Education for Local and Global Ecological Responsibility: Arne Næss’s CrossCultural, Ecophilosophy Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper explains Arne Naess’s approach to understanding contemporary grassroots movements, and especially the long range deep ecology movement. Some critics reject what they call “deep ecology” and criticize “deep ecologists,” but in so doing they confuse Naess’s personal ultimate philosophy—which he calls Ecosophy T—with his description of global socio-political movements (Glasser, 1996, 1997). Naess’s interdisciplinary, crosscultural approach involves a four level framework for discourse that is fruitful for local and global environmental study. It helps us clarify how local actions and global responsibility can become a part of all our relationships. This approach stresses respect and appreciation for all forms of diversity: personal, cultural and ecological. Using it we can help students and ourselves design personal ecosophies as living philosophies of ecological harmony. Resume Ce document explique l’approche d’Arne Naess pour comprendre les mouvements communautaires contemporains, et notamment le mouvement d’ecologisme radical a large spectre. Certains critiques rejettent ce qu’ils nomment l’« ecologisme radical » et s’opposent aux « ecologistes radicaux », mais confondent la philosophie absolue et personnelle de Naess, l’ecosophie T, ainsi que sa description des mouvements sociopolitiques mondiaux. L’approche interdisciplinaire et interculturelle de Naess nous donne un cadre de quatre niveaux en vue d’un discours fructueux pour l’etude environnementale locale et mondiale. Elle nous aide a clarifier comment les actions locales se relient a la responsabilite globale dans toutes nos relations. Au moyen de cette approche de questionnement profond, nous pouvons tous creer notre propre ecosophie, qui
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".