,*APT] #b 
,NATURE1 ,FIR/ & ,SECOND 

#aiigaiig 

,PEOPLE 3 

,AU?OR 3 ,MURRAY ,BOOK*9 

,$ITOR 3 ,JANET ,BIEHL 

,TEXT 3 

,*APT] #b3 ,NATURE1 ,FIR/ & ,SECOND 

,9TRODUCTION 

,AMID ! TE*NOLOGICAL 5*ANTM5T ( ! #a#i#eS1 PROPON5TS ( 
ORGANIC F>M+1 LIKE ,BOOK*9 HIMSELF1 HAD TO DEF5D ORGANIC 
AGRICULTURAL TE*NIQUES AGA9/ ! SCORN ( F$]AL AG5CIES & 
! *EMICAL 9DU/RY1 BO? ( :I* W]E BUSILY MAK+ PE/ICIDES 
9TO AGRICULTURAL COMMONPLACES4 ,UNLIKE TODAY1 :5 ! VALUE 
( ORGANIC F>M+ IS RECOGNIZ$1 9 ?OSE YE>S ITS VALUE HAD TO BE 
F\<T =4 

,AS P>T ( ?AT /RUGGLE TO DEF5D ORGANIC F>M+1 ,BOOK*9 
BORR[$ ! CONCEPT 0UNITY 9 DIV]SITY0 FROM ! ,G]MAN IDEALI/ 
PHILOSOPH] ,G4,W4,F4 ,HEGEL4 ,RECA/ AS A PR9CIPLE ( ORGANIC 
AGRICULTURE1 ! CONCEPT SUGGE/$ AN ALT]NATIVE F>M+ TE*NIQUE 
?AT WAS ABLE TO RID CROPS ( PE/S1 )\T ! USE ( C>C9OG5IC 
PE/ICIDES4 ,UNLIKE ! MONOCULTURES ?AT DEM&$ PE/ICIDE USE1 
A DIV]SITY ( CROPS 9 ONE FIELD C\LD PLAY (F POT5TIAL PE/S AGA9/ 
ONE ANO!R1 LEAV+ ! CROPS !MSELVES PE/-FREE4 ,& UNLIKE 
MONOCULTURES1 :I* >E SUSCEPTIBLE TO COMPLETE DE/RUCTION ) 
ONE PE/ 9FE/ATION1 ECOSY/EMS ?AT >E HI<LY DIV]SIFI$ YIELD 
OPTIMAL /ABILITY4 0,UNITY 9 DIV]SITY0 BECAME A CAT*WORD = 
/ABILITY1 NOT ONLY 9 ORGANIC AGRICULTURE BUT 9 ECOSY/EMS G5]ALLY2 
IT 5T]$ ! VOCABUL>Y ( ! ECOLOGY MOVEM5T AS A CONCEPT 
UND]P9N+ ! VALUE ( DIV]SE SPECIES 9 AN ECOSY/EM4 

,ONCE ORGANIC AGRICULTURE GA9$ A MEASURE ( ACCEPTANCE1 
H[EV]1 ,BOOK*9 HIMSELF BEGAN TO USE ! PHRASE 0UNITY 9 
DIV]SITY0 9 A DIFF]5T S5SE1 GIV+ IT A MORE DYNAMIC 9T]PRETATION4 
,:ILE /ABILITY CAN /R5G!N AN ECOSY/EM1 HE MA9TA9$1 
IT CANNOT MAKE = SPECIES V>IEGATION4 ,DIV]SITY PLAYS AN 
IMPORTANT ROLE 9 PRODUC+ NOT ONLY /ABILITY BUT *ANGE & 
9NOVATION4 ,9DE$1 )\T DIV]SIFICATION NATURAL EVOLUTION C\LD 
NOT OCCUR4 ,TODAY1 ,BOOK*9 USES ! PHRASE 0UNITY 9 DIV]SITY0 TO 
REF] TO ! 9CREAS+ DIFF]5TIATION ?AT A SELF-=MATIVE 
BIOSPH]E UND]GOES1 )9 ! NATURAL CONT9UUM ( EVOLUTION>Y 
PROCESSES4 

,?IS EVOLUTION>Y EMPHASIS IS :AT M>K$LY DI/+UI%ES 
,BOOK*9'S PHILOSOPHY ( NATURE FROM ?AT ( O!R S*OOLS ( 
ECOLOGICAL-POLITICAL ?\<T TODAY4 ,NATURAL EVOLUTION1 HE HAS LONG 
>GU$1 5COMPASSES NOT ONLY A /RICTLY BIOLOGICAL REALM 7OR 0FIR/ 
NATURE07 BUT ALSO A SOCIAL REALM 7OR 0SECOND NATURE074.<#b#a.> ,F> FROM 
BE+ 9H]5TLY ANTAGONI/IC TO EA* O!R1 FIR/ & SECOND NATURE 
>E ACTUALLY TWO ASPECTS ( ONE CONT9UUM1 ,BOOK*9 MA9TA9SAT 
ONCE SEP>ATE FROM EA* O!R BUT ALSO MUTUALLY IMBRICAT$ 9 
A %>$ EVOLUTION>Y PROCESS4 ,HUMAN BE+S & HUMAN SOCIETY1 
) !IR POT5TIALITIES = SELF-CONSCI\SNESS & FRE$OM1 DIFF] 
9 PR(\ND RESPECTS FROM FIR/ NATURE YET EM]GE FROM & 
9CORPORATE IT 9 A GRAD$ DEVELOPM5T4 

,P]HAPS ( MO/ 9T]E/ TO SOCIAL ECOLOGY1 ! EVOLUTION>Y 
PROCESSES 9 FIR/ NATURE G5]ATE 9CREAS+ COMPLEXITY & SUBJECTIVITY 
9 LIFE-=MS4 ,CONSCI\SNESS HAS EVOLV$ 9 A CUMULATIVE PROCESS1 
FROM ! SIMPLE REACTIVITY ( UNICELLUL> ORGANISMS1 TO ! NEUROLOGICAL 
ACTIVITY ( MAMMALS & REPTILES1 TO A CULM9ATION 9 HUMAN 
9TELLECTION4 ,AS LIFE-=MS ATTA9 HI<] LEVELS ( SUBJECTIVITY1 !Y 
>E ABLE TO EX]CISE GREAT] *OICE 9 SELECT+ & EV5 IMPROV+ 
!IR [N ECOLOGICAL NI*ES4 

,! DIM1 EM]G5T SUBJECTIVITY 9 FIR/ NATURE CAN MAKE ONLY 
RUDIM5T>Y 0*OICES10 BUT 9 SECOND NATURE HUMAN BE+S1 
POSSESS$ ( ! HI<E/ LEVEL ( SUBJECTIVITY1 >E CAPABLE ( ACTIVELY 
& CONSCI\SLY ALT]+ !IR 5VIRONM5TS1 ( %AP+ ! SOCIETIES 
9 :I* !Y LIVE -- & ( CREAT+ ! ECOLOGICAL SOCIETY ?AT 
9TEGRATES T[N & C\NTRY1 OR FIR/ & SECOND NATURE1 9 :AT 
,BOOK*9 W\LD LAT] CALL 0FREE NATURE40 

,AT FIR/ GLANCE1 ! GREAT SIGNIFICANCE ,BOOK*9 ATTA*ES TO HUMAN 
CONSCI\SNESS W\LD SEEM TO REPRES5T A %>P DEM>CATION 
BETWE5 HUMAN & NONHUMAN NATURE 9 HIS ?\<T1 ONE ?AT 
SETS HUMAN BE+S ON AN 5TIRELY DIFF]5T PLANE FROM ! RE/ ( 
! NATURAL WORLD4 ,& IT IS TRUE ?AT HE CONSID]S HUMANITY AS A 
RADICALLY NEW DEVELOPM5T 9 NATURAL EVOLUTION1 MANIFE/+ ! 
POT5TIALITY = SELF-CONSCI\S5ESS1 FRE$OM1 & 9NOVATION4 ,HE 
DOES REG>D HUMAN CONSCI\SNESS AS QUALITATIVELY DIFF]5T FROM 
?AT ( O!R LIFE-=MS4 ,BUT BY HIS USE ( ! CATEGORIES ( FIR/ & 
SECOND NATURE1 HE ALSO EMPHASIZES ! ROOT$NESS ( HUMAN BE+S 
9 NONHUMAN NATURE4 

,9 ! MID-#a#i#hS A T5D5CY >OSE )9 ! ECOLOGY MOVEM5T 
?AT D5IGRAT$ ! NOTION ?AT HUMAN BE+S >E 9 ANY WAY 
SUP]IOR OR MORE ADVANC$ ?AN O!R LIFE-=MS 9 ! BIOSPH]E4 
,BLAM+ HUMAN-C5T]$ NESS1 OR 0AN?ROPOC5TRISM10 AS ! CAUSE 
( ! ECOLOGICAL CRISIS1 DEEP ECOLOGY -- ) ITS FUNDAM5TAL PRECEPT 
( BIOC5TRISM -- ADVANC$ A NOTION ( 0BIOSPH]IC DEMOCRACY10 
:I* SAW HUMAN BE+S AS HAV+ 09TR9SIC WOR?0 EQUAL TO ?AT 
( ANY O!R SPECIES4 ,BOOK*9'S %>P CRITICISM ( ?IS T5D5CY IS 
ROOT$ 9 TWO CONFLICT+ VIEWS ( HUMANITY'S RELATION%IP TO ! RE/ 
( ! NATURAL WORLD4 ,:]E BIOC5TRISM W\LD R$UCE HUMAN 
BE+S 9TO 0PLA9 CITIZ5S0 ( ! BIOSPH]E1 MORALLY 9T]*ANGEABLE 
) O!R LIFE-=MS1 SOCIAL ECOLOGY ASS]TS ?AT HUMAN BE+S 
>E UNIQUE 9 NATURAL EVOLUTION4 ,BY VIRTUE ( !IR P[]S ( ?\<T 
& COMMUNICATION1 !Y HAVE ! ABILITY TO CREATE & EV5 ! 
RESPONSIBILITY TO A*IEVE A H>MONI\S1 9DE$ CREATIVE RELATION%IP 
) ! FIR/ NATURE4 

,! N9ETE5?-C5TURY PHILOSOPH] ,JOHANN ,FI*TE ONCE 
REM>K$ ?AT HUMANITY IS NATURE R5D]$ SELF-CONSCI\S4 ,AL?\< 
?IS VIEW HAS SOMETIMES BE5 ATTRIBUT$ TO ,BOOK*9 AS 
WELL1 HE ACTUALLY MA9TA9S ?AT SECOND NATURE HAS ?US F> FALL5 
%ORT ( REALIZ+ HUMANITY'S POT5TIALITY = CREAT+ A LIB]ATORY 
SOCIETY & AN 9TEGRATIVE RELATION%IP ) ! NONHUMAN WORLD4 
0,:]E ,FI*TE PAT5TLY ]R$ WAS 9 HIS ASSUMPTION ?AT A POSSIBILITY 
IS A FACT10 HE WROTE 9 ,! ,ECOLOGY ( ,FRE$OM4 

,WE >E NO MORE NATURE R5D]$ SELF-CONSCI\S ?AN WE >E 
HUMANITY R5D]$ SELF-CONSCI\S4 ,REASON MAY GIVE US ! CAPACITY 
TO PLAY ?IS ROLE1 BUT WE & \R SOCIETY >E /ILL TOTALLY IRRATIONAL9DE$1 
WE >E CUNN+LY DANG]\S TO \RSELVES & ALL ?AT LIVES 
>\ND US4.<#b#b.> 

,HE !RE=E MODIFIES ,FI*TE'S /ATEM5T TO >GUE ?AT HUMANITY IS 
POT5TIALLY NATURE R5D]$ SELF-CONSCI\S -- ?AT IT W\LD ACTUALIZE 
?AT POT5TIAL ONLY IF IT W]E TO CREATE AN ECOLOGICAL SOCIETY4 

,IMAGES ( ,FIR/ ,NATURE 

7FROM 0,:AT ,IS ,SOCIAL ,ECOLOGY80 #a#i#h#d7 

,MORE ?AN ANY S+LE NOTION 9 ! HI/ORY ( RELIGION & PL