Towards an Ecological Philosophy of Education: Eco-Education Against Cartesian Nature

Year 2025, Volume: 24 Issue: 1, 359 - 387, 28.03.2025

Oya Güler

Abstract

This study examines how the Cartesian thought structure in modern education affects the relationship between humans and nature, emphasizing the need for an ecological educational philosophy. Cartesian thought has fostered a human-centered perspective that perceives nature as a mechanical entity, exacerbating environmental challenges. In contrast, ecological education aims to cultivate individuals' sensitivity to environmental issues and foster ethical responsibility by recognizing the essential relationship between humans and the natural world. By analyzing these effects, this research highlights that ecological education enhances environmental awareness, supports the adoption of sustainable lifestyles, and encourages harmonious interactions with nature. Restructuring education systems with an ecological paradigm will equip individuals with the knowledge necessary to comprehend environmental challenges and contribute to sustainable practices and conservation efforts.

Keywords

Ecological Education, Nature, Sustainability, Environmental Awareness, Cartesian Thought, Philosophy Of Education.

Ekolojik Bir Eğitim Felsefesine Doğru: Kartezyen Doğaya Karşı Eko-Eğitim

Abstract

Bu çalışma, modern eğitim sisteminin Kartezyen düşünce yapısının doğa-insan ilişkisine etkilerini inceleyerek ekolojik eğitim felsefesine geçişin gerekliliğini vurgulamaktadır. Ekolojik eğitim, bireylerin çevre bilincini artırmayı, sürdürülebilir yaşam biçimlerini benimsemeyi ve doğayla uyumlu bir şekilde yaşamayı teşvik etmektedir. Kartezyen düşünce, doğayı mekanik bir nesne olarak görerek insan merkezli bir bakış açısını pekiştirmiştir. Bu durum, çevresel sorunların derinleşmesine yol açmıştır. Ekolojik eğitim, insanın doğanın ayrılmaz bir parçası olduğunu kabul ederek, bireylerin çevresel sorunlara duyarlılık geliştirmelerini ve etik sorumluluk almalarını hedefler. Eğitim sistemlerinin ekolojik bir paradigma doğrultusunda yeniden yapılandırılması, bireylerin çevresel sorunları anlamalarını ve çözüm üretmelerini sağlayacaktır.

Keywords

Ekolojik Eğitim, Doğa, Sürdürülebilirlik, Çevre Bilinci, Kartezyen Düşünce, Eğitim Felsefesi.

References

• Abram, D. (2012). “The Spell of the Sensuous: Perception and Language in a More-Than-Human World.” Retrieved from https://www.google.com/books?hl=tr&lr=&id=-aVDf4-42tAC&oi=fnd&pg=PR9&dq=Abram,+David.+1997.+The+Spell+of+the+Sensuous:+Perception+and+Language+in+a+More-Than-Human+World.+Vintage+Books.+&ots=h4H8coeNxq&sig=YtI7_qif951efPyDc3_1qyTIhQo.
• Ahouse Merus, J. N. (1998). “The Web of Life: A New Understanding of Living Systems by Fritjof Capra.” https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-0526(199805/06)3:53.0.CO;2-M.
• Barnett, R. (2015). Understanding the University. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315678245.
• Barnett, R. (2017). The Ecological University. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315194899.
• Bateson, G. (n.d.). “Steps to an Ecology of Mind: Collected Essays in Anthropology, Psychiatry.” Accessed December 13, 2024. https://books.google.com.tr/books?hl=tr&lr=&id=RGq0EAAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PR5&dq=Bateson,+Gregory.%E2%80%AFSteps+to+an+Ecology+of+Mind.+&ots=dPIu9zs-DH&sig=SPtnmMQl5qbN6Suw6E6pVkBxn88&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=Bateson%2C%20Gregory.%E2%80%AFSteps%20to%20an%20Ecology%20of%20Mind.&f=false.
• Becker, G. (n.d.). “Bildung für nachhaltige Entwicklung in urbanen Bildungslandschaften.” https://doi.org/10.25656/01:21828.
• Bonnett, M. (2017). “Environmental Consciousness, Sustainability, and the Character of Philosophy of Education.” Studies in Philosophy and Education, 36(3), 333-347. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11217-016-9556-x.
• Bowers, C. A. (1994). “Education, Cultural Myths and the Ecological Crisis.” Human Ecology Review, Winter/Spring, 1.
• Brown, T., Jeanes, R., & Cutter-Mackenzie, A. (2014). “Social Ecology as Education.” In The Socioecological Educator: A 21st Century Renewal of Physical, Health, Environment and Outdoor Education (pp. 23-45). Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-7167-3_2.
• Capra, F. (1982). The Turning Point: Science, Society, and the Rising Culture. Simon and Schuster. Bantam Books. https://archive.org/details/fritjof-capra-the-turning-point.
• Cobern, W., Tobin, K., Brown-Acquay, H., Espinet, M., Irzik, G., Jegede, O., Herrera, L., et al. (2005). “Beyond Cartesian Dualism: Encountering Affect in the Teaching and Learning of Science.” 29. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-3808-9.
• Deetz, J. (1996). Descartes’ Legacy: The Challenge of the New Science. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
• Deleuze, G., & Patton, P. (1994). Difference and Repetition. Columbia University Press.
• Descartes, R. (1641). Meditations on First Philosophy. Translated by John Cottingham. Cambridge University Press.
• Descartes, R. (1637). Discourse on the Method of Rightly Conducting One's Reason and Seeking Truth in the Sciences. Translated by John Veitch. Prometheus Books. (https://archive.org/details/discourseonmetho1912desc/page/n9/mode/2up)
• Dewey, J. (2008). Democracy and Education, 5. https://doi.org/10.1086/591813.
• Diehm, C. (2002). “Arne Naess, Val Plumwood, and Deep Ecological Subjectivity: A Contribution to the ‘Deep Ecology-Ecofeminism Debate.’” Ethics & the Environment, 7(1), 24-38. https://doi.org/10.1353/een.2002.0003.
• Freire, P. (1994). Pedagogy of Hope: Reliving Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Bloomsbury Academic.
• Gadotti, M. (2008). “Education for Sustainability: A Critical Contribution to the Decade of Education for Sustainable Development.” Green Theory & Praxis: The Journal of Ecopedagogy, 4(1), 15-64. https://doi.org/10.3903/GTP.2008.1.3.
• Glasser, H. (2011). “Naess’s Deep Ecology: Implications for the Human Prospect and Challenges for the Future.” Inquiry, 54(1), 52-77. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020174X.2011.542943.
• Guattari, F. (2000). The Three Ecologies. ACET Series. Athlone Press. https://www.academia.edu/30403909/Guattari_Felix_The_Three_Ecologies
• Hargreaves, A. (2003). “Teaching in the Knowledge Society: Education in the Age of Insecurity.” Educational Researcher, 32(2), 1-12.
• Hopkins, C. (2013). “Education for Sustainable Development in Formal Education in Canada.” In Schooling for Sustainable Development in Canada and the United States (pp. 23-36). Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4273-4_2.
• Kahn, R. V. (2010). “Critical Pedagogy, Ecoliteracy, & Planetary Crisis: The Ecopedagogy Movement,” 186. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/240595272_Critical_pedagogy_ecoliteracy_planetary_crisis_The_ecopedagogy_movement.
• Kollmuss, A., & Agyeman, J. (2002). “Mind the Gap: Why Do People Act Environmentally and What Are the Barriers to Pro-Environmental Behavior?” Environmental Education Research, 8(3). https://doi.org/10.1080/1350462022014540.
• Klautke, S., & Köhler, K. (1991). “Umwelterziehung - Ein Didaktisches Konzept.” In Unterricht Biologie (UB), 164/15, 48-51.
• Leopold, A., Schwartz, C. W., & Finch, R. (1992). Sand County Almanac; and Sketches Here and There. Oxford University Press (N.Y.).
• Martusewicz, R. A., Edmundson, J., & Lupinacci, J. (2020). EcoJustice Education. Edited by R. A. Martusewicz, J. Edmundson, & J. Lupinacci. Third Edition. New York: Routledge, 2021. Series: Sociocultural, Political, and Historical Studies in Education Series. Second edition published 2015. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429020049.
• Miller, N. C., Kumar, S., Pearce, K. L., & Baldock, K. L. (2021). “The Outcomes of Nature-Based Learning for Primary School Aged Children: A Systematic Review of Quantitative Research.” Environmental Education Research, 27(8), 1115-1140. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2021.1921117.
• Morin, E. (1999). Seven complex lessons in education for the future (N. Poller, Çev.). United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO).
• Öztürk, M. (2017). “Sürdürülebilir Gelişme Odaklı Eğitim: Kuramsal Çerçeve, Tarihsel Gelişim ve Uygulamaya Dönük Öneriler.” Dergipark.org.tr. İlköğretim Online, 2017. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/ilkonline/article/342997.
• Naess, A. (1973). “The Shallow and the Deep, Long-Range Ecology Movement: A Summary.” Inquiry (United Kingdom), 16(1-4), 95-100. https://doi.org/10.1080/00201747308601682.
• Nash, R. (2007). The Rights of Nature: A History of Environmental Ethics. Recording for the Blind & Dyslexic.
• Neal, P., & Palmer, J. (2003). The Handbook of Environmental Education. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203422021.
• Orr, D. W. (1994). “Earth in Mind: On Education, Environment, and the Human Prospect.” Island Press. https://tr.z-lib.gs/book/5958578/64604d/earth-in-mind-on-education-environment-and-the-human-prospect.html.
• Özdemir, O. (2007). “Yeni Bir Çevre Eğitimi Perspektifi: ‘Sürdürülebilir Gelişme Amaçlı Eğitim’.” 32, 145.
• Özdemir, O. (2016). Ekolojik Okuryazarlık ve Çevre Eğitimi. Ankara: Pegem Akademi Yayıncılık. https://doi.org/10.14527/9786053185970.
• Sterling, S. (2001). “Sustainable Education.” https://www.researchgate.net/publication/289505456.
• Stratford, R. J. (2024). “Towards Ecological Everything – The Ecological University, Ecological Subjectivity and the Ecological Curriculum.” Policy Futures in Education, January. https://doi.org/10.1177/14782103241227005.
• Ungaretti, T., Thompson, K. R., Miller, A., & Peterson, T. O. (2015). “Problem-Based Learning: Lessons From Medical Education and Challenges for Management Education.” Academy of Management Learning & Education, 14(2), 173-186. https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2013.0245.
• Westwood, R. I., & Jack, G. (2007). “Manifesto for a Post-Colonial International Business and Management Studies: A Provocation.” Critical Perspectives on International Business, 3(3), 246-265. https://doi.org/10.1108/17422040710775021.