THE

entertainment centers for tourists, the combination of the lack of drinking water and food with huge pools and all-inclusive restaurants, minimum wages for extremely hard physical work with reckless expenses for ghostly pleasures and fleeting impressions. The whole consumer architecture is aimed at instilling in the human consciousness an unbreakable truth – to work, to be poor or economical is humiliating. The problem is that this sense of freedom is illusory. Deformed moral attitudes, a break with the natural environment, isolation from global problems, greed, cruelty to others and unrestrained consumerism make a person indifferent, empty and confused. The person loses resistance under the feet in any crisis situation, does not know what to do on his/her own, cannot enjoy such basic values as live communication with loved ones, sunset (without posting photos to social networks), dreams (without searching for ideas on the Internet), etc. If we do not eliminate this consumer attitude to the world and people, do not rebuild our homes and shopping malls, do not shift the emphasis on highly moral values, we will face one of the worst dystopian scenarios in which a person (in the best sense of the word) will degenerate into an ordinary representative of the mass herd, which is managed and used as a tool for someone's own purposes.

. attention was accented to the importance of moral formation of ecological imperative, as an effective means for protecting the environment.
When Nature permitted mankind she did more than make an error in her calculations...
she committed a sin against herself.

Emile Cioran
The subject of the human-world philosophy contains a practical dimension, expressed through the human-nature relationship, which manifests itself at the level of a particular person, group of people, society, nation, state, and humanity as a whole. To small children, as soon as they begin to separate themselves from the world of things, it seems that everything around exists for them. They think of themselves as the center of their world. This position in philosophy, when people are understood as the center of the world and development, was called anthropocentrism.
Unfortunately, as the average person matures their anthropocentrism also strengthens, which in today's society, together with the tendency of increasing consumption, can grow into extreme individualism, in the language of philosophyegocentrism. A person may not deny that kindness, justice, love, beauty, and wellbeing of people are the foundations of social life. However, these values of human existence are perceived as existing independently of the Self, but they must be present NOW as a given. This position can be exemplified by the legend: "…One young man had a dream that he had entered a large store. An angel stood behind the counter. "What are you selling?" the young man asked. "Anything you want," said the angel politely. The young man began to list, "I would like all wars in the world to end, justice for the wronged, tolerance and generosity for strangers, love in families, work for the unemployed, unity in the Church, and… and…" The angel interrupted him, "Excuse me sir, you didn't understand me. We don't sell fruits, only seeds." [1] So our consciousness, our soul, is the field that will bear fruit, depending on the quality of the grain of love, beauty, kindness, justice that is sown there.
In what ways do these values practically manifest in us? Obviously, we start from a position where "I" is my home, my friends, my work, my city or village, my country. Therefore, I can't litter, pollute the environment, because it is the environment of MY city or village, because it is the nature of MY country. I can't unnecessarily leave my electrical appliances on and burn gas because I conserve energy for all my contemporaries and descendants; it is a small but practical manifestation of MY love for them and the energy resources of my land.
At the level of humanity as a whole, the negative tendencies of human-nature interconnection have become global. Because modern man continues to view the nature from the anthropocentric perspective perceiving it mainly as a tool to meet his needs, which, in the end, entails catastrophic consequences.
"When determining a situation, it is always necessary to consider two aspects: environmental and moral. As long as today's world system remains as it is, there is no other way than to maneuver between two reefs. Along the way, we can formulate the following ethical and environmental dilemma: the greater the percentage of the world's population living in prosperity, the higher is the threat to the ecosystem; the . more the ecosystem is protected, the higher is the risk of widening the poverty line" [2].
"Man must be attuned to a new attitude towards nature, to replace the usual, traditional to a new attitude towards nature, to replace the usual, traditional consumer attitude to the one scientifically grounded and environmentally friendly" [3]. If current generations don't realize the reality of the environmental crisis and don't offer quality action, then future generations will be on the verge of survival. In our opinion, the moral eco-imperative can form philosophical thinking, since "philosophy is an intellectual and spiritual humus (soil), a wise moral mind through which a person can identify and determine the issues that make up the essence of their choice and destiny" [4].
The moral imperative, according to Immanuel Kant, envisages such a behavior and activity of a person that is based on a conscious duty and that can be perceived by other people as a common and necessary law for all. This requirement must be projected on the relationship with nature, as it puts the urgent need for humans to change the habitual lifestyle, which puts consumption as the main goal of human existence and leads to undermining natural conditions of human existence and biosphere self-regulation processes. This is especially important in the current context of globalization, which is accompanied by processes of unification on a planetary scale of various spheres of human activities such as production, trade, technology, as well as culture and political institutions. Unfortunately, these processes, which are manifested in the unification of lifestyles, give rise to a new type of marginal man with his inherent mercenary and orientation to the consumption of culture's ersatz values, when nature appears only as an object to meet his needs. The unification of lifestyles is, in fact, a simulation of instrumental way of living in simplified and more accessible version.
Globalization has exacerbated a worldwide crisis in the relationship between mankind and nature, and without an urgent solution it will result in a deadlock. "The fact that the environmental crisis has far-reaching implications for the ethics, economy and politics, will certainly not be denied by any reasonable person; it is also undeniable that this crisis is deeply rooted in the history of European culture" [5].
While an ancient person perceived nature as a sacralized "world of the gods" and therefore disrespectful attitude towards it was considered ungodly and deadly, a modern man perceives nature as a tool for his own needs, which undoubtedly leads to catastrophic consequences.
A new generation man with particular activity satisfies his own interests, neglecting the value of nature and forgetting that it is through natural processes that human life is possible at all. Nature can easily do without man, but man can't exist without nature. Unfortunately, without realizing a critical danger to life in general, man surely, though maybe unconsciously, destroys the natural world. That is why we need to rethink the basics of human existence and interaction with nature, analyze our priority levers and change our attitude towards the environment, and, most importantly, to find ways out of the crisis, which man himself has created with his thoughtless consumerist attitude. Such modern principles as "when you've used it throw it away", "the more the better" harm nature the most. Consumerism is the ultimate consequence of the industrial civilization development and, unfortunately, . the price for it is natural disasters, natural resources depletion, pollution, and exacerbation of the ecological crisis in general.
The industrial civilization is responsible for the individual's eco-deviant behavior, which has become a sad syndrome of modern society. Often, different social groups develop a view that their stereotyped deviant behavior is ordinary and will not cause any condemnation or warnings. Destroying the anthill or the nest, clogging the nature aroundsuch actions are perceived as completely normal and not considered unacceptable. Rather, such behavior becomes a kind of game: "Will I be caught or not?" The undeveloped majority with its conformal behavior tends to choose deviance as a means of asserting itself in a subcultural space. The causes of eco-deviant behaviors include gaps in parenting and education, lack of knowledge about the processes taking place on the planet, indifference and lack of accountability at the level of society.
Therefore, in today's world, the world of active technical development and consumerist values, global dangers to humanity have ceased to be an abstract problem and have become an existential reality for every human being. "All our crises: environmental, political, demographic, industrial, energy, national, etc. are all different sides, separate manifestations of one and only SOCIAL CRISIS OF HUMANITY. In order to solve individual crises as manifestations (symptoms) we must solve the main crisis as the cause" [6].
In the context of the global social and environmental crisis, the moral imperative by which each person forms their eco-consciousness must become the main imperative. "Bringing" a natural (or "environmental") dimension to a system of moral values can only mean treating nature as "a specific, special, ethical value. It is the search for the meaning of nature as a value at the level of real historical ethos that will make it possible to involve this meaning in a complex mechanism of social education and include it to real moral practice" [7].
Emphasis on moral ideals, guidelines, societal priorities and practices for the benefit of harmonious development of man and nature as the highest value explored by ecological ethics, the main purpose of which is the moral responsibility of mankind for the flora and fauna of the planet, for the bio and ecospheres, as well as for future generations of people.
Usually, most thinkers in their studies of global problems, and ecological problems in particular, are based on the concept of comparing anthropocentric (when dominant element is human) approach, nature-centric (when dominant element is nature) approach and ecocentric approach (when dominant element is human-nature interaction).
The anthropocentric ecological approach regards man as a transcendent, with endless possibilities in the subjugation of nature. This type of eco-consciousness is characterized by a purely pragmatic, utilitarian nature of the society-nature relationship, which is caused, above all, by an economic benefits.
The nature-centric ecological approach is a system of ideas about the world based on the idea of society's dependence on nature. The cult of nature and neglecting humans can be exemplified by the radicalized activities of the Greens in Western Europe. Partially this approach can be found in Henry Thoreau's works. The philosopher believed that nature should be given the same moral rights as man, moreover, the laws of nature should be placed above the legal . ones. Transcendentalist Henry Thoreau believed that the human personality had an infinite spiritual wealth, but social authoritarianism puts pressure on man and thereby deforms him; for liberation he needs to get alone and get closer to nature. Thoreau, following this outlook, secluded himself in a forest hut, where he lived for more than two years, and described his life and experience in the famous book "Walden; or, Life in the Woods" [8].
An ecocentric approach places the interconnection of man and nature in the first place, according to which "the totality of all that exists in this world is recognized as intrinsic value. This doesn't mean that its components, including man, are of no value. The whole constitutes a hierarchy, whereby the task of man is to gradually open the interconnection of these values" [2]. In our opinion, this approach enables harmonious development and coexistence of both nature and humanity as a whole. The ecocentric approach is clearly expressed in the teachings of Aldo Leopold and Albert Schweitzer.
In his classic work, "A Sand County Almanac", which outlined the basic ideas of environmental ethics, Leopold calls his approach "Land Ethic". He wrote, "We do not protect the land because we consider it to be a property belonging to us. When we realize that it is a community to which we belong, we may begin to use it with love and respect. Only under this condition can the earth withstand the onslaught of a mechanized man… The notion of the earth as a community forms the basis of ecology, but love and respect for the earth are ethical" [9]. Leopold emphasized that when considering any issue, one should look not only for what is economically viable, but also for what is ethically and aesthetically good. Eco-philosopher also outlined several basic principles of his environmental ethics. In his opinion, "the thing is right, when it tends to maintain the integrity, stability and beauty of a biological group. It is wrong when it has the opposite tendency." According to the ethics of the earth, you should not: destroy species or promote their extinction; mindlessly mix native and exotic species; extract excess energy from the bowels of the earth and release it into the biota; barrage or pollute rivers; it is worth taking care of the animals.
The priority of Schweitzer's ethics is the rejection of the anthropocentric approach of his predecessors. "The ethics, then, is that I feel compelled to show the same reverence for life, both in relation to my will-to-live and in relation to any other one. And this is the basic principle of moral reasoning. The good is that which serves the preservation and development of life; the evil is that which destroys or impedes life" [10]. Often, we see people rip a flower or break a blossoming branch of a cherry tree to satisfy a whim, intentionally crush a snail or a rain worm, and in Schweitzer's view, this is absolute evil. Although we could set this worm aside in the grass so that it doesn't burn out in the sun, or set the snail aside so that someone doesn't accidentally crush it. Unnecessary destruction causes self-destruction. A person is moral only when he is subordinate to the inner impulse to help any life and, of course, does everything in order not to damage life as a whole. Awe for life is a fundamental principle that must be the basis for the spiritual restoration of humanity. Schweitzer argued that every form of life is sacred, so the principle of dividing life into higher and lower, more valuable and less valuable is absurd. A human being, who is endowed with the capacity to think, must be responsible for every living thing, because to become a moral person means to become a truly thinking person. "The . ethics of reverence for life gives us a weapon against illusory ethics and illusory ideals. But we only gain the power to carry out these ethics when we, each one in his own life, adhere to the principles of humanity. Only when most people in their thoughts and actions will constantly stimulate humanity and polemicize with reality, will humanity cease to be a sentimental idea, and it will become what it should bethe basis for beliefs of man and society" [10].
Also relevant today is the "ethics of responsibility" of Hans Jonas, according to which responsibility extends to the entire planet. The Jonas' imperative is an interpretation of Immanuel Kant's categorical imperative, taking into account the new unique moral subject's existence conditions created by the technogenic civilization. The principle of "acting in such a way that the consequences of your actions are compatible with the support of a truly human life on Earth" [11] has become a kind of appeal to take into account the "ethical right of nature", to create new ethics which are to become "ethics oriented towards the future". The subject of responsibility is now collective humanity, while traditional morality is more individualoriented.
Man was "metaphysically" and ethically proclaimed "the measure of all things", which became the basis of humanism. Like Schweitzer, Jonas opposed the anthropocentric attitude toward nature. The ethics of responsibility was the answer to specific requests of the technological future, being, in essence, technical fatalism.
To sum up, we want to emphasize that it is the moral imperative that becomes the space of the ideal in human-nature relationship. The ecological imperative of the present is an objective command to humanity: in order to survive, we must radically change the way of life and interaction with the natural environment, significantly limiting the needs of society and, finally, realizing our responsibility for everything that happens in nature. Moral responsibility leads to a transition from a "domination model" to a "coexistence model", which produces a balance between modern existence and the ecosystem past.
The main tasks of the ecological imperative are: -Realize your own responsibility for the environment state and your dependence on it; -Create a system of values that defines nature as a harmonious basis of life; -Develop practical skills and a purposeful behavior strategy. «The Natural Basis of Ethics: good, not the one that promotes individual satisfaction or conservation of species, but the one that promotes biocenosis, which is beneficial for humankind and the entire biosphere (the idea of modern Western Social Democrats and the Greens about a coherent ecological society; Albert Schweitzer -"Reverence for Life": "I am the life that wants to live among other lives that also want to live")" [6].
The process of Ukraine's accession to the European community implies fundamental changes in the environmental education of youth, because a wellformed environmental awareness of citizens is the key to a high level state development.
"Humanity is faced with a choice: return to its nature (symbiosis) or perish" [6]. The words of Etienne Vermeersch which can be called a covenant for contemporaries will be relevant here: "...it would be highly desirable to instill in the process of education a respect for nature in all its manifestations, whether it be . trees, field flowers, algae, butterflies, squirrels or wild boars, or such wonders of inanimate nature as stalagmites, stalactites, mountain peaks, canyons or waterfalls. This standard of behavior is that everything created by nature should be treated with caution, that you can't foolishly destroy what has received form and image. This approach can be reinforced on the basis of Samaritan ethics and the ethics of the future, but in the end, respect for nature must become a second nature, a habit" [12]. Knowledge of the real effects of human management in nature and its impact on the plant and animal world, as well as on the health of human generations, can play the role of a brake factor in the self-destruction of humanity. "We are always indulging our generation's whims at the expense of all who will come after us. We have taken ourselves as a unit of ethical dimension, not only distinctly separated from the natural world, but also devoid of a sense of obligation to others..." [12]. Therefore, each of us today must follow the environmental imperative, recognizing our direct responsibility not only for ourselves and our present environment, but also for future generations.