


































Microsoft Word - Relavence of Deep Ecological  Principal


Bangladesh Journal of Bioethics 2020; 11 (2): 42-48 

 

42 

 

The Relevance of deep ecological principles in Aquatic Crisis: 

A philosophical Analysis 

 

Osebor Ikechukwu Monday 

 
Lecturer. Department of Arts and Humanities  
Delta State Polytechnic Ogwashi-Uku PmB 1030, Nigeria 
Email osebormonday1@gmail.com or Osebordarry@yahoo.com  
Orcid Number: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2642-662X 

 
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3329/bioethics.v11i2.50392  

Abstract: Ethics is a branch of philosophy that analyzes right or wrong of an action.  Ethics studies all 
aspect of human activities; which water pollution is one.  Water pollution is the emission of waste or 
chemicals into water bodies at a quantity that is harmful to man and the aquatic organisms.  The Effects of 
water pollution include mass extinction species, decrease in the biodiversity, and scarcity of fresh water. 
The question to ask is “how can   water pollution be ameliorated if not totally eradicated?” Using the method 
of philosophical analysis, the paper suggests that the implementation of deep ecological principles by policy 
makers would be abatements and environmental consciousness for the common good of the society. 

Keywords: Aquatic crisis, relational ethics, "I and Thou", vital needs, anthropocentricism, aquaculture, 
biocentric equality, self- realization and Ukama philosophy 

 

Introduction: Aquatic crisis is one of the 
environmental challenges facing humanity.  
In the last decades, human habits have been 
conditioning the normal functioning of life 
on the planet1. 

Mother earth is in great perils. Human 
activities and the demand for resources have created 
enormous pressure and stress on the sustainability of 
Earth. Resource depletion and environmental 
devastation have plagued the world in the last several 
decades, creating havoc to the environment and the 
life of species inhabiting it, which includes the 
human2. 

 

Aquaculture is the rearing of aquatic animals 
and the cultivation of aquatic plants for 
food3.  Aquaculture covers the farming of 
both animals (including crustaceans, finfish  
 
 

 
and mollusks) and plants (including 
seaweeds and freshwater macrophytes)4-5. 
 

With the improvement of science and 
technology, the traditional method of fishing 
has changed to Aqua-mechanization. Aqua-
mechanization is concerned with the use of 
Sophisticated farming techniques6. Bottom 
trawling is a method of fish harvesting. It is 
aimed at creating wealth for farmers. The 
implication of commercial fish harvesting, 
nature is conceived as a means to an end. We 
maintain that aqua-mechanization has played 
important role in the aquatic crisis. The 
industrial sector had produced jobs, profits, 
expanded the quality of life, but it equally 
alienated human beings from nature7. 



Bangladesh Journal of Bioethics 2020; 11 (2): 42-48 

 

43 

 

However, Aquaculture accounts for over 
50% of the world food market for protein, 
fish products and it provides income for 
farmers but alienated man from the 
environment.   

Environmental problems have developed 
chiefly because of man's rapaciousness. The belief 
that natural resources are inexhaustible characterized 
the early development of this nation, a period replete 
with examples of extravagant waste of forests, land, 
minerals, water, and wildlife. Human behavior in this 
decade contributes litter, pollution, improper use and 
depletion of resources, and a continuing destruction 
of natural balances and cycles essential to life8. 

 A reflection the negative relationship 
between human and nature, there is need for 
an ontological shift, from the anthropocentric 
perception of nature to what nature is; the 
(essence)9. The ontological shift would lead 
humankind to reconsider environmental and 
agricultural ethics. In light of the aquatic 
crisis, strong anthropological views of nature 
would give birth to ethical thinking and 
judicious use of environment and its 
resources. 

 Cyanide fish harvesting is a negative attitude 
of the aquatic farmers9.This approach is 
typically used in the aquariums.  It involves 
the application of sodium cyanide into a fish 
habitat. The cyanide-fishing technique does 
not just kill the desired fish. It kills other 
aquatic organisms such as coral reefs. Apart 
from the killing of the non-desired 
organisms, cyanide-fishing harvesting 
pollutes the non-targeted habitat, which 
causes the aquatic crisis. Dayanthi Nugegoda 
and Golam Kibria argue that  

Disruption of fish thyroid function by 
environmental stressors has the potential to result in 
deleterious effects including the inhibition of sperm 
production, reduction in egg production, gonad 

development, ovarian growth, swimming activity, 
fertilization and increase in larval mortality10. 

The aquatic stressors could lead to the 
extinction of humanity. A critical question is, 
how can an intelligent species such as human, 
seek to harvest a few species of fish, using a 
method that contaminated the entire 
environment?  We contend that human 
hurtful relationship with the environment 
forwarded a pessimistic view and a blind 
symbiotic history of interactions. This is 
alarming! It is a distortion of the food chain. 
The unsystematic application of chemicals, 
pesticides, wild fish harvesting, and the use 
of explosives in a habitat affects the access to 
fresh water and its resources. 

Human assaults upon the environment would 
lead to a possible destruction of the biotic and 
abiotic communities11.  Now, the human race 
is challenged than before, to exhibit our 
mastery, not over nature but ourselves.  

The fight to preserve the environment must 
continue and this is the focus of the deep 
ecological principles. Carson did not oppose 
the use of chemicals for the exploration of 
nature, but the acceptable methods should be 
used to avoid the environmental crisis:  "I 
contend that we have put poisonous and 
biologically potent chemicals 
indiscriminately into the hands of persons 
largely or wholly ignorant of their potentials 
for harm11. We have allowed these chemicals 
used, with little or no advance investigation 
of their effects on the soil, water, wildlife, 
and the man himself, future generations are 
not possible to condone our lack of prudent 
concern for the integrity of the natural world 
that supports all life"11. We maintain that 
environment education that focuses on deep 



Bangladesh Journal of Bioethics 2020; 11 (2): 42-48 

 

44 

 

ecological principles would be a panacea to 
the aquatic crisis. 

Anthropocentrism: Anthropocentrism is an 
idea that most environmental philosophy is 
opposed. Etymologically, anthropocentrism 
is a derivative of two Greek word" ανθρωπoς 
(Anthropos, or human being) and κ́εντρoν 
(kentron, or centre)2. Anthropocentrism is the 
human-centred philosophy in the hierarchy of 
beings2.  

The Biblical assertion; the earth is there for 
humans to gain dominion over. Genesis (1-
26) God said, “Let us make man in our image, 
after our likeness. And let them have 
dominion over the fish of the sea and over the 
birds of the heavens and over the livestock 
and over all the earth and over every creeping 
thing that creeps on the earth”12. This view of 
course, would be the foundation of strong 
anthropocentrism. Ikeke cites Van Tassel that 
humans are much higher and above non-
humans species13. Humankind exercises 
dominion over nature, and nature is there to 
serve human needs14. We maintain that 
environmental ethics shares a dislike to 
human- centered philosophy 

 Lynn White further asserts that Christianity 
is the most anthropocentric religion the world 
had seen.  Christianity is absolute contrast to 
ancient paganism. It establishes dualism 
between man and nature. For Christianity, 
God's will, for man to exploit nature for his 
proper ends14. Lynn White holds that 

The Christian dogma of creation, which is 
found in the first clause of all the Creeds, has another 
meaning for our comprehension of today's ecologic 
crisis. By revelation, God had given man the Bible, 
the Book of Scripture. But since God had made 
nature, nature also must reveal the divine mentality14. 

The dualistic mindset is a hindrance to the 
flourishing of organisms in an environment. 
The danger of the dualistic mindset is that it 
separates human beings from the earth13. In 
our opinion, the notion of dominion over 
non-humans is an ecological 
misrepresentation.  How can man take 
dominion over creation and rule over them? 
This assertion is could be misrepresented 
because the aquatic crisis is not solely 
explicating the teachings of dominion over 
nature.  There are some Christian teachings 
such as the mystical and sacramental 
universe. The mystical and sacramental 
universe affirms that all beings have an 
intrinsic value, and they are participating in 
divine beauty; each being is a "Cosmic 
Christ." Today many Christian bodies are 
unable to apply this teaching for 
environmental protection and preservation13.    

Is Deep Ecological Principles a Panacea to 

the aquatic crisis? In April 1984, George 
Sessions and Arne Næss developed the 
principles of deep ecology15.  Deep 
ecological principles entail that humans 
recognizes the intrinsic worth of all life 
forms, and the right of non-humans to 
flourish in an environment. Deep ecological 
principles are moral obligation for 
humankind, to preserve and care for the non-
human world.  In addition, deep ecological 
principles are rooted in naturalistic ethics, 
concerned with respect and duties of 
humankind towards others. Deep ecological 
principles are normative ethics aimed at 
cleaning up the aquatic crisis for sustainable 
development.   

The peace and survival of humanity, is halt, 
by the degradation of the environment. The 



Bangladesh Journal of Bioethics 2020; 11 (2): 42-48 

 

45 

 

security of life and property, cannot be 
achieved by mounting weapons (the popular 
concept of “defense” in a narrow sense), but 
through the recognition of the positive 
aquatic relativity. Humankind should provide 
the basic conditions for solving non-military 
problems, which threatens humanity. The 
survival of humanity does not only depend on 
the military balance, but global 
environmental cooperation for sustainable 
environment. The teaching and 
implementation of deep ecological 
principles, such as the richness and diversity 
of all life forms, environmental self -
realization, biocentric equality, 
environmental relatedness (Ukama 
philosophy), and the exploration of nature 
only for vital needs would boast the learning 
of environment ethics to saving humanity 
from ecological disaster.  

 There are many deep ecological principles; 
in this paper will we discuss selected 
ecological principles that would be relevant 
to this study. 

Self-Realization: The philosophical 
aphorism man ‘knows thyself 'is attributed to 
Socrates. The concept of ‘man knows thyself 
implies self-development, self-
understanding, self-examination, self-
interpretation16. The inner message of the 
‘Self acknowledgement, is the realization of 
the self, as a part of a whole.  I am because of 
nature, is the likelihood that human existence 
is impossible without a symbiotic 
relationship with others. Self- realization is 
not self-sufficiency, but the preservation of 
others for posterity sake16. Self-realization is 
not the ‘ego' of wide fish harvesting, but a 
diminishing ego, and a gradual reduction in 

the hedonistic attitude of humans towards 
nature17.   The Self-realization is not self-
centeredness, but inextricably linked to, as 
well as the individual dissolved into the 
greater Self. 

 Self-realization is a metaphysical condition, 
which nobody can ever reach because of its 
ontological nature. Nevertheless, it is the 
richness and diversity of life forms, which is 
value and values in themselves15. Luca 
maintain that self-realization is the 
identification of the ecological self and the 
asymmetrical relationship between human 
beings and nature. The ecological self-
expounds the ontological processes of human 
relationship with the cosmos17. The 
ecological self would help to reshapes the 
environmental ethics, starting with 
environmental ontology, and the recalling of 
the primacy of human relationship with 
nature. From an ecological standpoint, self-
realization is the complexity and symbiotic 
conditions for the maximizing of ecological 
diversity15.   The above assertions are ringing 
affirmations that no ontological divides 
between humans and nature7. There is 
ultimately only one substance; reality is a 
unity, which we may call God or Nature, we 
are aware that we are united to the whole, 
alienation drops when we identify that we are 
parts of a whole18.  

Biocentric Equality: 'Biocentric equality is 
one among the principles of deep ecology. It 
affirms that all beings have equal intrinsic 
value. There is no ontological part separating 
human beings and nature15. Here, human 
beings have no greater worth, than any other 
creature. Human being has no rights more 
than plants or animals. Richness and diversity 



Bangladesh Journal of Bioethics 2020; 11 (2): 42-48 

 

46 

 

of life forms contribute to the realization of 
these values in themselves15. This is an 
affirmation of species egalitarianism. 

 Species egalitarianism is characterized by 
the inherent worth of beings, regardless of 
their instrumental and utility. Humans have 
no reason to assume that species do not have 
equal moral standing, all species command 
equal respect. We argue that respect for 
nature is not negotiable because we are parts 
of a whole. George Sessions et al mentioned 
that the flourishing of human life and cultures 
is compatible with a substantial decrease in 
the human population15. The flourishing of 
nonhuman life requires such a decrease. We 
maintain that human and nature should 
flourish without moral superiority. 

The ‘Vital Need': The concept of vigorous 
need entails that humans have no right to 
reduce the richness and diversity of nature, 
except for the satisfaction of the vital needs. 
"Vital need;" is an ecological principle, 
which is broad and dense, owing to its vague 
nature.  Frances Stewart refer vital need as 
basic needs, thus 

A basic needs (BN) approach to development 
is one, which gives priority to meeting the basic needs 
of all the people. The actual content of BN have been 
variously defined: they always include the fulfillment 
of certain standards of nutrition, (food and water), and 
the universal provision of health and education 
services. They sometimes also cover other material 
needs, such as shelter and clothing, and non-material 
needs such as employment, participation and political 
liberty19. 

 The term "vital need" is deliberately vague 
to allow considerable latitude of judgments 

15.  The "vital need" is nature inherent in 
value. The intrinsic worth of all life forms can 
only be   reducible for imperative need. The 

vital need implies two strands of 
anthropocentrism-the weak and strong 
anthropocentrism. Weak anthropocentrism is 
the view that human beings should explore 
nature only for vital needs. While Strong 
anthropocentrism, on the other hand, believes 
that human beings explore nature as a means 
to an end2. A vital need is open to rational 
interpretations. To some schools of thought, 
vital need is an imperative need, which is the 
opposite of "other" needs15.  We argue that 
the meaning ofvital need requires a moral 
interpretation to determine the difference 
between vital need and other needs.  

Concept of Ukama: From the African 
perspective, Ukama is a traditional value. It 
is a Shona word among the people of 
Zimbabwe. Ukama is a philosophy that has 
strong biocentrism. It is a philosophy, which 
deconstructs the anthropocentric perception 
of nature.  Ukama is concerned about the 
well-being of the environment, 
kinship/relatedness and the immortality of 
soul20. 

 Ukama is an environmental ethics. It teaches 
moral relationship among organisms21. 
Ukama is a inter-relational ethics that 
encourage co-existence of humanity in the 
bio-network.  The existence of humans is 
dependent on the established positive 
relationship with others. Otherwise, 
humankind could face extinction21.  "What 
has become the most frightening reality about 
our human existence is that the world that is 
extremely interconnected and the pursuit of 
self-interest have resulted in a rampant 
pollution of the environment”20. 

Ukama rejects the superiority of humans in 
the hierarchy of beings. It calls for cross-



Bangladesh Journal of Bioethics 2020; 11 (2): 42-48 

 

47 

 

fertilization in the relationship between 
organisms. The philosophy of cross-
fertilization, affirms that there is no 
separation between thou and "I and thou.” 
This affirms that there is no ontological 
understanding that human beings not 
separated with others21. 

Conclusion: In light of the above, we could 
answer the question "how would the aquatic 
crisis be ameliorated if not eradicated? This 
review suggested that the teaching and 
implementation of the deep ecological 
principles would help humankind to frame a 
positive ecological attitude in the exploration 
of nature for posterity sake. We suggest that 
deep ecological principle be integrated into 
school curriculum, so that citizens can be 
taught environmental consciousness for the 
common good of the society. 

References  

1. Ainara S, Naiara R,Jon A, Loli E, Josune A. 
European Journal of Sustainable Development 
(2020), 9, 4, 22-32 . 
Doi:10.14207/ejsd.2020.v9n4p22. 

2. Ravichandran M, and Gabriel T A. Environmental 
Ethics through Value-Based Education. 
Bangladesh Journal of Bioethics 2020; 11 (2): 1-
9. https://doi.org/10.3329/bioethics.v11i2.49257.   

3. Akinbi, J.  (2012): The Niger Delta 
Environmental Crisis in Nigeria Journal of 
International   Multidisciplinary, 5(63): 150-164 

 
4. Aquaculture (N-d). 

http://www.fao.org/3/x6941e/x6941e04.htm ([14 

August 2019]) 

5. Stephen, M.(2016) Gardiner and Allen, T. 
“Introducing Contemporary Environmental 
Ethics” The Oxford Handbook of Environmental 
Ethics, moral philosophy, Social and Political 
Philosophy, (2016), p. 1. 

6. Sustainability For All Destructive Vs Sustainable 
Fishing (n-d) available from 
https://www.activesustainability.com/environme

nt/destructive-vs-sustainable-fishing (14 August 

2019). 

7. Luca, V.(2018) Ecological Self and Self-
Realization: Understanding Asymmetrical 
Relationships Through Arne Næss's Ecosophy. 
Journal of Agricultural and Environmental 
Ethics, 5( 1), p.1-8). Available from  
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-018-9715-x([14 

August 2019]). 

8. Environmental crisis.(N-d): “Journal of 
Educational Leadership” Available from 
http://www.ascd.org/ASCD/pdf/journals/ed_lead
/el_197012_romine.pdf(14 August 2019) 

9. Olawande, F. (1998): Harmful Fishing Practices 
in the Coastal Belt of Nigeria: Use of Non-
Selective Fishing Gears” Available at 
http://www.fao.org/3/a-an681e.Pdc (14 Sept 

2020) 

10. Dayanthi N. and Golam K. (2016): “Effects of 
Environmental chemicals on Fish Thyroid 
Function: Implications for Fisheries and 
Aquaculture in Australia.” General and 
Comparative Endocrinology, p. 244. Available 
from 10.1016/j.ygcen.2016.02.021.  

11. Carson, R. (1962): Silent Spring: with an 
Introduction by Vice President Al Gore. (New 
York: Houghton Mifflin. Available from 
https://www.amazon.com/Silent-Spring-
Introduction-Vice-President/dp/B00600Z7O8(14 

August 2018). 

12. The Holy Bible. Genesis, 1-26. Available from 
https://www.bibleref.com/Genesis/1/Genesis-1-
26.html (14 August 2018). 

13. Ikeke, M. (2015): The Ecological Crisis and The 
Principle Of Relationality In African Philosophy. 
Philosophy Study, 5(2): 179-186. Available from 
http://www.doi: 10.17265/2159-
5313/2015.04.001 

14. Lynn, W. “The Historical Roots of Our 
Ecological Crisis”. Science, (1967), p. 155: 1203-
1207. Available at 
http://www.cmu.ca/faculty/gmatties/lynnwhitero
otsofcrisis.pdf (14 August 2019). 

15. Naess, A. and Sessions, G. “Basic Principles of 
Deep Ecology” (1984). Available at 
https://www.deepecology.org ([14 August 

20219). 



Bangladesh Journal of Bioethics 2020; 11 (2): 42-48 

 

48 

 

16. Talukder, H. (2016) For "Self-Realization." The 
Ultimate Norm of Arne Naess's Ecosophy .T. 
Symposium. p.219-235. Available from  
https://philarchive.org/archive/TALOS.frican. 

17. Zimmerman, M. (1998): Deep Ecology, Eco-
activism and Human Evolution. Available from  
https://ogigaya.wordpress.com/think-sangha/tsj3-
html/zimmerman-htm.(14 August 2019). 

18. David, S. (1998): “Are All Species Equal”? 
Journal of Applied Philosophy. Available  from 
http://rintintin.colorado.edu/~vancecd/phil3140/
Schmidtz.pdf.( 14 August 2019). 

19. Frances S. (1985): A Basic Needs Approach to 
Development. In: Planning to Meet Basic Needs. 

Palgrave Macmillan London P.1-13. Available 
from https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-17731-
8_1. 

20. Murove, M. “An African Commitment to 
Ecological Conservation through the Concept Of 
Ukama And Ubuntu. Mankind.” Quarterly, 
(2004), p. 40. 

21. Osebor, I. (2012): African Concept of Ukama: 
Appraisal (Unpublished B.A Project, Department 
of Philosophy and Religious Studies Delta State 
University Nigeria, Abraka. pp.38-49. 

 

 
 

Author Contribution: The Manuscript is an 
Unpublished PhD Seminar Paper, written by Osebor 
Ikechukwu Monday, supervised by prof. Ikechukwu 
Ogugua. Department of Philosophy, Nnamdi Azikiwe 
University Awka, Anambra State Nigeria.  

 

 

Conflict of Interest: No Conflict of interest. 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


