The postmodernism of deep ecology, the deep ecology of postmodernism, and grand narratives

Deep ecology as developed by Arne Naess and others has much in common with postmodernist philosophy, and postmodernists for the most part are sympathetic to radical environmentalism. This confluence suggests that deep ecology and postmodernism might have common roots and so could provide resources for one another, but also that problems of one could also be problems of the other. Noting the congruence of Heidegger's philosophy (a major source of inspiration for postmodernists) with deep ecology, Michael Zimmerman has suggested that there are antimodernist elements within deep ecology which could have dangerous political consequences. He proposes a new synthesis of ideas from deep ecology, modernism, and postmodernism to obviate these anti-modernist elements while preserving the virtues of each philosophical perspective. What is the relationship between deep ecology, modernism, and postmodernism? Are there dangerous political tendencies in deep ecology? And if so, has Zimmerman provided a synthesis that resolves all the problems in, and unites the best features of, deep ecology, modernism, and postmodernism? [Introduction]