Each of your responses should be in the form of a concise but substantial short essay (500-600 words).
1. Explain the debate between Rolston and Callicott concerning intrinsic value in nature. How does Hargrove’s position stand with regard to this debate? What is at stake in all this, and who, if anyone, has the strongest position?
2. Explain and evaluate Callicott’s critique of the idea of ‘wilderness’. How and to what extent does Guha’s ‘third world’ critique overlap with Callicott’s views? What consequences, if any, does this have for environmental ethics?
3. In what ways can human rights conflict with environmental protection? Why might someone recommend ecofeminism as a way to resolve such conflict? Would this really be able to help? Explain.
4. Explain what it would mean to say that "the concept of sustainability is irreducibly normative." What is the significance of this claim, and what consequences would it have for environtmental ethics?
5. Explain the principle 25 of the Rio Declaration. What does it mean, how might it's interpretation depend upon different views concerning human population, and is one view better than the other?