Yes, apparently "greening" philosophy (and apparently other topics) is a thing. It's a thing I'd never heard of before I opened the welcome email from the professor for the Philosophy 1 (Knowledge and Reality) class I was supposed to start next week.
Here, from Santa Monica College's class catalog, is the description for the class I signed up for:
This course introduces students to the analysis of various metaphysical and epistemological questions and problems in philosophy, typically including the nature and limits of knowledge, the existence of God, the Mind-Body Problem, the Freedom vs. Determination debate, and the Absolution vs. Relativism debate. Related topics in ethics may also be included.
What I got was a syllabus with a banner announcing "Greening Philosophy: A Fresh Introduction to the Field". The "Knowledge and Reality" title was under that. I had no idea what "Greening Philosophy" meant as there was no mention of it in the class description.
Well, I found out.
In the syllabus, mixed in with all the actual philosophy stuff, this was listed under Course Description:
*Ecological Literacy for Sustainability: Above section will provide foundations in ecological literacy and help prepare students to live more sustainably.
You know when I needed to know that this was part of this section? When I was signing up for classes months ago. Not now, a week before the semester starts and when all the other Philosophy 1 sections are filled and closed. Also, if I wanted to take a course on ecological literacy I would have signed up for a class on ecological literacy, not philosophy.
And under Learning Outcomes, in addition to the philosophy stuff, students are expected to:
Assume responsibility for their own impact on the earth by living a sustainable and ethical lifestyle.
So how did this happen? Why is ecological literacy and sustainable living included in a class about philosophy? The answer was provided in
the description for the textbook, which is where the banner title came from:
Greening Philosophy...is part of an
emergent project in higher education...the goal of which is to incorporate
environmental awareness, or ecological literacy, into existing courses without
changing the primary objectives of those courses.
This reader (book) offers the reader an
opportunity to learn philosophy and at the same time to cultivate an
environmental consciousness for global citizenship.
In other words, they're co-opting a topic I'm actually interested in to shoehorn in their propaganda. Got it. But hey, they're still offering readers the opportunity to learn philosophy. Thanks bunches, textbook, for giving me the opportunity to study the subject that I signed up for and paid for.
What I didn't sign up for or pay for was being subjected to propaganda. Using buzz words like "an emergent project...", "to incorporate...awareness...or literacy, into existing courses..." and "global citizenship" doesn't change what it is. There's no reason to incorporate an unrelated subject into another topic. You know what you could do? Just offer courses on environmental awareness, ecological literacy, and sustainable living. But if you did that, your influence is limited only to students who enroll in those classes. So, no, "greening" a subject and pushing "global citizenship" does in fact change the primary objectives of the courses it infiltrates, regardless of the book's claim. It changes it by bringing in a separate topic to deliver propaganda. I wonder if the class's philosophical approach includes any criticism of the greening movement. I'd bet good money it wouldn't tolerate that at all. As I mentioned above, the desired outcome is clearly stated in the syllabus.
What's the point of all this? The point is they have a captive audience of mostly young, malleable minds who are more receptive to being brainwashed than someone older (me) who long ago learned the importance of learning how to think, not what to think. Who learned a long time ago not to blindly follow without thinking for myself. Who learned to be objective, educate myself, and develop intelligently considered opinions rather than parroting what others tell me I should think.
And if this "emergent project" is so vital to making us all better people, why not include it in the course description? I've double-checked the class schedule and catalog and there's no mention of the ecological literacy aspect of the course in any description of it. Why hide it? I also can't help but wonder what aspects of philosophy I'm missing out on during the portion of the class that now has to be devoted to ecological literacy. What philosophy material did the instructor have cut out to accommodate the greening aspect?
Another thing I found telling was that in her email, the professor requested that students review the syllabus to see if the class is a good fit for us individually. It seems like an odd thing to say until you realize that there's a component of the class that hadn't previously been shared. The problem again is that this is the kind of information I needed when I was signing up for the class, not the week before the semester starts and other classes I could have taken are full. I could have chosen another class at the time of registration. Now I'm out a class because, no, this is not a good fit for me. Philosophy is a good fit for me. This class, not so much.
One of my big concerns when I started taking classes online with SMC was due to numerous stories I've heard in recent years of how college professors pushed their personal and political agendas on students, up to and including threatening poor grades for students who held opposing views. I have to say that my experience at SMC has been relatively free of this kind of stuff. A few times something would come through. For example, I didn't need to know nor did I care that my Shakespeare professor was Hispanic and gay. Contrary to what he seemed to believe, I didn't think it was odd that someone like him was into Shakespeare. He's entitled to be interested in Shakespeare as much as the next person. Nor did my Poli Sci professor (an older Black man) seem to have any sort of agenda. What all my teachers at SMC have had is an amazing amount of knowledge and enthusiasm for the subjects they teach, without any other agenda being inserted. And that's all I want.
And that's pretty much what I got until a week before my Philosophy class was to begin. Apparently that's not what I'm going to get from Philosophy 1. And that's not going to work for me.
I haven't heard from my other instructor yet. I can only hope they haven't gotten around to greening Art History.
Updated 8/31/26: Good news - no greening of Art History 1! Hooray!