Brett Pino

Part I – Land Ethics Summary

“…preserve integrity, stability and beauty in the biotic community.” This

statement alone can be viewed as extremely rigid; some would go as far to say that

Leopold didn’t support the expansiveness of our growing community, such as, building

on the land in general. Leopold left his Land Ethic statement’s open for the reader to

come up with their own interpretation, that is most likely to increase the inner exploration

of our own morals upon the way we view and ultimately treat the land. Leopold had a

passionate understanding that this way we’re living won’t go away and shouldn’t

completely, but more importantly, there’s a required balance. The fact that we all go out

of our way to take hikes or camping trips just to submerged ourselves in nature and

escape “all of this” that we have created is a clear indication we all believe in a similar

ethic.

Biologically we’re one with nature (land/animals) but in the ways we’re not make

us human, setting humans far apart from sharing this said balance. The way we function

on a grand scheme shows that we’ve invented abstract things that have little importance

to those under expressed relationships to nature. That greater picture to life exists beyond

economic growth, the power hunger mindset is completely destructive to our balance we

have with land and animals. As Leopold explains with the concepts of economic self-

interest, it clouds our minds from the strength in our morals, that we might have if we
spent time appreciating what life is all about. We can’t begin to care unless we truly

meditate the concepts and apply our morals.

Part II – Response to following questions

1. My philosophy begins with the thought of how I grow extremely exhausted of

being less surrounded by nature and more around humans and what they create

past art. Sometimes the abstract concepts we come up with lack beauty because it

complicates everything by inventing things to care about that aren’t even real, for

example, the concept of time.

2. “This land is our land” says enough that we believe we own it and add to it as

though it only exists for us which is just simple-minded. When the Native

Americans hunted animals, they would ask the animal’s spirit for permission. I

believe at the very least if we sit for one whole day submerge in nature, just

meditate on the connection you feel just in the soil beneath your feet, that you’ll

realize exactly that we’re not properly coexisting.

3. It must be worse than it was in the 1940s. Everything is based of immediate

gratification; we expect things to work quickly and get results fast. There’s no

doubt that people put money down for land as property to turn around and make

money, that usually goes without thinking about the ecological aspects.

4. This is really hard to answer for me; I think a lot about my connection to

nonhuman things and how I can’t do much by myself to increase the quality in our

relations with everything else already being as far gone as it is. I just want to
 purchase a cabin in the woods away from everyone, maybe that way I would be

more inclined to grow my own food.

5. As I stated in Part I, I feel absolutely have my own understanding of this

statement. Finding the meaning for me is as simple as going hiking or camping to

get away from it all. I dislike being around all this manmade stuff constantly.

Overall, you just spend sometime befriending nature and learning about it, you

come out feeling a lot different about it.

6. I don’t entirely understand this question. I instinctively want to answer beauty

because that’s a word that describes my relationship with land. I find untouched

places beautiful and I value that visual. Everything is super fresh and lush; all my

senses are activated, and I feel at home. Overall, I respect land.

7. I have a genuine interest for non-human elements. I don’t really think what we’re

doing is all the time right, I respect technology advancements, but those manmade

abstract concepts can really make me anxious.

Part III – critique

I’ve always had a very strong admiration for land and animals, I feel very

connected to everything around me. The relationship I share is a very spiritual one.

Leopold thoroughly goes into depth about the issues behind the ethics on how we treat

the land. He put things into great perspective it had me reanalyzing my own views. He

speaks about how we rely on the government to fix our problems; we’ve gained
respect for each human right but not lands and even provided passages from The

Bible about the ethics on how to treat the land.

I’ve always had a very strong admiration for land and animals, I feel very connected

to everything around me. The relationship I share is a very spiritual one, I spend a lot

of time in nature, taking nemophilia related photography and really pay attention to

my senses. It allows me to really go deep inside myself and quiet all unimportant

things. Leopold thoroughly goes into depth about the issues behind the ethics on how

we treat the land. He put things into great perspective it had me reanalyzing my own

views. He speaks about how we rely on the government to fix our problems; we’ve

gained respect for each human right but not lands and even provided passages from

The Bible about the ethics on how to treat the land. I have mad respect for this

philosopher and would highly recommend this during a heated debate with someone

who carries strong morals for interests following economical growth instead of

ecological growth.