[ORDER SOLUTION] Reading Reflecton

In this order, the writer will read provided material (Book – PDF, not the whole book, haha, just specific sections) and answer four questions. Instructions: 1) Answer all questions/sub-questions – fully, clearly and concisely. These are philosophy questions, therefore, argue and support arguments with evidence within the textbook, no need outside sources, and no need to take a stance on a position. 2) Each question needs – intro, body and conclusion, what matters here is, how well the argument is articulated, proper citations if used direct material, and Questions: 1) “The Land Ethic” – (i) articulate Leopold’s land ethic (do not provide a summary – attempt to pull out the premises and subconclusions/conclusion(s) of his piece); (ii) explain how one might cultivate in one’s self or others, a land ethic; Is there anything within Leopold’s piece that suggests that his land ethic could actually be used to develop an appreciation for human environmental destruction of our biosphere or does his piece contain elements that prevent this possibility? Pg.75 2) “Identification as a Source of Deep Ecological Attitudes” – (i) articulate Naess’s position in this piece (do not provide a summary – attempt to pull out the premises, explain the most pertinent concepts, and identify the subconclusions/conclusion(s) of the piece); (ii) explain how one might cultivate in one’s self or others, a relationship of “deepness” to the environment; Is there anything within Naess’s piece that suggests that his push towards “identification” could actually be used to develop an appreciation for human environmental destruction of our biosphere or does his piece contain elements that prevent this possibility? Pg.88 3) Elaborate the argument (do not provide a summary – attempt to pull out the premises, explain the most pertinent concepts, and identify the subconclusions/conclusion(s)) of Warren’s piece on “The Power and Promise of Ecological Feminism”; (ii) Provide an argument not provided by Warren or by the textbook itself for why Warren is correct that any general feminist position also must attend to the domination of nature and why any theory of the domination (or logic of domination) of nature must also be feminist; (iii) Provide an argument not anticipated by Warren herself or by the textbook against the argument you create in section (ii). pg.164 4) In “Two Objections and Responses” (Section D), objections are lodged against Hill’s and Williston’s accounts (the immediately preceding readings. (i) Elaborate two arguments not found in “Two Objections and Responses,” in my lectures, or in Hill’s or Williston’s respective works (they anticipate some counter-objections against their own positions) against Hill’s and/or Williston’s arguments and (ii) elaborate two replies not found in “Two Objections and Responses,” in my lectures, or in Hill’s or Williston’s respective works to argue against the objections you lodge in (i). Pg.253 Textbook Pdf: https://onedrive.live.com/?authkey=%21Au8%5FK2KETQCQ8AI&cid=0CE5D5AD46AB8383&id=CE5D5AD46AB8383%214599&parId=CE5D5AD46AB8383%21238&o=OneUp