게 해서 다가간 자연이 진짜 자연이다. 이익을 만들어 내는 데에 활용하는 자연은 이미 자연이 아니다. 그건 인간이 저지른 야만에 이용되는 대상일 뿐이다.
아나키스트 박홍규. 예전에 그의 책에서 자유, 자연, 자치의 기치를 읽었다. 이번 소로 평전에서도 그 가치관이 녹아 있다.
그런데도 사람들은 소로를 왜곡했다. 은둔 성자처럼. 하지만 알고 보면 그게 아니다. 안 그래도 나 역시 예전에 <월든>을 읽으며 의문스럽긴 했다. 그가 월든 숲에서 지낸 기간이 불과 2년이다. 그 2년 생활로 삶을 마친 게 아니다. 다시 도시에 와서 살았다. 근데 이 대목에서 황당한 건 그가 월든 생활로 영양실조에 걸렸고, 가족의 도움이 없었다면 얼마 뒤에 죽었을 지도 모른다는 대목이다. 그렇게도 사람들이 칭송하는 월든 숲에서의 생활이 남긴 게 그런 것이었나. 암튼 2년 만에 그 숲 생활을 정리했다는 것을 보면 그가 무슨 은둔 성자가 아닌 것만큼은 분명하다. 세상 더럽다고 생각하고 다른 방식의 삶을 보여주러 잠시 숲 생활을 했을 뿐인 것 같다. 왜곡 과장하지 말지어다.
또한 내가 놀란 것은 <존 브라운 대장을 위한 변호>에 나온다는 그의 폭력저항에 대한 동의 부분이다. 흔히 간디도 이 소로의 영향을 받았다고 했는데, 소로가 폭력저항까지 옹호했다니 전혀 새롭게 다가왔다.
하긴 사람은 변한다. 처음엔 비폭력 저항을 내세우다가도 어떤 극한 상황에 대한 체험으로 그렇게 바뀔 수도 있었을 것이다.
처음 그의 저항 방법은 불복종이다. 인두세 납부 거부였다. 노예제도와 멕시코 전쟁에 반대한다는 이유, 즉 정부가 그런 못된 짓을 하는 데 도움이 되게 세금을 낼 수 없다는 것이다. 그렇게 나쁜 곳에 쓰일 게 뻔한데도 세금을 내는 것은 어쩌면 공범이 된다는 논리다. 그러니 납세 거부. 참 마음에 든다. 나도 지금 그렇게 하고 싶다. 하지만 못한다.
실제 그로 인해 투옥되기까지도 했다. 물론 친척이 세금을 대납하는 바람에 감옥 체험은 이틀 만에 끝났다고 하니 좀 싱겁긴 했다. 그런 그가 어떤 계기로 폭력저항에도 긍정성을 부여했다고 한다.
암튼 전반적으로 그는 그 사회의 이단아였음은 분명하다. 당시 기득권자들은 그를 심한 꼴통으로 보았음이 틀림없다. 그래서 어쩌면 지금까지도 울림이 큰 것일지도 모른다.
물론 박홍규가 비틀어 본 것 말고, 예전부터 소로를 논하던 관점도 모두 잘못된 것은 아니다. ‘자발적 빈곤’을 주장한 점. ‘가장 좋은 정부는 가장 일을 적게 하는 정부’라는 주장. ‘오늘날 철학교수는 있지만 철학자는 없다’는 말.
그렇다고 단순히 사회개혁운동가로 보기엔 무리가 있다. 그는 제도의 완성이 아니라 보다 근본적인 변화 즉 새로운 인간상의 창조를 주장했기 때문이다. 그는 정의와 자유가 인간의 선량함에 근거를 둔 것이므로 끝내는 승리한다고 믿었다는 것이다. 반은 공감하고 반은 부정하고 싶다. 제도 개선만으로 안 되는 것은 나 역시 전적으로 공감한다. 그러나 새로운 인간상 창조의 방법에 대해서는 일단 구체적이지 않으므로 보류 입장을 취하겠다.
그럼에도 그의 좌충우돌은 상당히 선구적인 작업이었음을 인정한다. 본받고 싶지만 나는 용기가 없어 그러지 못한다. 부럽다.
솔직히 이런 사람을 보면 요즘 나는 일단 그의 결혼 유무와 자식이 있나 없나부터 따지고 본다. 역시나. 그는 미혼이었다. 홀몸이었다는 말이다. 그러니 그런 이단아 짓기 가능했지 싶다.
그렇다고 그가 결혼할 마음이 없었던 것은 아닌 모양이다. 퇴짜를 맞은 경험도 있다. 암튼 이런 사람을 보면 그의 처지와 나의 처지가 다름을 일단 설정할 수밖에 없다. 그러면서도 그가 말하고자 했던 알갱이는 챙기고 싶다.
“생계 이상의 돈벌이에 연연하지 말고 자유인이 될 것. 그것은 자연과 함께 할 수 있을 것. 그 자연 역시 돈벌이와 관련 없이 자연 그대로의 자연일 것.” 그것을 방해하는 제도에 대해서는 싸울 것. 하지만 그 싸움도 단순히 제도 개선이 아니라 인간의 궁극적 변화를 지향하는 것이 되어야 할 것.
나도 숲에 들어가 살고 싶다. 돌아가고 싶다.
- 접기
샬롬 2008-11-11 공감(0) 댓글(0)
Thanks to
 
공감

Posted by at
Labels: ,

2021/01/03

Exile Spirit - Tricycle: The Buddhist Review

Exile Spirit - Tricycle: The Buddhist Review


Exile Spirit

A Profile of Thanissaro Bhikkhu and the Metta Forest MonasteryBy Barbara RoetherWINTER 1995

DARKNESS CLIMBS THE WILD SAGEBRUSH SLOPES around the Metta Forest Monastery northeast of San Diego. Coyotes bark. In a leveled clearing, light spills out from a simple wooden shrine. Inside all is quiet except for a single voice—pausing . . . going on, pausing . . . going on again.The Arhat Kalika, from Cave 17, Dunhuang, Tang Dynasty, 9th c. C.E., ink on paper, courtesy of The Trustees of The British Museum.



In clear and certain tones, the voice of Thanissaro Bhikkhu leads a guided meditation for a handful of people sitting Thai-style on their ankles under the gaze of a huge golden Buddha. There are three young men from the outskirts of Los Angeles, a lone schoolteacher from Alaska, a Thai family, and several women and men.

“We look for true happiness and think about where true happiness would be found. Breath anchors us in the present, but even there we find there is change, so we have to dig deeper. The breath and one’s inner happiness are the only real things to rely on. Why wouldn’t you want something you can rely on to be happy? So think about the breath—how the breath is shallow or deep, fast or slow—and concentrate on getting to know the breath.”

It is the voice of a farmer selling his crop to the shipper next door, smoothly arguing for the quality and ripeness of his produce. It’s a voice that recalls Thoreau. Economy, confidence, simplicity, reason. Indeed, it is Thoreau whom Thanissaro identities as one of his earliest heroes.

Like Thoreau, Thanissaro Bhikkhu has founded a kind of Walden as the Abbot of the Metta Forest Monastery near San Diego, the first and only Thai forest tradition monastery in this country. Just as the utopian movement in America was sparked by the advent of the industrial revolution, the forest tradition of Theravada Buddhism was developed in Thailand around the tum of the century by Ajahn Mun Bhuridatto in reaction to the increasing urbanization of the Buddhist monastic communities there. Forest monks abandoned the heavy social demands of the city and devoted themselves to meditation instead.

FROM AN ELGHT-LANE FREEWAY the roads grow increasingly narrow. A country road meanders through orchards heavy with lemons and oranges, then turns to dirt and climbs into a mountainous landscape of native chaparral thick with wild rosemary and sage. There is something rough in the dusty air, a whiff of something wild from the Mojave that stretches out over the next ridge.

At the entrance to the Metta Forest, there is no gate, no fence. Nor is there really a forest at all, but a lush 40-acre orchard of avocado trees. From the sunstruck clearing where the monastery’s temple building stands, there is a dazzling view, framed by young palm trees and scarlet blooms of proteus. On a ridge off in the distance the white finger of the Mount Palomar telescope points its lens to infinity.

The handful of buildings are built for an outdoor life. Raised platforms for meditation line the outside edges. There are outdoor sinks and kitchens, broad swatches of white rice drying in the sun. Orchard workers in wide straw hats move hoses around, and here and there are the temporary piles of things that signal a work in progress.Thanissaro Bhikkhu.

Thanissaro’s robes are the color of the dirt road. His body is lean and relaxed. As we talk at the long table under the overhanging roof, he explains the orchard, sounding like a farmer: “Sometimes the avocados pay us, and sometimes we pay for them. But they are good trees for meditating under; their shade is thick and it’s always cool underneath.”

As we begin to talk a car pulls up and a large Thai family gets out. They shout greetings to Thanissaro in Thai. “We’re on the pilgrimage route,” he explains.” The local Thai people visit us on family outings, but most come from the John Wayne Dharma Study Group in Ontario [California].” The growing Thai community in the area—professionals, doctors, and bankers—have come to the spreading suburbs around Riverside, California, but the land for Metta Forest was donated by a wealthy patron from Massachusetts in 1991 under the condition that the community would find some monks to run it.

Stretched out under a shady trellis on an old Volkswagen back seat, a lanky young man shifts his long bronzed limbs like a local lizard, glancing up periodically to check out the action. The lounging teenager seems an anomaly until Thanissaro mentions that the Buddhist monastic code, or Vinaya, states that a bhikkhu is never to be left alone with a woman; the teenager is our chaperon. The monastic code shapes the setting here as it does all aspects of Thanissaro’s life.

Thanissaro (Geoffrey DeGraff) was born on Long Island, where his father had a potato farm, though later the family moved to Virginia. His father was an elder in the local Presbyterian Church. He remembers the first time he heard the Four Noble Truths. He was in an airplane over the Pacific Ocean flying back from Asia with his fellow exchange students, several of whom had taken temporary monastic vows in Thailand. In his second year at Oberlin College, a special class in Buddhist meditation was offered, and he began meditating with some seriousness. When he had a chance to go to Asia to teach English, he chose Thailand. That was in 1974.

In Thailand, he found his way to the jungle hermitage of Ajahn Fuang Jutiko. Fuang had been a student of Ajahn Lee, a teacher well known in Thailand and a member of the Dhammayut lineage of the forest tradition. When Ajahn Lee died, everyone expected Ajahn Fuang to take over Asoka Monastery in Bangkok; instead, Fuang slipped away as soon as he could to a fledgling monastery in Rayong. Choosing meditation over administration is the forest way.

Thanissaro writes of that time:


Vlat Dhammasathit had the look of a summer camp down on its luck: three monks living in three small huts, a lean-to where they would eat their meals . . . and a small wooden structure on top of the hill—where I stayed—which had a view of the sea off to the south. Yearly fires swept through the area, preventing trees from taking hold, although the area on the mountain above the monastery was covered with a thick malarial forest.

In essence, it was a poorer version of the very place where we are sitting now: a handful of buildings, a few students, a hideout off the beaten track, a forest—of sorts. And after Fuang’s death, Thanissaro also retreated rather than run Wat Dhammasathit, which by now was firmly established. As he explains, ”Ajahn Fuang said to keep moving; this is not a tradition that works well in big groups.”

“When l first saw Ajahn Fuang,” Thanissaro recounts, “he was smoking a cigarette, and I said, ‘Now what kind of a monk smokes cigarettes?’ Bur there was something about him. He seemed very kind and down-to-earth. I had planned on staying three days; instead, I stayed for three weeks, had my visa renewed, and returned for three months until I contracted malaria and had to leave.

“I came back to the U.S. and thought hard about taking vows. I thought of all the professors I knew who were thinking and writing about Buddhism, but l wanted to do it, not just talk about it. Before I met Ajahn Fuang, I thought: If someone spends their life meditating, what are they going to be like? Are they going to be dull and dried up? But Ajahn Fuang was such a lively, interesting person. Finally I decided, I’ll give it five years, and if it doesn’t work I can always come back. That was in 1976. When I said I wanted to be ordained, Ajahn Fuang made me promise either to succeed in the meditation or die in Thailand. There was to be no equivocating. When he said that, it made me certain. I thought, yes, this is what I want.Metta Forest Monastery, California, courtesy of Barbara Roether.



“In my experience, practicing as a layperson was like looking into a mirror that had a wall of glass blocks in front of it. Living with my teacher was like stripping all the glass blocks away. It was very concentrated one-on­one type of study, which is the essential focus of the forest tradition. Fuang had this uncanny way of mentioning something in passing that was exactly what was coming up in my meditation, even before l told him. I sometimes had the sense that we were merely continuing a relationship from a previous life. By the third year I had become Fuang’s attendant and pretty much stayed with him until the end.”

“In part because of his years living in the jungle humidity, Fuang had a terrible case of psoriasis, and how he handled this sickness made me see what a tough person he was. This is a serious disease in its most extreme cases—fever, weakness, the whole thing. Often it would get so bad that he had to lie on banana leaves because cloth would stick to his skin. When he was very sick he would talk very softly with the accent of southeastern Thailand, where he came from. He would ask for something once, and if you didn’t hear him, he would crawl over and get it himself. So you had to be very quick. Also, you had to be very quiet, so as not to wake him. You did it because it had to be done. He wasn’t always pleasant to be around.”

AJAHN FUANG HAD BEEN orphaned early in his life and had taken vows as the only available means of supporting himself. “I have sometimes thought that if he hadn’t become a monk he would have been a gangster,” says Thanissaro. “He had that kind of roughness. As it turns out, one of his best students in Thailand was a former gangster. If you think about it, some of the same skills are required: a sense of subtlety, roughness, independence. In the forest, you are very much thrown back on your own resources.

“In Thailand, a culture where having family and connections is everything, being an orphan has a special stigma. The fact that I was an American in Thailand, without any real connections, meant that I was in essence an orphan, too.” The intimacy of exiles is often the strongest intimacy of all, and the exile spirit is certainly in keeping with the forest tradition. Thanissaro is firm in his conviction that real dharma practice in any culture, to be successful, must be countercultural. Ajahn Fuang wrote: “Our practice is to go against the stream, against the flow. And where are we going? To the source of the stream. That’s the cause side of the practice. The result side is that we can let go and be completely at ease.”

In Thailand, a country where Buddhism is the national religion, complete with “Monk of the Month” magazines and patrons eager to invest stock in the great Merit Market of the monastic universe, countercultural Buddhism has meant, to a large degree, the forest monk tradition.

What countercultural Buddhism means in America (where any Buddhist tradition is arguably already countercultural) may also have something to do with the forest tradition.

In comparison with some other traditions, which in their current efforts to serve an increasingly middle-class following offer attractive weekend seminars at varying prices on popular subjects like “skillful means” or “practice in daily life,” the forest tradition offers absolutely nothing—and charges nothing for it. What it does offer is not exactly quantifiable: knowledge of the breath through meditation; space for, and instruction in, meditation.

When someone comes to the monastery to practice, Thanissaro gives them a basic lesson in breath meditation and shows them to a place under the trees. Scattered through the orchard are a number of simple wooden platforms: one for sitting and a larger one to pitch a tent on. Around each set is a smooth swept path for walking meditation. Mornings and evenings there is a chanting session and a reaching. The subject is usually breath meditation. The simplicity suggested by such a curriculum, in its refusal to be attractive or compelling, is part of the outlaw flavor of Metta Forest.

What students offer in return for the teachings varies: they have brought rice, ice, and bottled water. In a discreet corner of the shrine room behind the giant Thai Buddha there is a book where one may leave monetary donations, but you must ask for it.

The Vinaya prohibition against the use of money extends to not charging those who come to use the monastery, as well as barring Thanissaro from using money. He has traveled through the modem world in yellow robes without a penny in his pocket (nor even having a pocket), and has often waited long hours for rides that were slow in corning.

“In the beginning I was not that enthusiastic about the rules,” admits Thanissaro. “But then, living in the community, I saw how well designed they were. They not only serve to help and protect the monks, but the people around them as well.” Thanissaro has held to those rules faithfully since his ordination 17 years ago.Two young monks, Hadda, India, c. 3rd-century C.E., stucco, courtesy of Musée Guimet, Paris.

Recently he translated from the Pali the voluminous “Buddhist Monastic Code,” a comprehensive guide to 227 precepts that, along with detailed chapters on dealings with women, clothing, food, and diplomacy, also includes admonitions against eavesdropping, tickling, and stopping in the village to talk of kings, robbers, ministers of state, armies, or scents. But in his introduction Thanissaro suggests the real import of the Vinaya: they are not just “rules” but “qualities developed in the mind and character” of those practicing the dharma. lt is as a way of being in the world that the Vinaya finds its real meaning.

Though the Theravada has been faulted by Other Buddhist schools for not actively attending to the practice of compassion, Thanissaro points out that adhering to the Vinaya and devoting oneself to meditation creates, of necessity, a more compassionate person. The way Theravada monks live, being totally dependent on what is given them, is a situation in which both givers and receivers are able to act with generosity and humility.

THE DAILY GIVING AND RECEIVING OF ALMS is a mark of this practice. Early in the morning, amid the sound of blue jays and laughter, Thai women in black skirts and white blouses squat on the linoleum floor of the kitchen, chatting and drinking instant coffee. Outside a few of the men are smoking cigarettes as they wait for the rice to finish cooking.

This Thai family (one always seems to be in attendance) is overseeing the preparation of the food that we will offer as alms to Thanissaro and a young Thai monk, Path Phai Thita Bho. Wide rice noodles and fish, watermelon, mango and raisins arranged in bright patterns, soup, some salads, whole fruits and biscuits and cookies and flowers, and rice mounded up in elaborate aluminum serving bowls.

When the monks are spotted on the path between the rows of avocado trees we line up with our offering of rice, and we bow. The monks stop in front of each person as they place their portion of rice into the metal alms bowls (rice has become the symbolic offering of all the foods). Then the two monks turn deliberately, without hurrying, and disappear again into the avocado forest.

The twentieth century floods back in as a yellow Lincoln Continental screeches into place in front of the kitchen and the remainder of the elaborate feast on the table is quickly loaded into its capacious trunk. The trunk is slammed shut and the car races down to the table by the shrine room where the monks eat first from the vast feast, and then the laypeople finish whatever is left.

“When I talked with Ajahn Fuang about going back to the West, about taking the tradition to America, he was very explicit. ‘This will probably be your life’s work,’ he said. He felt, as many teachers have, that the forest tradition would die out in Thailand but would then take root in the West.”

As we walk along one of the dusty perimeter paths of the property, Thanissaro points out the native flora he is beginning to know and talks of the future. Currently he is translating many of the “forest teachings” into English.

He is also the author of The Mind Like Fire Unbound, a scholarly exploration of the Pali canon in relation to the Buddhist term nirvana, which literally means “the extinguishing of a fire.” For Thanissaro, the original meaning of nirvana is the “unbinding” or freeing of a fire from its fuel, rather than “extinguishing.” Once unbound, the fire “remains” in some other nascent state. One Buddhist scholar called Thanissaro’s understanding “too original”; others have welcomed its important implications.

It seems appropriate that “unbinding” would be a theme in Thanissaro Bhikkhu’s teachings. After all, he has unbound himself from several cultures, and unbinding (from the city, from habits, from popular Buddhist trends) is at the core of the forest tradition in which he trained.

As we walk, Thani bends periodically to check the progress of his newly planted trees. Native trees—California walnut, scrub oak, and digger pine—no more than a foot or so high now, they’re barely visible in the waist­high chaparral. These trees grow naturally on the edge of the California desert, not dependent on irrigation or human care to survive. Thanissaro has planted them with the hope that they will eventually replace the avocado orchard altogether. When that happens the Metta Forest will be in America to stay: a wild forest, yet a native one, able to thrive and spread on its own.

The Rewards of the Contemplative Life
SAMANNAPHAIA SUTIANTA
Adapted from the Pali by Thanissaro Bhikkhu

SHAKYAMUNI BUDDHA

There is the case where a Tathagata (the Buddha) appears in the world, worthy and rightly self­awakened. He teaches the Dhamma admirable in its beginning, admirable in its middle, admirable in its end. He proclaims the holy life both in its particulars and in its essence, entirely perfect, surpassingly pure.

A householder or householder’s son, hearing the Dhamma, gains conviction in the Tathagata and reflects: ‘Household life is crowded, a dusty path. The life gone forth is like the open air. It is not easy living at home to practice the holy life totally perfect, totally pure, like a polished shell. Suppose I were to go forth?’ So after some time he abandons his mass of wealth, large or small; leaves his circle of relatives, large or small; shaves off his hair and beard, puts on the saffron robes, and goes forth from the household life into homelessness.

When he has thus gone forth, he lives restrained by the rules of the monastic code, seeing danger in the slightest faults. Consummate in his virtue, he guards the doors of his senses, is possessed of mindfulness and presence of mind, and is content.

Now, how does a monk guard the doors of his senses? On seeing a form with the eye, he does not grasp at any theme or variations by which—if he were to dwell without restraint over the faculty of the eye-evil—unskillful qualities such as greed or distress might assail him. (Similarly with the ear, nose, tongue, body, and intellect.)

And how is a monk possessed of mindfulness and presence of mind? When going forward and returning, he acts with full presence of mind. When looking toward and looking away . . . when bending and extending his limbs . . . when carrying his outer cloak, his upper robe, and his bowl . . . when eating, drinking, chewing, and tasting. . . when urinating and defecating . . . when walking, standing, sitting, falling asleep, waking up, talking, and remaining silent, he acts with full presence of mind.

And how is a monk content? Just as a bird, wherever it goes, flies with its wings as its only burden; so too is he content with a set of robes to provide for his body and almsfood to provide for his hunger. Wherever he goes, he takes only his barest necessities along.

He seeks out a secluded dwelling: a forest, the shade of a tree, a mountain, a glen, a hillside cave, a charnel ground, a jungle grove, the open air, a heap of straw. After his meal, returning from his almsround, he sits down, crosses his legs, holds his body

erect, and brings mindfulness to the fore. He purifies his mind from greed, ill will, sloth and torpor, restlessness and anxiety, and uncertainty. As long as these five hindrances are not abandoned within him, he regards it as a debt, a sickness, a prison, slavery, a road through desolate country. But when these five hindrances are abandoned within him, he regards it as unindebtedness, good health, release from prison, freedom, a place of security. Seeing that they have been abandoned within him, he becomes glad, enraptured, tranquil, sensitive to pleasure. Feeling pleasure, his mind becomes concentrated.

Quite withdrawn from sensual pleasures, withdrawn from unskillful mental qualities, he enters and remains in the first jhana (mental absorption): rapture and pleasure born of withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought and evaluation. He permeates and pervades, suffuses and fills this very body with the rapture and pleasure born of withdrawal. Just as if a skilled bathman or bathman’s apprentice would pour bath powder into a brass basin and knead it together, sprinkling it again and again with water, so that his ball of bath powder—saturated, moisture­laden, permeated within and without—would nevertheless not drip; even so, the monk permeates . . . this very body with the rapture and pleasure born of withdrawal. There is nothing of his entire body unpervaded by rapture and pleasure born of withdrawal. This is a reward of the contemplative life, visible here and now, more excellent than the previous ones and more sublime.

Furthermore, with the stilling of directed thought and evaluation, he enters and remains in the second jhana: rapture and pleasure born of composure, one-pointedness of awareness free from directed thought and evaluation—internal assurance. He permeates and pervades, suffuses and fills this very body with the rapture and pleasure born of composure. Just like a lake with spring-water welling up from within, having no inflow from east, west, north, or south, and with the skies supplying abundant showers time and again, so that the cool fount of water welling up from within the lake would permeate and pervade, suffuse and fill it with cool waters, there being no part of the lake unpervaded by the cool waters; even so, the monk permeates . . . this very body with the rapture and pleasure born of composure. There is nothing of his entire body unpervaded by rapture and pleasure born of composure. This, too, is a reward of the contemplative life, visible here and now, more excellent than the previous ones and more sublime.

And furthermore, with the fading of rapture, he remains in equanimity, mindful and fully aware, and physically sensitive of pleasure. He enters and remains in the third jhana, and of him the Noble Ones declare, ‘Equanimous and mindful, he has a pleasurable abiding.’ He permeates and pervades, suffuses and fills this very body with the pleasure divested of rapture. Just as in a lotus pond, some of the lotuses, born and growing in the water, stay immersed in the water and flourish without standing up out of the water, so that they are permeated and pervaded, suffused and filled with cool water from their roots to their tips, and nothing of those lotuses would be unpervaded with cool water; even so, the monk permeates . . . this very body with the pleasure divested of rapture. There is nothing of his entire body unpervaded with pleasure divested of rapture. This, too, is a reward of the contemplative life, visible here and now, more excellent than the previous ones and more sublime.

And furthermore, with the abandoning of pleasure and stress—as with the earlier disappearance of elation and distress—he enters and remains in the fourth jhana: purity of equanimity and mindfulness, neither pleasure nor stress. He sits, permeating the body with a pure, bright awareness. Just as if a man were sitting covered from head to foot with a white cloth so that there would be no part of his body to which the white cloth did not extend; even so, the monk sits, permeating the body with a pure, bright awareness. There is nothing of his entire body unpervaded by pure, bright awareness. This, too, is a reward of the contemplative life, visible here and now, more excellent than the previous ones and more sublime.

With his mind thus concentrated, purified, and bright, he directs it to the knowledge of the ending of the mental fermentations. Just as if there were a pool of water in a mountain glen—clear, limpid, and unsullied—where a man with good eyesight standing on the bank could see shells, gravel, and pebbles, and also shoals of fish swimming about and resting, and it would occur to him, ‘This pool of water is clear, limpid, and unsullied. Here are these shells, gravel, and pebbles, and also these shoals of fish swimming about and resting.’ In the same way, the monk discerns, as it is actually present, that ‘This is stress. . . This is the origination of stress. . . This is the stopping of stress. . . This is the way leading to the stopping of stress. . . These are mental fermentations. . . This is the origination of fermentations. . . This is the stopping of fermentations . . . This is the way leading to the stopping of fermentations.’ His heart, thus knowing, thus seeing, is released from the fermentations of sensuality, becoming, and ignorance. With release, there is the knowledge, ‘Released.’ He discerns that ‘Birth is ended, the holy life fulfilled, the task done. There is nothing further for this world.’ This, too, is a reward of the contemplative life, visible here and now, more excellent than the previous ones and more sublime. And as for another visible fruit of the contemplative life, higher and more sublime than this, there is none.

Get Daily Dharma in your email

Start your day with a fresh perspective

Barbara Roether is a freelance writer and editor living in San Francisco.






--
Posted by at
Labels: , , , , ,

2020/12/28

The Journal of John Woolman - Wikipedia

The Journal of John Woolman - Wikipedia

The Journal of John Woolman

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search

The Journal of John Woolman is an autobiography by John Woolman which was published posthumously in 1774 by Joseph Crukshank, a Philadelphia Quaker printer. Woolman's journal is one of the longest continually published books in North America since it has never been out of print.

The Journal adds to his other published works and gives greater evidence to his character as he discusses ideas of anti-slavery and anti-materialism as well as discussing power's ability to corrupt. The work also discusses God's divine power and goodness for all on the earth.

The work has remained in print due to its focus on making life simple and the hopeful message of God's divine goodness. Woolman is one of the first early American writers besides John Smith who is not a Puritan. Puritans were the most prevalent writers in Early America, and it was during the time of this publication that writing began to move away from being by only Puritan authors. Woolman's writing is at the forefront of this transition.

Anti-Slavery[edit]

Slavery[edit]

Woolman's Journal focuses much on his decision to support anti-slavery. The struggle is first seen when he discusses how he was required to write a bill of sale for a Quaker friend who had sold a slave. He completed the bill of sale because it was part of his job and the man that sold the slave was also a Quaker however, after this event, Woolman took a more official stance in regard to his opinion, even explaining during the actual event that he "believed slavekeeping to be a practice inconsistent with the Christian religion."[1] His journal shows his inner turmoil as he grapples with understanding how he truly feels about the selling and buying of slaves that eventually led to publishing works such as his Some Considerations on the Keeping of Negroes.

Slavery is prominent in Woolman's journal, and it returns again shortly after the scene with the bill of sale as he discusses further opinions he has on the subject. He takes time to discuss those who he visited that did not take care of their slaves and how that made him feel uncomfortable while visiting. In contrast, Woolman discusses individuals who did take care of their slaves and how that made him feel more at ease. Shortly after that comparison, Woolman moves beyond the treatment of slaves and reflects on the idea that even if slaves were well cared for, they were still taken from their homes.[1] His continual discourse on slavery in his journal makes Woolman one of the first abolitionists.

Power[edit]

Woolman addresses one of the issues of slavery to be men having too much power: "men having power too often misapplied it...we made slaves of the Negroes and the Turks made slaves of the Christians."[1] This is an idea already a large part of American heritage as many who traveled to America were seeking freedom of some kind. Woolman's focus on how power corrupts will continue to be impactful as Americans push further away from England (which is what had been occurring when Joseph Crukshank published this journal).

God's Divine Goodness[edit]

Quakers and Puritans[edit]

Woolman spends time in his journal writing about his relationship with God and his perspective on God. He discusses that as early as the age of 7 he "began to be acquainted with the operations of divine love."[1] His perspective on God and God's love is important, as it offers clear contrasts from the opinions that Puritans had. Puritans believed in a less tolerable God, and as Jonathan Edwards in Sinners in the Hands of An Angry God suggests, a God who does not care for those on Earth, nearly as much as Woolman suggests. Woolman's journal speaks of a God who gives revelation and creates a feeling of sweetness as well as strong feelings of mercy.

Tolerance[edit]

The opinion on God's love and his strong mercy is what makes Woolman and other Quakers more tolerant to others. Woolman writes: "I found no narrowness respecting sects and opinions, but believed that sincere, upright-hearted people in every Society who truly loved God were accepted of him."[1] This is a very different belief from those of other major religions in American at the time. The Puritans were very intolerant, even within their own ranks--intolerance is one of the causes of the Salem Witch Trials. Quakers' differing opinion on God is also what brings about a major dislike of Quakers by Puritans. They could not stand the opinions of Quakers and considered it a type of religious heresy.[2] Woolman does not discuss this in his Journal, instead focusing on what he knows and believes. In fact, Woolman believes that tolerance and mercy towards others were given from God: "he whose tender mercies are over all his works hath placed a principle in the human mind which incites to exercise goodness towards every living creature." [1]

These kinds of connections involving tolerance and mercy towards other people are what makes Woolman's writings easier to connect with. He appears more real and sincere because of his tolerance towards others. Christians now connect with his opinions on mercy, and this is part of the reason he has remained in print since the first publication of his journal.

Anti-Materialism[edit]

Woolman did many things in his life, varying from merchant, to tailor, to Quaker preacher. Along this path he decided that his wealth and prosperity were hurting him and his relationship with God: "the increase became my burden."[1] He turned away from all his merchandise and placed his focus somewhere else, no longer even desiring it.

This aspect of Woolman's writing moves beyond Quaker ideals. It is something that contains aspects of Americanism, also portrayed in later authors like Henry Thoreau as well as Walt Whitman. He in some ways follows transcendentalism.

Woolman seems to believe in the importance of anti-mercantilism, as following his decision to forgo his wealth he becomes much more visionary and believes to become closer to God.

References[edit]

  1. ^ Jump up to:a b c d e f g McMichael, George; Leonard, James (2011). Anthology of American literature (10 ed.). Boston: Longman. pp. 293–301. ISBN 9780205779390.
  2. ^ Crisler, Jesse. Brigham Young University Class Lecture, 12 October 2016, Joseph Fielding Smith Building, Provo, UT.
Posted by at
Labels: ,

2020/11/29

Deep ecology - Wikipedia

Deep ecology - Wikipedia

Deep ecology

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search

Earth seen from Apollo 17
Environment
Environment in
Part of a series on
Green politics
Sunflower symbol
Not to be confused with ecology.

Deep ecology is an environmental philosophy which promotes the inherent worth of all living beings regardless of their instrumental utility to human needs, plus the restructuring of modern human societies in accordance with such ideas.

Deep ecology argues that the natural world is a complex of relationships in which the existence of organisms is dependent on the existence of others within ecosystems. It argues that non-vital human interference with or destruction of the natural world poses a threat therefore not only to humans but to all organisms constituting the natural order.

Deep ecology's core principle is the belief that the living environment as a whole should be respected and regarded as having certain basic moral and legal rights to live and flourish, independent of its instrumental benefits for human use. Deep ecology is often framed in terms of the idea of a much broader sociality; it recognizes diverse communities of life on Earth that are composed not only through biotic factors but also, where applicable, through ethical relations, that is, the valuing of other beings as more than just resources. It is described as "deep" because it is regarded as looking more deeply into the actual reality of humanity's relationship with the natural world arriving at philosophically more profound conclusions than those of mainstream environmentalism.[1] The movement does not subscribe to anthropocentric environmentalism (which is concerned with conservation of the environment only for exploitation by and for human purposes), since deep ecology is grounded in a quite different set of philosophical assumptions. Deep ecology takes a holistic view of the world human beings live in and seeks to apply to life the understanding that the separate parts of the ecosystem (including humans) function as a whole. The philosophy addresses core principles of different environmental and green movements and advocates a system of environmental ethics advocating wilderness preservation, non-coercive policies encouraging human population decline, and simple living.[2]

Origins[edit]

In his original 1973 deep ecology paper,[3] Arne Næss stated that he was inspired by ecologists who were studying the ecosystems throughout the world. In a 2014 essay,[4] environmentalist George Sessions identified three people active in the 1960s whom he considered foundational to the movement: author and conservationist Rachel Carson, environmentalist David Brower, and biologist Paul R. Ehrlich. Sessions considers the publication of Carson's 1962 seminal book Silent Spring as the beginning of the contemporary deep ecology movement.[4] Næss also considered Carson the originator of the movement, stating "Eureka, I have found it" upon encountering her writings.[5]

Other events in the 1960s which have been proposed as foundational to the movement are the formation of Greenpeace, and the images of the Earth floating in space taken by the Apollo astronauts.[6]

Principles[edit]

Deep ecology proposes an embracing of ecological ideas and environmental ethics (that is, proposals about how humans should relate to nature).[7] It is also a social movement based on a holistic vision of the world.[1] Deep ecologists hold that the survival of any part is dependent upon the well-being of the whole, and criticise the narrative of human supremacy, which they say has not been a feature of most cultures throughout human evolution.[6] Deep ecology presents an eco-centric (earth-centred) view, rather than the anthropocentric (human centred) view, developed in its most recent form by philosophers of the Enlightenment, such as Newton, Bacon, and Descartes. Proponents of deep ecology oppose the narrative that man is separate from nature, is in charge of nature, or is the steward of nature,[8] or that nature exists as a resource to be freely exploited. They cite the fact that indigenous peoples under-exploited their environment and retained a sustainable society for thousands of years, as evidence that human societies are not necessarily destructive by nature. They believe a different economic system must replace capitalism, as the commodification of nature by industrial civilization, based on the concept of economic growth, or 'progress', is critically endangering the biosphere. Deep ecologists believe that the damage to natural systems sustained since the industrial revolution now threatens social collapse and possible extinction of the species. They are striving to bring about ideological, economic and technological change. Deep ecology claims that ecosystems can absorb damage only within certain parameters, and contends that civilization endangers the biodiversity of the earth. Deep ecologists have suggested that the optimum human population on the earth, without fossil fuels, is 0.5 billion, but advocate a gradual decrease in population rather than any apocalyptic solution.[9] Deep ecology eschews traditional left wing-right wing politics, but is viewed as radical ('Deep Green') in its opposition to capitalism, and its advocacy of an ecological paradigm. Unlike conservation, deep ecology does not advocate the controlled preservation of the landbase, but rather 'non-interference' with natural diversity except for vital needs. In citing 'humans' as being responsible for excessive environmental destruction, deep ecologists actually refer to 'humans within civilization, especially industrial civilization', accepting the fact that the vast majority of humans who have ever lived did not live in environmentally destructive societies - the excessive damage to the biosphere has been sustained mostly over the past hundred years.

In 1985 Bill Devall and George Sessions summed up their understanding of the concept of deep ecology with the following eight points:[10]

  • The well-being of human and nonhuman life on earth is of intrinsic value irrespective of its value to humans.
  • The diversity of life-forms is part of this value.
  • Humans have no right to reduce this diversity except to satisfy vital human needs
  • The flourishing of human and nonhuman life is compatible with a substantial decrease in human population.
  • Humans have interfered with nature to a critical level already, and interference is worsening.
  • Policies must be changed, affecting current economic, technological and ideological structures.
  • This ideological change should focus on an appreciation of the quality of life rather than adhering to an increasingly high standard of living.
  • All those who agree with the above tenets have an obligation to implement them.

Development[edit]

The phrase "Deep Ecology" first appeared in a 1973 article by the Norwegian philosopher Arne Næss,[3]. Næss referred to 'biospherical egalitarianism-in principle', which he explained was 'an intuitively clear and obvious value axiom. Its restriction to humans is … anthropocentrism with detrimental effects upon the life quality of humans themselves... The attempt to ignore our dependence and to establish a master-slave role has contributed to the alienation of man from himself.'[11] Næss added that from a deep ecology point of view "the right of all forms [of life] to live is a universal right which cannot be quantified. No single species of living being has more of this particular right to live and unfold than any other species".[12] As Bron Taylor and Michael Zimmerman have recounted, 'a key event in the development of deep ecology was the “Rights of Non-Human Nature” conference held at a college in Claremont, California in 1974 [which] drew many of those who would become the intellectual architects of deep ecology. These included George Sessions who, like Naess, drew on Spinoza’s pantheism, later co-authoring Deep Ecology - [Living as if Nature Mattered] with Bill Devall; Gary Snyder, whose remarkable, Pulitzer prize-winning Turtle Island proclaimed the value of place-based spiritualities, indigenous cultures, and animistic perceptions, ideas that would become central within deep ecology subcultures; and Paul Shepard, who in The Tender Carnivore and the Sacred Game, and subsequent works such as Nature and Madness and Coming Home to the Pleistocene, argued that foraging societies were ecologically superior to and emotionally healthier than agricultur[al societies]. Shepard and Snyder especially provided a cosmogony that explained humanity’s fall from a pristine, nature paradise. Also extremely influential was Edward Abbey’s Desert Solitaire, which viewed the desert as a sacred place uniquely able to evoke in people a proper, non-anthropocentric understanding of the value of nature. By the early 1970s the above figures put in place the intellectual foundations of deep ecology.'[13]

Sources[edit]

Science[edit]

Old-growth forest in Biogradska Gora National Park, Montenegro

Deep ecology is an eco-philosophy derived from intuitive ethical principles. It does not claim to be a science, but is based generally on the new physics, which, in the early 20th century, undermined the reductionist approach and the notion of objectivity, demonstrating that humans are an integral part of nature - a concept always held by primal peoples [14][15] Duvall and Sessions, however, note that the work of many ecologists has encouraged the adoption of an ecological consciousness, quoting environmentalist Aldo Leopold's view that such a consciousness changes the role of Homo sapiens from conqueror of the land community to plain member and citizen of it.[16] Though some detractors assert that deep ecology is based on the discredited idea of the 'balance of nature', deep ecologists have made no such claim. They do not dispute the theory that human cultures can have a benevolent effect on the landbase, only the idea of the control of nature, or human supremacy, which is the central pillar of the industrial paradigm. The tenets of deep ecology state that humans have no right to interfere with natural diversity except for vital needs: the distinction between vital and other needs cannot be drawn precisely. [17] Deep ecologists reject any mechanical or computer model of nature, and see the earth as a living organism, which should be treated and understood accordingly.[18]

Philosophy[edit]

Arne Næss used Baruch Spinoza as a source, particularly his notion that everything that exists is part of a single reality.[19] Others have copied Næss in this, including Eccy de Jonge[20] and Brenden MacDonald.[21]

Aspects[edit]

Environmental education[edit]

In 2010 Richard Kahn promoted the movement of ecopedagogy, proposing using radical environmental activism as an educational principle to teach students to support "earth democracy" which promotes the rights of animals, plants, fungi, algae and bacteria. The biologist Dr Stephan Harding has developed the concept of 'holistic science', based on principles of ecology and deep ecology. In contrast with materialist, reductionist science, holistic science studies natural systems as a living whole. 'We encourage … students to use [their] sense of belonging to an intelligent universe (revealed by deep experience),' Harding has written, 'for deeply questioning their fundamental beliefs, and for translating these beliefs into personal decisions, lifestyles and actions. The emphasis on action is important. This is what makes deep ecology a movement as much as a philosophy.'[22]

Spirituality[edit]

Næss criticised the Judeo-Christian tradition, stating the Bible's "arrogance of stewardship consists in the idea of superiority which underlies the thought that we exist to watch over nature like a highly respected middleman between the Creator and Creation".[12] Næss further criticizes the reformation's view of creation as property to be put into maximum productive use.

Criticisms[edit]

Eurocentric bias[edit]

Guha and Martinez-Allier critique the four defining characteristics of deep ecology. First, because deep ecologists believe that environmental movements must shift from an anthropocentric to an ecocentric approach, they fail to recognize the two most fundamental ecological crises facing the world today, 1) overconsumption in the global north and 2) increasing militarization. Second, deep ecology's emphasis on wilderness provides impetus for the imperialist yearning of the West. Third, deep ecology appropriates Eastern traditions, characterizes Eastern spiritual beliefs as monolithic, and denies agency to Eastern peoples. And fourth, because deep ecology equates environmental protection with wilderness preservation its radical elements are confined within the American wilderness preservationist movement.[23] Deep ecologists, however, point to the incoherence of this discourse, not as a 'Third World Critique' but as a critique by the capitalist elites of third world countries seeking to legitimise the exploitation of local ecosystems for economic gain, in concert with the global capitalist system. An example of such exploitation is the ongoing deforestation of the Amazon in Brazil under President Jair Bolsonaro.[24]

Knowledge of nonhuman interests[edit]

Animal rights activists state that for an entity to require intrinsic rights, it must have interests.[25] Deep ecologists are criticised for insisting they can somehow understand the thoughts and interests of non-humans such as plants or protists, which they claim thus proves that non-human lifeforms have intelligence. For example, a single-celled bacteria might move towards a certain chemical stimulation, although such movement might be rationally explained, a deep ecologist might say that this was all invalid because according to his better understanding of the situation that the intention formulated by this particular bacteria was informed by its deep desire to succeed in life. One criticism of this belief is that the interests that a deep ecologist attributes to non-human organisms such as survival, reproduction, growth, and prosperity are really human interests. Deep ecologists counter this criticism by the assertion that intelligence is not specific to humans, but a property of the totality of the universe of which humans are a manifestation.[26]

Deepness[edit]

When Arne Næss coined the term deep ecology, he compared it favourably with shallow ecology which he criticized for its utilitarian and anthropocentric attitude to nature and for its materialist and consumer-oriented outlook,[27] describing its "central objective" as "the health and affluence of people in the developed countries."[28] William D. Grey believes that developing a non-anthropocentric set of values is "a hopeless quest". He seeks an improved "shallow" view.[29] Deep ecologists point out, however, that shallow ecology - resource management conservation - is counter-productive, since it serves mainly to support capitalism - the means through which industrial civilization destroys the biosphere. The eco-centric view thus only becomes 'hopeless' within the structures and ideology of civilization. Outside it, however, a non-anthropocentric world view has characterised most 'primal' cultures since time immemorial, and, in fact, obtained in many indigenous groups until the industrial revolution and after. [30] Some cultures still hold this view today. As such, the eco-centric narrative is in not alien to humans, and may be seen as the normative ethos in human evolution.[31] Grey's view represents the reformist discourse that deep ecology has rejected from the beginning.[32]

Misanthropy[edit]

Social ecologist Murray Bookchin interpreted deep ecology as being misanthropic, due in part to the characterization of humanity by David Foreman of Earth First!, as a pathological infestation on the Earth. Bookchin mentions that some, like Foreman, defend misanthropic measures such as organising the rapid genocide of most of humanity.[33]

In response, deep ecologists have argued that Foreman's statement clashes with the core narrative of deep ecology, the first tenet of which stresses the intrinsic value of both nonhuman and human life. Arne Naess suggested a slow decrease in human population over an extended period, not genocide.[34] Bookchin's second major criticism is that deep ecology fails to link environmental crises with authoritarianism and hierarchy. He suggests that deep ecologists fail to recognise the potential for human beings to solve environmental issues.[35]

In response, Deep Ecologists have argued that industrial civilization, with its class hierarchy, is the sole source of the ecological crisis.[36] The eco-centric worldview precludes any acceptance of social class or authority based on social status.[37] Deep ecologists believe that since ecological problems are created by industrial civilization, the only solution is the deconstruction of the culture itself.[38]

Sciencism[edit]

Daniel Botkin concludes that although deep ecology challenges the assumptions of western philosophy, and should be taken seriously, it derives from a misunderstanding of scientific information and conclusions based on this misunderstanding, which are in turn used as justification for its ideology. It begins with an ideology and is political and social in focus. Botkin has also criticized Næss's assertion that all species are morally equal and his disparaging description of pioneering species.[39] Deep ecologists counter this criticism by asserting that a concern with political and social values is primary, since the destruction of natural diversity stems directly from the social structure of civilization, and cannot be halted by reforms within the system. They also cite the work of environmentalists and activists such as Rachel Carson, Aldo Leopold, John Livingston, and others as being influential, and are occasionally critical of the way the science of ecology has been misused.[40] Naess' concept of the equality of species in principle reflects an ethical view of the disproportionate consumption of natural resources by a single species. This intuitive observation is born out by the current perilous environmental situation.[citation needed]

Links with other philosophies[edit]

Peter Singer critiques anthropocentrism and advocates for animals to be given rights. However, Singer has disagreed with deep ecology's belief in the intrinsic value of nature separate from questions of suffering.[41] Zimmerman groups deep ecology with feminism and civil rights movements.[42] Nelson contrasts it with "ecofeminism".[43] The links with animal rights are perhaps the strongest, as "proponents of such ideas argue that 'all life has intrinsic value'".[44]

David Foreman, the co-founder of the radical direct-action movement Earth First!, has said he is an advocate for deep ecology.[45][46] At one point Arne Næss also engaged in direct action when he chained himself to rocks in front of Mardalsfossen, a waterfall in a Norwegian fjord, in a successful protest against the building of a dam.[47]

Some have linked the movement to green anarchism as evidenced in a compilation of essays titled Deep Ecology & Anarchism.[48]

See also[edit]

References[edit]

  1. ^ Jump up to:a b Smith, Mick (2014). "Deep Ecology: What is Said and (to be) Done?". The Trumpeter. 30 (2): 141–156. ISSN 0832-6193. Retrieved 12 May 2018.
  2. ^ John Barry; E. Gene Frankland (2002). International Encyclopedia of Environmental Politics. Routledge. p. 161. ISBN 9780415202855.
  3. ^ Jump up to:a b Næss, Arne (1973). "The shallow and the deep, long-range ecology movements. A summary" (PDF). Inquiry. 16 (1–4): 95–100. doi:10.1080/00201747308601682. ISSN 0020-174X. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2016-08-10. Retrieved 2020-06-20.
  4. ^ Jump up to:a b Sessions, George (2014). "Deep Ecology, New Conservation, and the Anthropocene Worldview". The Trumpeter. 30 (2): 106–114. ISSN 0832-6193. Retrieved 12 May 2018.
  5. ^ Arne, Naess; Rothenberg, David (1993). Is it Painful to Think?. University of Minnesota Press. p. 131-132.
  6. ^ Jump up to:a b Drengson, Alan; Devall, Bill; Schroll, Mark A. (2011). "The Deep Ecology Movement: Origins, Development, and Future Prospects (Toward a Transpersonal Ecosophy)". International Journal of Transpersonal Studies. 30 (1–2): 101–117. doi:10.24972/ijts.2011.30.1-2.101.
  7. ^ Stephan Harding 'Deep Ecology in the Holistic Science Programme' Schumacher College.
  8. ^ Lynn Margulis 'Animate Earth'
  9. ^ 'This does not imply misanthropy or cruelty to presently existing humans' Deep Ecology for the 21st Century Ed. George Sessions p.88
  10. ^ Devall, Bill; Sessions, George (1985). Deep Ecology. Gibbs M. Smith. p. 70. ISBN 978-0-87905-247-8.
  11. ^ Naess, Arne (1973). "The Shallow and the Deep, Long-Range Ecology Movement. A Summary". Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy. 16 (1–4): 95–96.
  12. ^ Jump up to:a b Næss, Arne (1989). Ecology, community and lifestyle: outline of an ecosophy Translated by D. Rothenberg. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. p. 166, 187. ISBN 0521344069. LCCN 88005068.
  13. ^ Taylor, B. and M. Zimmerman. 2005. Deep Ecology" in B. Taylor, ed., Encyclopedia of Religion and Nature, v 1, pp. 456–60, London: Continuum International.
  14. ^ The Intuition of Deep Ecology by Warwick Fox, quoted in 'Deep Ecology' by Duvall/Sessions 1985 p.90
  15. ^ Wholeness & The Implicate Order by David Bohm 1980 p.37
  16. ^ we are only fellow-voyagers with other creatures in the odyssey of evolution, Aldo Leopold quoted in 'Deep Ecology' by Duvall/Sessions 1985 p.85
  17. ^ Andrew McLaughlin 'The Heart of Deep Ecology' in 'Deep Ecology for the 21st Century' ed. George Sessions p87
  18. ^ There are no shortcuts to direct organic experiencing Morris Berman, quoted in Deep Ecology by Bill Devall and George Sessions 1985 p.89
  19. ^ Naess, A. (1977). "Spinoza and ecology". Philosophia. 7: 45–54. doi:10.1007/BF02379991.
  20. ^ de Jonge, Eccy (April 28, 2004). Spinoza and Deep Ecology: Challenging Traditional Approaches to Environmentalism (Ashgate New Critical Thinking in Philosophy). Routledge. ISBN 978-0754633273.
  21. ^ MacDonald, Brenden James (2012-05-14). "Spinoza, Deep Ecology, and Human Diversity -- Schizophrenics and Others Who Could Heal the Earth If Society Realized Eco-Literacy". Trumpeter. 28 (1): 89–101. ISSN 1705-9429.
  22. ^ Stephan Harding 'Deep Ecology in the Holistic Science Programme' Schumacher College (undated)
  23. ^ Guha, R., and J. Martinez-Allier. 1997. Radical American Environmentalism and Wilderness Preservation: A Third World Critique. Varieties of Environmentalism: Essays North and South, pp. 92-108
  24. ^ The Guardian, http://www.digitaljournal.com/news/environment/deforestation-of-amazon-rainforest-soars-under-bolsonaro/article/553369#ixzz6RR8tTsOZ
  25. ^ Feinberg, Joel. "The Rights of Animals and Future Generations". Retrieved 2006-04-25.
  26. ^ 'The Spell of the Sensuous' by David Abram P262
  27. ^ Devall, Bill; Sessions, George. Deep Ecology: Environmentalism as if all beings mattered. Retrieved 2006-04-25.
  28. ^ Naess, Arne (1973). "The Shallow and the Deep, Long-Range Ecology Movement. A Summary". Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy. 16 (1–4): 95.
  29. ^ "Anthropocentrism and Deep Ecology by William Grey".
  30. ^ The Spell of the Sensuous by David Abrams.
  31. ^ Deep Ecology by Duvall/Sessions 1985 p.97
  32. ^ Deep Ecology by Duvall/Sessions 1985 p.52
  33. ^ name="Bookchin 1987"
  34. ^ Deep Ecology for the 21st Century Ed. George Sessions 1995 p.88
  35. ^ Bookchin, Murray (1987). "Social Ecology versus Deep Ecology: A Challenge for the Ecology Movement". Green Perspectives/Anarchy Archives.
  36. ^ Endgame by Derrick Jensen, Vol 2, 2006 p.18
  37. ^ Arne Naess The Shallow and the Deep Long Range Ecology Movement. 1973
  38. ^ Endgame by Derrick Jensen, Vol 2, 2006
  39. ^ Botkin, Daniel B. (2000). No Man's Garden: Thoreau and a New Vision for Civilization and Nature. Shearwater Books. pp. 42 42, 39]. ISBN 978-1-55963-465-6.
  40. ^ The Shallow and the Deep Long Range Ecology Movement by Arne Naess, 1973
  41. ^ Kendall, Gillian (May 2011). The Greater Good: Peter Singer On How To Live An Ethical Life. Sun Magazine, The Sun Interview, Issue 425. Retrieved on: 2011-12-02
  42. ^ Alan AtKisson. "Introduction To Deep Ecology, an interview with Michael E. Zimmerman". In Context (22). Retrieved 2006-05-04.
  43. ^ Nelson, C. 2006. Ecofeminism vs. Deep Ecology, Dialogue, San Antonio, TX: Saint Mary's University Dept. of Philosophy
  44. ^ Wall, Derek (1994). Green History. Routledge. ISBN 978-0-415-07925-9.
  45. ^ David Levine, ed. (1991). Defending the Earth: a dialogue between Murray Bookchin and Dave Foreman.
  46. ^ Bookchin, Murray; Graham Purchase; Brian Morris; Rodney Aitchtey; Robert Hart; Chris Wilbert (1993). Deep Ecology and Anarchism. Freedom Press. ISBN 978-0-900384-67-7.
  47. ^ J. Seed, J. Macy, P. Flemming, A. Næss, Thinking like a mountain: towards a council of all beings, Heretic Books (1988), ISBN 0-946097-26-7, ISBN 0-86571-133-X.
  48. ^ Deep Ecology & Anarchism. Freedom Press. 1993.

Bibliography[edit]

  • Bender, F. L. 2003. The Culture of Extinction: Toward a Philosophy of Deep Ecology Amherst, New York: Humanity Books.
  • Katz, E., A. Light, et al. 2000. Beneath the Surface: Critical Essays in the Philosophy of Deep Ecology Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
  • LaChapelle, D. 1992. Sacred Land, Sacred Sex: Rapture of the Deep Durango: Kivakí Press.
  • Passmore, J. 1974. Man’s Responsibility for Nature London: Duckworth.
  • Taylor, B. and M. Zimmerman. 2005. Deep Ecology" in B. Taylor, ed., Encyclopedia of Religion and Nature, v 1, pp. 456–60, London: Continuum International.
  • Clark, John P (2014). "What Is Living In Deep Ecology?". Trumpeter: Journal of Ecosophy. 30 (2): 157–183.
  • Hawkins, Ronnie (2014). "Why Deep Ecology Had To Die". Trumpeter: Journal of Ecosophy. 30 (2): 206–273.
  • Sessions, G. (ed) 1995. Deep Ecology for the Twenty-first Century Boston: Shambhala.

Further reading[edit]

  • Gecevska, Valentina; Donev, Vancho; Polenakovik, Radmil (2016). "A Review Of Environmental Tools Towards Sustainable Development". Annals of the Faculty of Engineering Hunedoara - International Journal of Engineering. 14 (1): 147–152.
  • Glasser, Harold (ed.) 2005. The Selected Works of Arne Næss, Volumes 1-10. Springer, ISBN 1-4020-3727-9. (review)
  • Holy-Luczaj, Magdalena (2015). "Heidegger's Support For Deep Ecology Reexamined Once Again". Ethics & the Environment. 20 (1): 45–66. doi:10.2979/ethicsenviro.20.1.45.
  • Keulartz, Jozef 1998. Struggle for nature : a critique of radical ecology, London [etc.] : Routledge.
  • Linkola, Pentti 2011. Can Life Prevail? UK: Arktos Media, 2nd Revised ed. ISBN 1907166637
  • Marc R., Fellenz. "9. Ecophilosophy: Deep Ecology And Ecofeminism." The Moral Menagerie : Philosophy and Animal Rights. 158. Champaign: University of Illinois Press, 2007.
  • Sylvan, Richard (1985a). "A Critique of Deep Ecology, Part I.". Radical Philosophy. 40: 2–12.
  • Sylvan, Richard (1985b). "A Critique of Deep Ecology, Part II". Radical Philosophy. 41: 1–22.
  • Tobias, Michael (ed.) 1988 (1984). Deep Ecology. Avant Books. ISBN 0-932238-13-0.
Posted by at
Labels: , , , ,
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)