This essay examines and compares two paradigms of technology, nature, and social life, and their associated environmental impacts. I explore moving from technocratic paradigms to the emerging ecological paradigms of planetary person ecosophies. The dominant technocratic philosophy's guiding policy and technological power is mechanistic. It conceptualizes nature as a resource to be controlled for human ends. Its global practices are drastically altering the integrity of the planet's ecosystems. In contrast, the organic, planetary person approaches respect the intrinsic values of all (...) beings. Deep ecology movement principles give priority to community and ecosystem integrity. These deep ecology movement principles guide the design and applications of technology by principles following from ecological understanding. I describe this shift in philosophical paradigms and how it affects our perceptions, values, and actions. (shrink)

This essay examines and compares two paradigms of technology, nature, and social life, and their associated environmental impacts. I explore moving from technocratic paradigms to the emerging ecological paradigms of planetary person ecosophies. The dominant technocratic philosophy's guiding policy and technological power is mechanistic. It conceptualizes nature as a resource to be controlled for human ends. Its global practices are drastically altering the integrity of the planet's ecosystems. In contrast, the organic, planetary person approaches respect the intrinsic values of all (...) beings. Deep ecology movement principles give priority to community and ecosystem integrity. These deep ecology movement principles guide the design and applications of technology by principles following from ecological understanding. I describe this shift in philosophical paradigms and how it affects our perceptions, values, and actions. (shrink)

In this paper I examine the interconnections between two paradigms of technology, nature, and social life, and their associated environmental impacts. The dominant technocratic philosophy which now guides policy and technological power is mechanistic. It conceptualizes nature as a resource to be controlled fully for human ends and it threatens drastically to alter the integrity of the planet’s ecosystems. Incontrast, the organic, person-planetary paradigm conceptualizes intrinsic value in all beings. Deep ecology gives priority to community and ecosystem integrity and seeks (...) to guide the design and applications of technology according to principles which follow from ecological understanding. I describe this shift in paradigms and how it affects our perceptions, values, and actions. (shrink)

In this paper I examine the interconnections between two paradigms of technology, nature, and social life, and their associated environmental impacts. The dominant technocratic philosophy which now guides policy and technological power is mechanistic. It conceptualizes nature as a resource to be controlled fully for human ends and it threatens drastically to alter the integrity of the planet’s ecosystems. Incontrast, the organic, person-planetary paradigm conceptualizes intrinsic value in all beings. Deep ecology gives priority to community and ecosystem integrity and seeks (...) to guide the design and applications of technology according to principles which follow from ecological understanding. I describe this shift in paradigms and how it affects our perceptions, values, and actions. (shrink)

Introduction RODGERBEEHLER We observe that all nations, barbarous as well as civilized, though separately founded because remote from each other in time and ...

Three points are discussed: first, that limits of technological fixes are revealed by current economic, social, and environmental problems; second, that these problems cannot be solved by a technological fix but require alternative forms of activity and being; third, that realizing these limits makes possible the re‐emergence of the sacred. Two attitudes toward technology, nature, and the sacred are described: Technocrats desacralize nature and strive to shape it technologically for human ends alone; pernetarians resacralize nature and develop a perennial philosophy (...) (synthesized from elements of different spiritual disciplines) allied with an enlarged, artful science, so as to design activities compatible with nature. (shrink)

"Beyond Environmental Crisis" addresses the most pressing challenge facing humanity at the end of the 20th Century: Can the peoples of the Earth get together with enough creativity, commitment and skill to avert the twin threats of nuclear holocaust and environmental destruction? This book employs comparative, creative philosophical inquiry to analyze and offer alternatives to the modern Western worldview which was the foundation of the Western technological revolution. It describes an emerging alternative ecophilosophy that is inclusive enough to serve as (...) a cross-cultural ground for synthesis of new visions of technological and social practices that promote ecological harmony, wisdom, and democratic values. It exemplifies appropriate philosophizing as an art that creatively uses shifting paradigms as a transformative discipline leading to the creation of new practices of appropriate design, for diverse lifestyles which promote preservation of the Earth's wild places, while sustaining its ecological communities. Comparative, creative, ecophilosophical inquiry facilitates participatory activity, which becomes an applied philosophy of life that is a way to ecosophy (wisdom and harmony based on ecocentric values). The way to ecosophy leads beyond environmental crises. To illustrate this transformation two philosophies are described, along with their ideals of progress, persons, community and Nature: The technocratic representing the dominant industrial paradigm, the planetary person (pernetarian) representing an ecosophic alternative. (shrink)

This paper is a response to Ted Toadvine’s article “Gestalts and Refrains: On the Musical Structure of Nature,” in Environmental Philosophy 2.2 (2005). We propose a more generous interpretation of Naess’s gestalt ontology, one that we believe mitigates Toadvine’s criticisms. Gestalt ontology and refrain ontology offer two different yet compatible ontologies for environmental philosophers searching for viable alternatives to scientific reductionism. Encouraging many ontologies also encourages a rich philosophical pluralism.

What are the central features of mastery of an art or discipline? Is there a distinction between just being a master and high-level mastery? Does the concept of a master imply something more than mastery of techniques and skills? This paper investigates the conceptual topography of these concepts, attempts to answer these questions and others. It also sets forth general criteria for master-level Tuastery of any art or discipline. In addition, it explores some of the normative questions related to the (...) responsibilities of being a master. A master exemplifies the values of the art or discipline. Do these values stop at the edge of the subject or do they extend beyond it? In this direction two paradigms of masters are discussed. The broader of the two expands the conceptof a master to include self-mastery, mastery and proper relationships with others, and mastery of nocture as a non-coercive relationship. (shrink)

Asks why current practices of technology negatively impact humans and the earth and how we can gain a holistic understanding so technology practices can be changed to support the environment.