Aristotle and the Roots of Deep Ecology
If you like reading about philosophy, here's a free, weekly newsletter with articles just like this one: Send it to me!
It’s tragic that we only begin loving nature after we’ve lost it.
Cultures that are immersed in the natural world, people whose daily lives are defined by the struggle to survive in the wild, they don’t romanticise nature. Nature, for them, is a series of obstacles to be overcome. For us, sitting in our small concrete flats, surrounded by whirring, beeping machinery, nature becomes the utopian dream of a better world, a word that’s laden with meaning and with the promise of a lost paradise.
Interestingly, the most modern philosophies of nature, for example, Arne Naess' Deep Ecology, go back all the way to an ancient Greek philosopher, Aristotle (385–322 BC). Aristotle, whom we have already met a few times, had the idea that every thing in the universe has its own kind of perfection – a way of reaching its maximum potential, of being the best it can be.
This clearly applies to man. What is the best kind of man? Aristotle asks. What makes us special and different from all other things in nature? There are, he says, two things: our rationality and our moral goodness, our virtues. So the best human beings would be those who have developed these two sides of themselves to the greatest possible extent: who are the most rational as well as the most virtuous of men. People like that would be wise, they would be also successful in the world, happy, and morally good.
Now only men can reach this highest stage of being because only we have the necessary rationality to do so. But if we look at things, we can also see that some of them fulfil the purpose that is inherent in them better than others, and this is one of the main points of deep ecology: that nature is not only here for us, but for itself. A pen can be a good pen or a bad pen. Good pens write well, they are easy to use, widely available, write on any surface, can be used to highlight as well as to draw, for example. Bad pens are the kind of thing you get for free in the office: they break easily, they don’t write well, the ink dries out for no good reason, their caps get lost and using these pens is generally a traumatic affair.
Photo by Jon Tyson on Unsplash
But now, and here is the trick that we can use to make an argument for nature, we can apply the same thought to a tree. What is a good tree? What is a bad tree? A good tree is one that fulfils its tree-ness well. It grows, it flourishes, it becomes strong, with healthy green leaves and wide branches. Birds nest in it, insects live off its flowers, and people like to sit under it, lean against its trunk, or sleep in its shade. A tree like that is not only benefiting itself, but it becomes a good, strong contributor in a whole ecosystem that thrives all around it. The interests of the tree, the interests of the ecosystem, and our own interests are not opposed, as we sometimes seem to think. When that tree is healthy and strong, the whole system benefits. When the tree is weak and sick, its leaves falling, its branches thin and broken, then not only is the tree itself a lesser tree - it also provides fewer flowers and fruit, no birds will want to build their nests in it, and it won’t give shade to humans who could sit under it. Not only the tree will be worse off, but the whole of creation.
Photo by Timothy Meinberg on Unsplash
We can apply the same idea to everything, without exception, and we can see how this relates to deep ecology. A good lake is one that’s clear, healthy, with a diverse population of animals and plants living in and around it. It benefits thousands of creatures with its water, it provides a home for fish, it allows healthy trees to grow along its shores, and these, in turn, benefit even more life. A poisoned lake full of pesticides and industrial waste will not only be ugly and unpleasant to watch; it will also poison its surroundings, kill its fish, and no trees will grow around it.
So this is Aristotle’s insight: one thing alone can not meaningfully flourish.
Egoism is not rational, neither in the world of men nor in the world of animals, plants, things. The whole universe is a finely tuned system, in which everything works together with everything else. And only if every single thing works well and flourishes, can the other things also fulfil their purpose. One tree in a destroyed landscape is doomed. But if all trees are healthy, then even the weaker ones can still survive and flourish, being supported by the stronger ones.
Live Happier with Aristotle: Inspiration and Workbook.
In the book to this series of articles you're reading right now, philosophy professor, founder and editor of the Daily Philosophy web magazine, Dr Andreas Matthias takes us all the way back to the ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle in the search for wisdom and guidance on how we can live better, happier and more satisfying lives today.
Get it now on Amazon! Click here!
Solidarity and altruism are not optional for Aristotle, and in this he agrees with deep ecology: they are the very fabric of life. And our love and respect for nature cannot be limited to romanticising trees, to daydreaming of fairies and hobbits, or watching permaculture documentaries on Youtube.
If we want to stay alive, then we will need to understand that we can only stay alive together with everything else that surrounds us.
Our flourishing is only possible in a world where everything flourishes: a world of perfect pens, healthy trees, fish, birds, insects and men. We all depend on each other. For Aristotle, it is folly to think that we can separate ourselves from the rest of the universe and chase our own benefit at the cost of every other creature.
Today I read an article in the news that air pollution has been found to kill half a million babies across the globe each year. Loving nature, and helping it to flourish, is not an optional sentiment. It is a rational requirement if we want to survive.
Aristotle knew that 2500 years ago. Perhaps it’s time that we learned it too.
