Heidegger’s phenomenological analysis of the ready-to-hand items that constitute an integral part of the world of Da-sein seems to allow us to formulate an environmental philosophy that does not rely on appeals to morality, animal rights, the rights of indigenous groups, or appeals to religion, but rather uses an appeal to Being itself in order to justify a new way of thinking about our interactions with the world around us. While the actual formulation and defense of such a philosophy of the environment is beyond the scope of this posting, I will try to outline how such an argument could be made.
All too often today, the affluent people of the world consume resources without second thought. We think of the objects that we use in our everyday tasks as mere “things” that have no direct to relation to our own being. In part, this type of relationship to the world reflects the type of ontology that has become part of the Western tradition; an ontology that even those that do not think philosophically tacitly embrace. This type of ontology is the subject/object mode of thinking about being. In this tradition, we think of ourselves as somewhat divorced from the world. We tend to treat objects and the tools we use to project ourselves into the world as not only separate from ourselves but wholly different. We relate to these things in a pragmatic way, as things to be used, and as such, we overlook anything but how they are immediately presented to us. When we use a hammer, we do not normally think about the wood of the handle, the iron of the head, let alone think about their origins, or the environment that produced them. It is because we do not relate to the environment in a way that is deeper than this that we need abstract injunctions to think about the environment in a moral way. By using Heidegger’s idea that tools are not only useful for their practical use in helping us with our projects but they serve an equally important function as signs may help us think about the environment in a new way.
For Heidegger the world is not comprised of a set of distinct objects but is comprised of the totality of the things in the world, humans included. As such, no one thing is separate from other things in the world, but parts of a greater whole. It is the relations between things-in-the-world, and not just the fact that these things exist, that are world building. Furthermore, things-in-the-world as relational beings point to other things-in-the-world. In short, everything that comprises our world and that has meaning to us as a tool to further our own projects, can be taken as a sign that allows us to understand the being of the world, and our own Being.
When we recognize these tools as signs and pay attention to that which they signify, we can “see” beyond the merely apparent. The hammer’s handle is not just a tooled piece of wood, but is the product of a long process that started with a tree that was felled and removed from its environment. If we think a little deeper, we can come to recognize that without the environment that from which this tree came that we would not be able to do the things that we are presently involved. By thinking in this way we may come to realize that we are not removed from the environment, a subject over and above the object that is the “environment”, but dependent upon it in a way that is integral to the understanding of our own Being.
In sum, if we are interested in the question of our own Being then the environment as revealed by the tools we use becomes a part of our concern. Of course, this does not necessarily entail that our concern for our environment will be anything beyond a realization of our dependency on an environment. However, it may provide a way on which an environmental ethic could be built.
The Free Soil Review 