ON FOX,WARWICK ASSESSMENT OF DEEP ECOLOGY

I examine Fox's tripartite characterization of deep ecology. His asses sment abandons Naess's emphasis upon the pluralism of ultimate norms b y distilling what I refer to as the deep ecology approach to ''Self-re alization!'' Contrary to Fox, I argue that his popular sense is distin ctive and his formal sense is tenable. Fox's philosophical sense, whil e distinctive, is neither necessary nor sufficient to adequately chara cterize the deep ecology approach. I contend that the deep ecology app roach, as a formal approach to environmental philosophy, is not depend ent upon and embodies much more than any single ultimate norm. I discu ss how Naess's deep ecology approach supports a wide diversity of ulti mate norms. The only stipulation placed upon ultimate norms, to make t hem deep ecological ultimate norms, is that the so called deep ecology platform be derivable from them. The deep ecology approach is disting uished, in part, through its focus on diminishing environmentally degr ading practices and policies by addressing root causes and by highligh ting pseudo-conflicts. I present an interpretation of the deep ecology approach that hightlights Naess's emphasis upon assisting individuals to arrive at thoroughly reasoned, consistent, and ecologically sound concrete decisions by supporting them in the articulation of their own personal ecological total views (ecosophies).