Concerning the Saunterer’s post of two days ago (“Arne Naess’ platform principles of deep ecology”), recall principle 4: “It would be better for humans if there were fewer of them, and much better for other living creatures.” Arne Naess went on to make this more specific, saying:
The flourishing of human life and cultures requires that the human population be substantially smaller than its present size. . . . The ultimate goals of humankind do not presuppose very large numbers of human beings on earth. A population significantly below the 6.6 billion of 2007 would be viable. . . . For those who accept Self-realization as one goal, or the ultimate goal, and accept the tendency to identify with all life as an inevitable consequence of maturity, the answer is clear: It is vastly more difficult to reach the goal with a population of 6.6 billion than with a substantially smaller population - other conditions being held constant. (Quoted from pages 303 and 305 of Ecology of Wisdom: Writings by Arne Naess, edited by A. Drengson and B. Devall. 2008. Berkeley: Counterpoint.)
For a brief biography of Arne Naess, click here.
Comments