Bill Devall in “The Deep Ecology Movement,” argues that we should preserve nature because of its inherent value, not just because it has instrumental value for us. He thinks that the “shallow ecology movement” that tries to reform environmentalism is inadequate. Ariel Salleh criticizes deep ecology from an eco-feminist perspective. She complaints of the pervasive rationalistic and scientistic language of both Naess and Devall. In your own view, which one of these views of ecological movement is tenable? Justify your position (be sure to set out clearly the two positions).
Welcome to Legit Writing
