Is Eating Dog Inmoral or Not?

558 Words2 Pages

In Jonathan Safran Foer’s “Let Them Eat Dog”, he discusses a controversial, yet debatable topic. The topic concerns the eating of dogs, and whether or not it is moral and right. This is an issue that has two sides to consider; it is either completely right or completely wrong, there is no in-between. The argument to eat dog is presented with the use of ethos, pathos, and logos. Foer has a number of important arguments why eating dogs is moral and unmoral, in the end he leaves it to the judgment of the reader as to which side they come down on.
The eating of companion animals is a taboo, but dog is not the only companion animal. I believe Foer stops at dogs to preserve the man’s best friend angle. Foer sites research that shows dogs have very similar mental capacities of a pig, cow, and chicken. Ethos kicks in due to the fact that researchers say dogs have mental capacities similar to other animals, yet people think it is immoral to kill dogs but moral to kill chickens, cows, or pigs; Furthermore, Foer states “if we let dogs breed on their own, the country would have a local meat s...

Show More
Related

  • Norcross: Torturing Puppies And Eating Meat Summary

    1037 Words  | 3 Pages

    Norcross expresses that when he said that “it is, of course unfortunate for Fred that he can no longer enjoy the taste of chocolate, but that in no way excuses the imposition of severe suffering on the puppies.” Therefore, Norcross believes Fred is morally wrong for having the puppies suffer in order for him to be able to enjoy the taste of chocolate again. In Norcross’ next premises, he believes that people whom purchase and eat factory farm meats while knowing what torture that animals endure in the farms are equally morally wrong like Fred with the puppies. People who consume factory meats are doing that for their own pleasure too, like Fred. According to Norcross, people do not need to consume meat for health reasons. Norcross points out that the majority of people who eliminate meats from their diet, do not suffer any ill health issues and can live healthy without

    Read More

  • Arguments Against Factory Farming: Alastair Norcross's Puppies, Pigs, and People: Eating Meat and Marginal Cases

    918 Words  | 2 Pages

    Norcross, Alastair. “Puppies, Pigs, and People: Eating Meat and Marginal Cases.” Philosophical Perspectives 18, (2004): 229-245.

    Read More

  • Secrets and Horrors in the Documentary Food Inc.

    951 Words  | 2 Pages

    One issue the documentary highlights is the abuse of animals and workers by the food companies, in order to reveal how the companies hide the dark side of the food world from the public. In several instances, we see animals being treated cruelly. The workers have little regard for the lives of the animals since they are going to die anyways. Chickens are grabbed and thrown into truck beds like objects, regulation chicken coups allow for no light the entire lives of the chickens, and cows are pushed around with fork lifts to take to slaughter. Many chickens are even bred to have such large breasts that their bones and organs cannot support their bodies. These chickens cannot walk and they even wheeze in pain for the cameras. The film is clearly using the unacceptable premise fallacy of appeal to emotion in this instance, because the viewer is meant to feel pity at the sight of the abused animals. This supports their conclusion, because many American’s imagine their food coming from a happy, country farm and would be horrified to know the truth.

    Read More

  • A Modest Proposal And Let Them Eat Dog Rhetorical Analysis

    815 Words  | 2 Pages

    “Let Them Eat Dog” talks about how in many countries it is completely normal to eat the family pet. I personally could not eat my pet. Foer quotes George Orwell saying “all animals are equal but some are more equal than others”(2). In my opinion this means

    Read More

  • The Myth Of The Rabid Locavore Analysis

    768 Words  | 2 Pages

    She was able to evoke emotions by her choice of negatively charged words towards the other author, Stephen Budiansky, and his work, Math Lessons for Locavores. By the end of the article, the reader developed strong negative views concerning the other article solely on Trueman’s diction and her tone. By writing, “Throw in a bunch of dubious and/or irrelevant statistics that appear to be truly locally sourced-i.e., pulled out of your own behind,” and “What’s so maddening about sloppy op-eds like this is that they give fodder to folks who hate the very notion that their food choices have any consequences beyond their own waistlines and bank balances”, Trueman expresses her dislike of Budiansky’s thoughst on the topic. She describes his article in such a dismissive way that her audiences adopts the same views as her. As a whole, her way of writing creates an overall negative tone towards the article being criticized. While doing this, she also points out flaws in his argument and exposes his faults in reasoning. As a result, his argument becomes invalid in the eyes of the readers and they are left with a clear winning perspective on the issue of the Local Food Movement. Kerry Truman's use of pathos in her critical analysis of Budiansky’s Math Lessons for Locavores was successful in the aspect that she evokes emotions in her

    Read More

  • Carnivore: Chewing Through Our Right to Privacy

    2121 Words  | 5 Pages

    Basically, the debate around Carnivore is the FBI versus everyone else. Both sides of the Carnivore debate use mainly argument of definition to present their points. Since the integrity of the FBI has been called into question, the FBI’s argument for the use and need of Carnivore consists mainly of logos and ethos. Ethos is also used in order to build an image that the public can trust. Those who are against Carnivore use mainly pathos in their arguments to point out that Carnivore is a threat to personal privacy and that the FBI cannot be trusted.

    Read More

  • An Analysis Of Gary Steiner's 'Animal, Vegetable, Miserable'

    947 Words  | 2 Pages

    Throughout the last century the concern of animals being treated as just a product has become a growing argument. Some believe that animals are equal to the human and should be treated with the same respect. There are many though that laugh at that thought, and continue to put the perfectly roasted turkey on the table each year. Gary Steiner is the author of the article “Animal, Vegetable, Miserable”, that was published in the New York Times right before Thanksgiving in 2009. He believes the use of animals as a benefit to human beings is inhumane and murderous. Gary Steiner’s argument for these animal’s rights is very compelling and convincing to a great extent.

    Read More

  • Vegetarianism and Meat Eating in Food Culture

    1924 Words  | 4 Pages

    Christopher McCandless, a young American who was found dead in summer of 1992 in wild land in Alaska, wrote in his diary about his moral struggle regarding killing a moose for survival. According to Jon Krakauer’s Into the Wild, Chris had to abandon most of the meat since he lacked the knowledge of how to dismantle and preserve it (166-168). Not only did he have a moral dilemma to kill a moose, but also had a deep regret that a life he had taken was wasted because of his own fault. He then started recognizing what he ate as a precious gift from the nature and called it “Holy Food” (Krakauer 168). Exploring relationships between human beings and other animals arouses many difficult questions: Which animals are humans allowed to eat and which ones are not? To which extent can humans govern other animals? For what purposes and on which principles can we kill other animals? Above all, what does it mean for humans to eat other animals? The answer may lie in its context. Since meat-eating has been included and remained in almost every food culture in the world throughout history and is more likely to increase in the future due to the mass production of meat, there is a very small chance for vegetarianism to become a mainstream food choice and it will remain that way.

    Read More

  • Persuasive Essay: Drunk Driving

    1018 Words  | 3 Pages

    Article #1 is a very effective piece of propaganda in that it captures the reader?s attention successfully by placing a picture of a dog in the focal point of the article. The dog plays a vital role in this piece of propaganda in that it represents a loved one, family and anything cherished. It shows what could be left behind, if a driver chose to ignore safe driving. The breed of dog is also very important. Choosing a sorrowful dogs face, further enhanced the emotions of the reader, as the article wouldn?t have the same effect if a dangerous dog was shown instead

    Read More

  • Analysis Of An Animal Place By Michael Pollan

    1023 Words  | 3 Pages

    Michael Pollan presents many convincing arguments that strengthen his position on whether slaughtering animals is ethical or not. He believes that every living being on this planet deserves an equal amount of respect regardless of it being an animal or human, after all humans are also animals. “An Animal’s place” by Michael Pollan is an opinionated piece that states his beliefs on whether animals should be slaughtered and killed to be someone’s meal or not. In his article, Pollan does not just state his opinions as a writer but also analyzes them from a reader’s point of view, thus answering any questions that the reader might raise. Although Pollan does consider killing and slaughtering of animals unethical, using environmental and ethical

    Read More

  • Why Eating Meat is Morally Impermissible

    1449 Words  | 3 Pages

    Is it morally permissible to eat meat? Much argument has arisen in the current society on whether it is morally permissible to eat meat. Many virtuous fruitarians and the other meat eating societies have been arguing about the ethics of eating meat (which results from killing animals). The important part of the dispute is based on the animal welfare, nutrition value from meat, convenience, and affordability of meat-based foods compared to vegetable-based foods and other factors like environmental moral code, culture, and religion. All these points are important in justifying whether humans are morally right when choosing to eat meat. This paper will argue that it is morally impermissible to eat meat by focusing on the treatment of animals, the environmental argument, animal rights, pain, morals, religion, and the law.

    Read More

  • Should We Be Vegetarians?

    1159 Words  | 3 Pages

    In this paper I will look at the argument made by James Rachels in his paper, The Moral Argument for Vegetarianism supporting the view that humans should be vegetarians on moral grounds. I will first outline the basis of Rachels’ argument supporting vegetarianism and his moral objection to using animals as a food source and critique whether it is a good argument. Secondly, I will look at some critiques of this kind of moral argument presented by R. G. Frey in his article, Moral Vegetarianism and the Argument from Pain and Suffering. Finally, I will show why I support the argument made by Frey and why I feel it is the stronger of the two arguments and why I support it.

    Read More

  • Animal Ethics

    1818 Words  | 4 Pages

    I will first look at the views of Peter Singer, who is a utilitarian. A

    Read More

  • The Importance Of Deontology

    1747 Words  | 4 Pages

    Humans place themselves at the top of the sociological tier, close to what we as individuals call our pets who have a sentimental value in our lives. Resource animal’s on the other hand have a contributory value within our lives: they provide us with meat and other important resources. In order to determine the boundaries between how we treat animals as pets and others simply as resources, utilitarians see these “resource animals” as tools. They contemplate the welfare significances of animals as well as the probable welfares for human-beings. Whereas deontologists see actions taken towards these “resources animals” as obligations regardless of whom or what they harm in the process. The objection to these theories are, whose welfare are we

    Read More

  • Human-Animal Relationships

    410 Words  | 1 Pages

    Since animals, especially dogs, share similar emotions as people they to make great companions. Animals do show us how to love better, because their emotions are more pure than a human's. According to Mary Lou Randour, in "What Animals Can Teach Us About Spirituality", animals are spiritual companions to humans. She tells the story of a boy who, after murdering someone, receives a dog to care for as a form of therapy. The dog comforts him, and the teenager learns to love the animal over time. The boy's pet is "healing his soul" by teaching him how to love. Dogs give their masters unconditional love, never questioning the human's orders or disciplines. I thought the story of the dog appearing in the author's backyard as her dead grandfather was rather outlandish. All of Randour's examples of how animals influence our feelings were viable aside from the disappearing ghost dog.

    Read More

More about Is Eating Dog Inmoral or Not?

Open Document