Question: At the start of his book Naure’s Ghosts, Mark Barrow describes seven basic arguments/rationales that naturalists developed for justifying the preservation of species from the 1770s to the

Question: At the start of his book Naure’s Ghosts, Mark Barrow describes seven basic arguments/rationales that naturalists developed for justifying the preservation of species from the 1770s to the 1970s (culminating in the U.S. Endangered Species Act of 1973): aesthetic, economic, ecological, evolutionary, cultural, scientific, and ethical. How did each of these rationales relate to ecological ways of thinking? Choose three of these arguments excluding the ecological one, and discuss how each one compared and/or contrasted to ecological ways of thinking, as discussed by Sharon Kingsland in her article “Conveying the Intellectual Challenge of Ecology.”

Aim to compose an essay of 350-450 words that minimizes duplication and includes as much specific supporting evidence as possible from the two assigned readings.

____________

Note: You can find the answers here in the book:

https://books.google.com/books?id=6uprrVExnmEC&printsec=frontcover&dq=Nature%27s+Ghosts:+Confronting+Extinction+from+the+Age+of+Jefferson+to+the+Age+of+Ecology&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiVn6LY3I7gAhXwoYMKHWSiCaoQ6AEIKDAA#v=onepage&q&f=false

I suggest that might help:  if you looking for something on the book,  you can use the search box in the left side, to look for some key words