Instructions: Complete an essay for each of the following four questions. Essays should be fully developed, including an introduction, body, and conclusions, with proper citations and references per APA guidelines.

1. Callicott presents a critique of Leopold's "Ecocentric Ethic: The Land Ethic," in which he contends that the "professional neglect, confusion, and (in some cases) contempt" for Leopold's writing on the land ethic may be attributed to three things. What are the three things being referred to by Callicott? Find examples with Leopold's writing to support or refute each of Callicott's arguments. Do you agree with Callicott?

2. Meadows argues that biodiversity should be left alone. Which other authors from this week or the previous weeks also argue for a separation between humans from nature? Do you agree that humans should be considered a part of nature or apart from nature in order to develop an environmental ethic?

3. According to Schweitzer, all destruction or injury to life is evil, and there is no social or ethical rule that absolves that evil or wrong or guilt, but each person must solemnly evaluate how much wrong he must do to survive him or herself. What other authors have you read that acknowledge this inherent conflict between human survival and other species as part of an environmental ethic? How can this conflict be resolved as a practical matter?

4. Should trees and other natural objects have legal rights? What is Stones underlying rationale for granting these rights?