Michael E. Zimmerman

Environmental Philosophy : From Animal Rights to Radical Ecology  by Michael E. Zimmerman (Editor), J. Baird Callicott (Editor), George Sessions.   

This impressive and encompassing anthology of recent essays--some especially written for this collection--offers readers philosophical diagnoses of the current ecological crisis. It comes divided into five sections, each dealing with a particular approach to ecological issues, and each edited and introduced by a leading author in the field. 

Edited by a team of nationally-recognized experts, this anthology features the best available selections — some written especially for this volume.  Conceptually focused and easily manageable, this book is divided into five sections that explore the full spectrum of concerns in contemporary Eco-philosophy — Environmental Ethics, Deep Ecology, Ecofeminism, Political Ecology, Animal Liberation/Rights.  For those interested in Environmental Ethics, Environmental Policy, Environmental Issues, Conservation Biology, and Environmental Geography.

Click here to learn more about this book

Contesting Earth's Future : Radical Ecology and Postmodernity by Michael E. Zimmerman

Radical ecology typically brings to mind media images of ecological activists standing before loggers' saws, staging anti-nuclear marches, and confronting polluters on the high seas. Yet for more than twenty years, the activities of organizations such as the Greens and Earth First! have been influenced by a diverse, less-publicized group of radical ecological philosophers. It is their work the philosophical underpinnings of the radical ecological movement that is the subject of Contesting Earth's Future. The book offers a much-needed, balanced appraisal of radical ecology's principles, goals, and limitations. Michael Zimmerman critically examines the movement's three major branches deep ecology, social ecology, and ecofeminism. He also situates radical ecology within the complex cultural and political terrain of the late twentieth century, showing its relation to Martin Heidegger's anti-technological thought, 1960s counterculturalism, and contemporary theories of poststructuralism and postmodernity. An early and influential ecological thinker, Zimmerman is uniquely qualified to provide a broad overview of radical environmentalism and delineate its various schools of thought. He clearly describes their defining arguments and internecine disputes, among them the charge that deep ecology is an anti-modern, proto-fascist ideology. Reflecting both the movement's promise and its dangers, this book is essential reading for all those concerned with the worldwide ecological crisis. 

"By linking environmental philosophy and Continental thought, Zimmerman's book represents a landmark in both fields." -- J. Baird Callicott, University of Wisconsin, Stevens Point 

About the Author
Michael E. Zimmerman is Professor of Philosophy at Tulane University and author of Heidegger's Confrontation With Modernity: Technology, Politics, and Art (1990) and Eclipse of the Self: The Development of Heidegger's Concept of Authenticity (1981)

Deep Ecology

Excerpt:

Deep ecology is founded on two basic principles: one is a scientific insight into the interrelatedness of all systems of life on Earth, together with the idea that anthropocentrism - human-centeredness - is a misguided way of seeing things. Deep ecologists say that an ecocentric attitude is more consistent with the truth about the nature of life on Earth. Instead of regarding humans as something completely unique or chosen by God, they see us as integral threads in the fabric of life. They believe we need to develop a less dominating and aggressive posture towards the Earth if we and the planet are to survive.

The second component of deep ecology is what Arne Naess calls the need for human self-realization. Instead of identifying with our egos or our immediate families, we would learn to identify with trees and animals and plants, indeed the whole ecosphere. This would involve a pretty radical change of consciousness, but it would make our behavior more consistent with what science tells us is necessary for the well-being of life on Earth. We just wouldn't do certain things that damage the planet, just as you wouldn't cut off your own finger.