Hettinger and Throop’s Refocusing Egocentrism is by far the best argument I have heard thus far as to why we should preserve the ecosystems. Their expansion of Leopold’s idea that meaning was held within stability and interdependence to mean that value was not just in interdependence of any kind but of the wild. The natural, the organic, the wild, as they call it, has an intrinsic value and there for must be preserved. Their examples of why we value what is natural were persuasive with the consideration of plastic surgery taking away from natural human beauty and stocking a pond taking away from the triumph and thrill of catching a wild fish. However, these are all examples of things we value in nature in relation to goods we receive from it, pleasure, joy, and triumph and sp it makes nature the instrumental good to get to these. As much as I believe that they are right to think that nature is beautiful and holds value I think that they contradicted themselves with the fact that nature holds intrinsic value. Other than the examples listed above there is one major example in the text where they are assigning what appears to be an instrumental good that comes from valuing the wild. “Valuing the wild acknowledges that limits to human mastery and domination of the world are imperative …. Confronting the other helps humans to cultivate a proper sense of humility” (p. 92). The benefit to humans of valuing the wild comes in the form of humility. This would mean that the wild is not a good in itself it is good because we see it as a good, it bring good to us in the way that it brings us humility and joy and inspiration. Nature without humans giving it instrumental value would not have value. I do not think that the authors, as convincing as their agreements are for the reasons to value and preserve the wild I cannot see that the wild is intrinsic.