Ecology is vital for life. Separation of ecosystems from life is impossible (Pierce, 2003). All the various views put forward try to understand the ecosystem and the role humans play in it. The three views put man at varying points of influence.
Philosophical views try to put a proper understanding of ecosystems. Other views describe man as in charge of ecosystems. This has allowed for destruction by man to satisfy his needs. This goes unabated and keeps ecosystems at the peril of human activities (Pierce, 2003). This has threatened diversity on earth. This has serious repurcussions to life even for that of man himself. Philosophical views try to create awareness to humans of their role. They seek for protection by man on ecosystems. Man should not exploit ecosystems at will. They try to create an understanding that each organism has equal right to life in ecosystems.
Evolutionary views explain response of organisms to changes in the ecosystems. They seek to explain how organisms have successfully adapted to these changes (Pierce, 2003). Unlike the religious view, evolutionary view discusses humanity as part of the ecosystems and not as a protector. It also does not give preferential treatment is not given to any organisms in ecosystem. Unlike the philosophical view, which seeks for man to protect ecosystems, this view only, focuses on response of organisms to changes (Pierce, 2003). Man is considered equally in the ecosystem and is affected by changes in the ecosystem as well.
Religious views consider ecosystems from a human perspective. They view ecosystems as a system where man wields more rights than other organisms. Man is viewed as the overall organism in the ecosystems. He has a right with the system when it comes to fulfilling his needs (Pierce, 2003). The creation story depicts man as the controller of ecosystems. This is contrasts much with the evolutionary views. Evolutionary views are concerned with behavior of organisms. It looks at response to changes in ecosystms by organisms and no organism is viewed as supreme (Pierce, 2003).