Today we discussed the implications of an ecocentric worldview as opposed to an egocentric one. I definitely think that there are many positive aspects to considering the interests of other animals and the dynamic processes of nature, but who cares about fleas? I see how it may be beneficial to our long term survival and self-realization to help other animals achieve their interests and to help stabilize different ecosystems that support our existence and well-being, but what good comes about from helping fleas, seriously? Furthermore, if deep ecology maintains that all life forms are equally valid and worthy of natural rights, then does this mean we should care about the well-being of the AIDS virus or parasitic organisms?
I think that death and destruction are just as much aspects of nature than life and creation. We cannot support all life forms and ecosystems because to do so necessitates the destruction of some life. I think we should try to destroy viruses, parasites, and any animal that would harm us if given a chance and protect those animals that are compatible with our existence. Also, we should be more concerned with curbing our greenhouse gas emissions because otherwise ocean levels will rise and landmasses will be reduced to deserts. It would really suck for human beings to live in a hot and crowded ecosystem.
This may seem to be an anthropocentric worldview, but don't we always think from a human point of view because we are, in fact, human beings? I think deep ecology is confused on some levels about its own philosophy or perhaps I just don't fully get it. It seems to hold that "all life has value" and "nature knows best" at the same time, but what about volcanoes and other natural disasters that wipe out life? It doesn't seem like nature gives a shit about innate value. At any rate, I hate fleas and I think we should kill them all at any chance we get.
So any flea lovers out there? Should we care about the well-being of all living things, or just those animals that are compatible with our own well-being? Does self-realization really necessitate an identifying with all of nature, or just the processes that support our existence?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I think you do raise a very good point. When you think about it, although there are a lot of people always looking out for 'nature,' it is selective. You rarely if ever hear about anyone trying to help organisms that are harmful to most other life forms. One thing though, I am pretty sure that viruses do not count as life forms. But caring about the well being of parasites such as the tapeworm just seems ridiculous, yet it is just the same as a dog if we are all equal.
ReplyDelete