Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
What is the singer's argument against eating meat
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: What is the singer's argument against eating meat
In Michael Pollan’s “An Animal’s Place,” he wavers between the idea of if it is right to eat animals. Pollan first begins to think about the issue after reading “Animal Liberation” by Peter Singer. In this narrative, Singer argues why it is wrong to eat animals. Singer states that animals deserve rights because they are able to suffer just like humans. While Pollan reads it, he tries to understand Singer’s views and counteract his arguments. Throughout Pollan’s work, he appears to not make a definite stance on the issue until later on in the text. Towards the end of the text, he provides evidence based on evolution to show it is ethical to eat animals. Pollan believes it is ethical to consume animals and animal products due to the concept of …show more content…
According to Pollan, “predation is not matter of morality or politics; it, also, is a matter of symbiosis” (Pg 691). Pollan describes the relationship between the wolf and the deer. While it may seem quaint, the deer needs to be hunted by the wolf in order to control the population and overall well being of the species. Without wolves, the deer population will spiral out of control until there is not enough resources available to sustain the whole population. In this case, the deer will begin to starve and will stop producing young as a result of the lack of resources. While the wolf is depended upon in nature to preserve a balance, so is man. Pollan believes that humans have taken over the predator’s ecological role in many areas, and it is because of the need for balance that it is ethical to eat animals. There are also other learned behaviors and traits humans have that Pollan uses to express his …show more content…
Pollan writes that while humans do not necessarily need to eat meat for survival, the desire to eat meat is “reflected in the design of our teeth and the structure of our digestion”(Pg 693). Much like wolves and other predatory animals, humans have canine and incisor teeth to tear off meat, along with molars to chew and break down food. If humans were not meant to consume other animals, than our front teeth would be less sharp and our molars more flat in order to adequately breakdown vegetation. The act of hunting other animals has also affected humans. Pollan states that, “Under the pressure of the hunt, the human brain grew in size and complexity, and around the fire where the meat was cooked, human culture first flourished” (Pg 693). Hunting has allowed humans to become complex thinkers as a result of having to create tools in order to successfully hunt prey. Pollan believes hunting has evolutionarily and socially created humans to be the way we are
The Omnivore’s Dilemma In the book The Omnivore’s Dilemma, Michael Pollan challenges his readers to examine their food and question themselves about the things they consume. Have we ever considered where our food comes from or stopped to think about the process that goes into the food that we purchase to eat every day? Do we know whether our meat and vegetables picked out were raised in our local farms or transported from another country? Michael pollen addresses the reality of what really goes beyond the food we intake and how our lives are affected.
In his article The Modern Hunter-Gatherer, Michael Pollan recounts the events that took place during his first hunting trip. Both during and after the hunt, Pollan struggles with an array of emotions that he conveys directly with his audience. From this struggle, a moral complication is formed regarding the direct relationship of death between humans and animals. By not giving a direct answer regarding the question he introduces of whether animals and humans experience death in the same way, Pollan leaves his text open to interpretation which ultimately forces his audience to view hunting through a more challenging, introspective lens.
American consumers think of voting as something to be done in a booth when election season comes around. In fact, voting happens with every swipe of a credit card in a supermarket, and with every drive-through window order. Every bite taken in the United States has repercussions that are socially, politically, economically, and morally based. How food is produced and where it comes from is so much more complicated than the picture of the pastured cow on the packaging seen when placing a vote. So what happens when parents are forced to make a vote for their children each and every meal? This is the dilemma that Jonathan Safran Foer is faced with, and what prompted his novel, Eating Animals. Perhaps one of the core issues explored is the American factory farm. Although it is said that factory farms are the best way to produce a large amount of food at an affordable price, I agree with Foer that government subsidized factory farms use taxpayer dollars to exploit animals to feed citizens meat produced in a way that is unsustainable, unhealthy, immoral, and wasteful. Foer also argues for vegetarianism and decreased meat consumption overall, however based on the facts it seems more logical to take baby steps such as encouraging people to buy locally grown or at least family farmed meat, rather than from the big dogs. This will encourage the government to reevaluate the way meat is produced. People eat animals, but they should do so responsibly for their own benefit.
At the end of “Into the Wild” by John Krakauer epilogue, my view towards McCandless’s journey and death is emotionally similar to McCandless’s parents as they accept Chris’s death. Chris’s parents weren’t really involved in his life so they never really knew why he cut everyone off. My initial guess is that Chris got tired of his parents controlling his life and just wanted to get away. Throughout “Into The Wild” Chris’s parents seemed like they didn’t support or care about Chris, or they didn’t know how to show it, however my opinion about Chris’s parents did change because the author shined light on his parents and how they came to senses with their son’s death and that they actually really did care about their son Chris McCandless.
Chris McCandless was just a victim of his own obsession. The novel "Into The Wild" written by John Krakauer revealed the life of a young bright man named Chris McCandless who turned up dead in Alaska in summer 1992. In the novel, John Krakauer approached carefully McCandless's life without putting too much authorial judgment to the readers. Although Chris McCandless remained an elusive figure throughout the novel, I can see Chris McCandless as a dreamy young idealist who tries to follow his dream but failed because of his innocent mistake which prove to be fatal and irreversible. Still, Chris McCandless's courage and passion was something that we should all be proud of.
In the book Eating Animals by Jonathan Safran Foer, the author talks about, not only vegetarianism, but reveals to us what actually occurs in the factory farming system. The issue circulating in this book is whether to eat meat or not to eat meat. Foer, however, never tries to convert his reader to become vegetarians but rather to inform them with information so they can respond with better judgment. Eating meat has been a thing that majority of us engage in without question. Which is why among other reasons Foer feels compelled to share his findings about where our meat come from. Throughout the book, he gives vivid accounts of the dreadful conditions factory farmed animals endure on a daily basis. For this reason Foer urges us to take a stand against factory farming, and if we must eat meat then we must adapt humane agricultural methods for meat production.
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.
Michael Pollan’s purpose of writing Omnivore’s Dilemma came about when he realizes that society is unbelievably unhealthy due to the abundance of food. The two conflicting logics that Pollan introduces are the logic of nature and the logic of industry; these two logics are reflected through various ways of raising livestock animals. The logic of nature consists of raising livestock animals in a pastoral environment where animals interact with one another and avoid the use of artificial chemicals; whereas, the logic of industry settles on raising livestock animals unnaturally. Growing cattle through the use of corn has allowed meat to be produced in large quantities and in a short time as described in the chapter “Feedlot: Making Meat”
Lastly, he argues that sentience is the only characteristic that should be considered in terms of granting animal rights. This leads him to the conclusion that “if a being suffers, there can be no moral justification for refusing to take that suffering into consideration. The principle of equality requires that its suffering be counted equally with the like suffering – insofar as rough comparisons can be made – of any other being”. Before I continue, it is important to note the distinction that Singer makes between “equal considerations” and “equal treatment”. For Singer, “equal consideration for different beings may lead to different treatment and different rights”....
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
“An Animals’ Place” by Michael Pollan is an article that describes our relationship and interactions with animals. The article suggests that the world should switch to a vegetarian diet, due to the mistreatment of animals. The essay includes references from animal rights activists and philosophers. These references are usually logical statement that compare humans and non-human animals in multiple levels, such as intellectual and social.
As an advocate of animal rights, Tom Regan presents us with the idea that animals deserve to be treated with equal respect to humans. Commonly, we view our household pets and select exotic animals in different regard as oppose to the animals we perceive as merely a food source which, is a notion that animal rights activists
Tom Regan, “The Case for Animal Rights,” in In Defense of Animals, ed. Peter Singer (Oxford:
Albany: State University of New York Press, 1992. Call Number: HV4711.A5751992. Morris, Richard Knowles, and Michael W. Fox, eds. On the Fifth Day, Animal Rights. and Human Ethics.
In the second chapter of Animal’s People, its protagonist Animal talks about eyes, eyes that fill the darkness, that appear whichever way he looks, and look for things to see. He says eyes come whenever he starts talking, they quietly watch and patiently wait, and then settle like flies on the pictures that are born from everything he says.