Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Is vegetarianism a better way of life
Ethical treatment of animals
Ethical treatment of animals
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Writing Section
“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.
Personally, I partially disagree with the argument. I support the idea that farm animals should be treated in a more humane way, but I do not think that we should stop consuming animals. They have been part of our diet for ages. Their meat is packed with essential nutrients, like proteins and
…show more content…
vitamins. Acquiring these nutrients is essential for a healthy life, and they are not very abundant in plants. Moreover, Earth is a very intricate, but delicate systems. These systems do not like sudden changes. We see how the increase in carbon emissions is affecting Earth, even though it has been around as a phenomenon for more than 200 years. For Earth to adapt to our new diet, it would take centuries, and the plan could backfire, leading to serious environmental problems. However, as stated above, I in no means support the wat animals are treated today.
The main actor here is overconsumption, which leaves capitalist companies with no other profitable choice. Hence, animals are fed low-quality foods, full of hormones and are stacked in cages. Also, I would support the ban on hunting, whether it be for fun or fur, since it is a luxury at the animals expense.
Some arguments presented in the article were quite logical, but other, e.g. A.M.C., sounded rather lame. Handpicking organisms with certain traits is not the best approach to a logical statement, or even a scientific study, for that matter. Humans use generalizations. This helped us survive iver millenia. So, when we want to compare, say, two species, we use specimens- organisms that possess traits which are considered normal for its species. For us, a specimen would be an adult, sane human. In that case, the result would be quite different.
As for the argument which reasoned that it is logical to choose an adult ape over an infant human, because the former has a greater capacity for pain; this logic does not even come into consideration within the animal kingdom, let alone humans. When two animals of the same species fight over food, mates or territory, they almost never choose to kill
one-another. We have been eating meat for a long time, and it does not seem like we are going to stop any time soon. Animals are being treated inhumanely, and we should take action and raise our voices. Corporations should find other methods of slaughtering which would inflict the minimal pain to animals. As the author stated, we have to either look away or do something about it, even if it means that we have to become vegetarians.
The argumentative article “More Pros than Cons in a Meat-Free Life” authored by Marjorie Lee Garretson was published in the student newspaper of the University of Mississippi in April 2010. In Garretson’s article, she said that a vegetarian lifestyle is the healthy life choice and how many people don’t know how the environment is affected by their eating habits. She argues how the animal factory farms mistreat the animals in an inhumane way in order to be sources of food. Although, she did not really achieve the aim she wants it for this article, she did not do a good job in trying to convince most of the readers to become vegetarian because of her writing style and the lack of information of vegetarian
.... People do not have to become vegetarians, but people should consider other meat and food as alternatives. Ultimately, if a majority of people chose organic farms and foods it would put a heavy hit on the meat production business. People will be eating healthier, and they will be doing their healthy part in the ecosystem and that will help to lower greenhouse gas emissions and greatly improve treatment of animals. The prices of organic food just need to come down dramatically for people to buy it. Methane from liquid manure, nitrous oxide from manmade fertilizers, carbon dioxide from machines are why people have put themselves and animals into a dilemma and made it into a never-ending continuous cycle.
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.
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
Anthropocentrism—the belief that humanity is the central element of the universe, is a concept that Michael Pollan grapples with in his essay “An Animal’s Place.” Written in response to famous philosopher Peter Singer’s position on animal rights, Pollan builds upon Singer’s own positon while adding in his own personal cautions about Singer’s extremism. He calls to mind many common positions that omnivores commonly use to defend their habits: one of these is that animals kill each other, so why is it wrong when we do it. He shows that we don’t want to lower ourselves to the animal kingdom: “…do you really want to base your morality on the natural order? Murder and rape are natural, too. Besides, humans don’t need to kill other creatures in order
Many farmers are to blame for the abuse of the animals not the process. Factory farming indirectly helps the public better themselves by stimulation the economy and giving those in need of work jobs, also the process of factory farming has the potential to be more humane than how it is used. Without the proper regulation and supervision the abuse of the animals rises. This is why many feel that factory farming should be throw away and forgotten. But it is very helpful in many ways. Factory farming allows many to have jobs in places where many jobs are stable and an opening for an already filled job is very unlikely. Also, Factory farming if used properly can be “natural” for animals. Farmers do not have to abuse the animals nor inject them with antibiotics to make them grow unnaturally large muscle. Factory farming improves the economy, and allows the opportunity for technological advancements to happen. This type of farming should be kept and enhanced so it can feel morally right instead of
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
He describes the factories as “places where the subtleties of moral philosophy and animal cognition mean less than nothing”(405). His arguments about the morals of the ways we should treat animals, provokes the feelings of guilt and empathy for the reader, which makes his essay a strong argumentative piece of literature. Pollan makes strong points, backed of with evidence, regarding the minds of animals and their ability to feel pain and suffering on not only a physical level, but on an emotional level. The major weakness of his argument is that it mainly deals with the moral dilemma of mistreatment of animals with in factory slaughterhouse and for the most part ignores the economic consequences of free range livestock. Big company slaughterhouses don’t just immorally treat animals for the fun of it but rather as a way to meet the high level demand of the American people while keep prices low enough for them to
Vegetarians are uncomfortable with how humans treat animals. Animals are cruelly butchered to meet the high demand and taste for meat in the market. Furthermore, meat-consumers argue that meat based foods are cheaper than plant based foods. According to Christians, man was given the power to dominate over all creatures in the world. Therefore, man has the right to use animals for food (Singer and Mason, 2007). However, it is unjustified for man to treat animals as he wishes because he has the power to rule over animals. This owes to the reality that it is unclear whether man has the right to slaughter animals (haphazardly), but it is clear that humans have a duty to take care of animals. In objection, killing animals is equal to killing fellow humans because both humans and animals have a right to life. Instead of brutally slaying animals, people should consume their products, which...
“The assumption that animals are without rights, and the illusion that their treatment has no moral significance is a positively outrageous example of Western crudity and barbarity. Universal compassion is the only guarantee of morality."(Schopenhauer). I always wondered why some people are not so drawn to the consumption of meat and fed up with only one thought about it. Why so many people loathe of blood, and why so few people can easily kill and be slaughter animal, until they just get used to it? This reaction should say something about the most important moments in the code, which was programmed in the human psyche. Realization the necessity of refraining from meat is especially difficult because people consume it for a long time, and in addition, there is a certain attitude to the meat as to the product that is useful, nourishing and even prestigious. On the other hand, the constant consumption of meat has made the vast majority of people completely emotionless towards it. However, there must be some real and strong reasons for refusal of consumption of meat and as I noticed they were always completely different. So, even though vegetarianism has evolved drastically over time, some of its current forms have come back full circle to resemble that of its roots, when vegetarianism was an ethical-philosophical choice, not merely a matter of personal health.
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.
Like many other industries, the farming industry has evolved into big business, “Animals on factory farms are regarded as commodities to be exploited for profit.” In each industry from clothing to instruments, the bosses want to make a profit. The more they can supply with the least amount of waste, the more profit they make. The same goes for factory farming. However instead of humans being the ones directly affected by big bosses, the animals are. They don’t have a voice, and can’t stand up for what is right or wrong. These animals are manipulated in every way to make a better profit. Factory farms mass produce animals for ...
In sum, the option of eating meat shouldn’t be completely taken away, but it should be limited to a reasonable amount to serve as a compromise to both meat eaters and non-meat eaters.
The animals that are raised in factory farms, and the farms are ran just like any other business. According to the article Factory Framing, Misery of Animals, the factory farming industry strives to maximize output while minimizing cost, always at the animal’s expense. “The giant corporations that run most factory farms have found that they can make more money by squeezing as many animals as possible into tiny spaces, even though many of the animals die from disease or infection” (Factory Farming). This is actually quit disgusting that we eat food that walks around in each other’s feces and can attract disease. These animals live a life of abuse, but we sit back and say it’s okay because we will eventually eat them. “Antibiotics are used to make animals grow faster and to keep them alive in the unsanitary conditions. Research shows that factory farms widespread use of antibiotics can lead to antibiotic-resistant bacteria that threatens human health” (Factory Farming). These animals aren’t treated with proper care and we act as if they are machines. Chickens for example, become so big and distorted that their legs can longer support them. Eventually they die because they can longer walk to get food or water. According to Factory Farming, most of these animals have been genetically manipulated to grow larger and to produce more eggs and milk than they naturally
...ming I will be willing to contribute in any way that I can, and becoming a vegetarian will help the environment a great deal. Becoming a vegetarian can also lead to becoming a healthier person and living a healthy lifestyle. And lastly, the way animals are killed and treated in factory farms are unethical and they should not be treated the way they are just to create a meal for the next person.Consider that the animal you are eating was a vegetarian and the meat contains all the minerals and vitamins of the plant foods it ate when you eat it. Along with fats yourbody needs in substantial amounts to stay healthy.....more on the fats later. Meat is as close to a complete meal as you can get because of this.