Issues of environmental (ir)responsibility

In this paper the author reflects the questions of humans' relationship to the environment and of their ecological behaviour that becomes together with the development of modern technologies increasingly relevant just as the question whether humans are able to affect fundamentally the environment on the Earth by their activities. According to some authors (e.g. Ehrlich, 1968; Gore, 2006; Wilson, 1995; Winter, Koger, 2009; Šmajs, 2005) human survival is directly connected with people's relationship to the nature; but other influential authors have contradictory opinions or they are at least afraid of overestimation of ecological activities that can lead to neglecting of other important problems (e.g. Simon, 1981; Goklany, 2007; Lomborg, 2007; Klaus, 2007, 2009).These issues are dealt in this article mainly from the perspective of psychological theories and concepts - the Freud's concept of unconsciousness is discussed as well as groupthink, theory of dissonance, contingency trap, Milgram's theory of autonomous and agentic state of consciousness, group and intergroup behaviour, social dilemma - tragedy of the commons.Achieving a sustainable way of life depends on the equilibrium between consumption of individuals and regenerative abilities of the natural environment. However, people still behave as if they were separated from the nature. The linking axis of this article is the question of psychic powers causing individual and collective ecological (ir)responsibility and the resulting consequences.