Title: Basic Principles of Deep Ecology Date: 1984 Source: Retrieved on 9 January 2011 from [[http://www.deepecology.org/platform.htm][www.deepecology.org]] Authors: Arne Næss and George Sessions, Arne Næss, George Sessions Topics: Environment, Green, Deep ecology Published: 2011-01-10 11:00:31Z
In April 1984, during the advent of Spring and John Muir’s birthday, George Sessions and Arne Næss summarized fifteen years of thinking on the principles of deep ecology while camping in Death Valley, California. In this great and special place, they articulated these principles in a literal, somewhat neutral way, hoping that they would be understood and accepted by persons coming from different philosophical and religious positions.
Readers are encouraged to elaborate their own versions of deep ecology, clarify key concepts and think through the consequences of acting from these principles.
Basic Principles
1. *The well-being and flourishing of human and nonhuman Life on Earth have value in themselves (synonyms: intrinsic value, inherent value). These values are independent of the usefulness of the non-human world for human purposes.*
1. *Richness and diversity of life forms contribute to the realization of these values and are also values in themselves.*
1. *Humans have no right to reduce this richness and diversity except to satisfy vital needs.*
1. *The flourishing of human life and cultures is compatible with a substantial decrease of the human population. The flourishing of nonhuman life requires such a decrease.*
1. *Present human interference with the nonhuman world is excessive, and the situation is rapidly worsening.*
1. *Policies must therefore be changed. These policies affect basic economic, technological, and ideological structures. The resulting state of affairs will be deeply different from the present.*
1. *The ideological change is mainly that of appreciating life quality (dwelling in situations of inherent value) rather than adhering to an increasingly higher standard of living. There will be a profound awareness of the difference between big and great.*
1. *Those who subscribe to the foregoing points have an obligation directly or indirectly to try to implement the necessary changes.*
[1] Tom Regan, “The Nature and Possibility of an Environmental Ethic,” **Environmental Ethics** 3 (1881), pp. 19–34
Source