ipl-logo

Consider The Lobster By David Foster Wallace Summary

1067 Words5 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: How our identity determines the food we consume as a culture introduction

In “Consider the Lobster,” David Foster Wallace asks his readers to consider if eating lobsters or other animals is ethical. He describes how lobsters show a preference to not be boiled by their efforts to avoid or escape the pan. He argues that this preference is proof that the lobster suffers or feels pain. However, he ignores the fact that the same argument can be made about plants. Grasses produce a chemical in distress right before they are cut from a lawnmower or attacked by insects. This shows that the grass prefers to not be cut or eaten just as the lobster did. As humans, we must eat either plants or animals to survive. If both plants and animals feel pain and show a preference to live, then how is eating one more ethical that eating the other? I believe that it is ethically permissible to kill animals and plants for food as long as we use majority of the animal / plant for practical purposes, the animal / plant is not domesticated to a point of trust that a pet would have, …show more content…

In “Consider the Lobster,” David Foster Wallace presents a neutral view on the ethics of eating lobster and by extension other animals. I believe he wrote the article so his readers would consider the ethics of what they eat. That is how the article affected me . However, I have a problem with the article due to a bulk of the arguments against eating meat also applying to plants. As humans, we 're required to eat at least one of them. However, ethics do play a role, in that morals is one of the elements that separates us from other animals. I believe that if you kill an animal or plant for food, you should put a majority of it to use in some way. I also believe animals and plants that are grown as a source of food should have as little interaction with humans as possible. We should not eat animals and plants if we are endangering their existence by eating them. As long as animal or plant does not fall into one of these exceptions, then I believe it is ethically permissible to eat

Show More
Related
660 Words | 3 Pages

Monster Monster by Walter Dean Myers was published in 1999. This occurs in Manhattan and Harlem, New York City. The story is told in third-person and first-person point of view as told by Sandra Petrocelli, Steven Harmon, Jose Delgado Osvaldo Cruz, James King, Kathy O’Brien, Sal Zinzi, Asa Briggs, Richard Evans, and The Judge. There are six important characters. They are Steven Harmon, who is a sixteen-year-old young man who has been arrested for being a look-out in a robbery that turns out to be a murder.

Read More
743 Words | 3 Pages

In the passage, Buhler gives plenty of facts pertaining information on why we should eat roadkill, but in many people 's cases they would never do such a thing. Animals are being killed at a very high rate when it comes to non hunting issues, therefore you could argue a fact that eating roadkill would help the community by saving the amount of money people spend on groceries. Buhler also states that the meat that will come from the roadkill animals will be more healthy for vegans because there is nothing extra put on the meat for better taste. Although the thought of someone getting sick comes to mind for the most part if you 're saving money and eating more healthy how can you not be happy?

Read More
825 Words | 4 Pages

The Omnivore’s Dilemma. Through the addition of each section and detail, Pollan slowly gains a basis for his argument. An argument that challenges the very way in what and how we eat. And one that sheds light into the industrialized food chain. Essentially, his argument is to be aware of what we are eating.

Read More
1009 Words | 5 Pages

Introduction In this article “Against Meat” (2009) Jonathan Safran Foer explains his experience from a young age until the present struggling whether being a vegetarian or an omnivore because he doesn’t want to hurt animals at the same time he can’t resist food because it tasted good. Jonathan Safran Foer is an American novelist (born February 21, 1977) He graduated from Princeton University with a degree in philosophy, in his freshman year he took a writing class from the novelist Joyce Carol.

Read More
1239 Words | 5 Pages

The article “Consider the Lobster” by David Wallace was first published in August 2004 and it has led to a lot of public controversies based on the morality and ethicality, surrounding the massive cooking of the lobster. There have been a lot of debates also from the vegetarians and the animal rights activists concerning the great lobster festival held at the Penobscot festival every late July. One thing we ought to understand is that the lobster is a summer food, and most people would want to have it freshly caught from the sea. In addition, it is a festival that is performed once a year, and therefore it gives them some time to reproduce. However, the central issue raised concerning this festival is based on the fact that some people feel that the festival is completely against the animal rights, and especially inflicts pain to the lobsters.

Read More
789 Words | 4 Pages

“Thou shouldst eat to live; not live to eat”, is a famous quote by the well known philosopher Socrates, who believed this is the perspective we should take when we are eating food. Unfortunately, the times have changed and so has the way we eat. We no longer have to go hunting for our food, or grow crops to receive all of our fruits and vegetables. Because we have become a society that has grown into the new world of technology, there would be no need to rely on ourselves for what we need-- we can simply gather our resources from other people. In the book, “The Omnivore’s Dilemma”, written by Michael Pollan, takes us on a journey full of concerns of the “Food Industrial Complex”.

Read More
531 Words | 3 Pages

The article “Consider the Lobster” by David Wallace opens a vivid, gruesome window, to a harsh truth that all lobster consumers push far back into the recesses of their minds. Wallace implores us to visit the controversial issue of boiling a live creature to death, for the sole purpose of our consumption. He uses a variety of literary persuasive tactics including the three rhetorical appeals Logos, Pathos and Ethos to drive home his argument to the reader. Throughout the article Wallace puts the reader on the front lines of a three-front war of convincing ethical, emotional and logical appeals.

Read More
624 Words | 3 Pages

These eaters ignore the politics concerning food rather looking for esthetics and quick service. Due to these disregarding’s, the industrial eaters won’t ever realize that eating responsibly is a way “to live free” (2). Berry then lists off seven points regarding how to eat more responsibly for the passive consumers. These points range from “[participating] in food production to the extent that you can” to “[learning] as much as you can, by direct observation and experience if possible, of the life histories of the food species” (Berry 4-5). Berry also believes that it’s important for the animals that meat comes from to have lived a pleasant life.

Read More
269 Words | 2 Pages

For vegetarians, animal rights should trump human rights. In “Utilitarianism, Vegetarianism, and Animal Rights,” Tom Regan defines animal rights as “the natural right to life” (307). Similar to Regan, many vegetarians believe that animals have rights and deserve to have their best interests taken into consideration, regardless of whether they are useful to humans. By switching to a plant-base diet, people will be able to alleviate the needless suffering and deaths of countless animals. Besides, in the same article, Regan also suggests “to treat animals in a more humane manner” (308).

Read More
731 Words | 3 Pages

to tell his audience: we should really think about the lobster’s point of view before consuming it. David Foster Wallace uses a multitude of rhetorical strategies to get his point across, including pathos and ethos. His essay is ingenious in how it gets its point across, and how it forces even the largest lobster consumers to truly contemplate how the lobster might react to its consumption. It brings up many controversial topics of animal rights that many people tend to avoid, especially people who are major carnivores. Wallace’s use of rhetorical strategies really gets the reader thinking, and thoroughly captures the argument of many vegetarians against the consumption of animals.

Read More
1736 Words | 7 Pages

The consumption of animal meat is highly accepted in today’s society, however, the methods, in which the animals are killed are sometimes questioned for their cruelty. David Wallace, in considering the Lobster, takes the readers to the Maine Lobster Festival, where the consumption of lobsters is exploited, and the festival's attendees celebrate these acts. However, the essay goes furthermore than narrating the lobster’s festival, because through sensory details, and different techniques, he makes the readers question society’s morality. By stressing the cruelty it takes boiling lobsters alive, Wallace is capable of creating a sense of awareness in society decisions that demonstrate their corrupted morality, and how it affects directly others (like lobsters)

Read More
1180 Words | 5 Pages

Being humans makes us omnivores, which means we can at whatever we want. Part of the dilemma is figuring out what is safe to eat and what its safe to think. This is all determined by what your culture tells you to eat. In some cultures it is normal to eat horse while in others it is illegal. This shows how diet varies by region and culture.

Read More
796 Words | 4 Pages

In the article, “Is It Possible to be a Conscientious Meat Eater”, the authors argue that processed meat can greatly affect the many things in our everyday life. Sunaura and Alexander’s argument is significantly unreliable because of the certain professions both authors yield. As stated in the article “Sunaura is an artist, writer, and activist in Oakland.” “Alexander’s profession is studying philosophy, and ethics in Athens, Georgia.” This shows that neither of them are qualified to argue in the subject of conscientious meat eaters.

Read More
768 Words | 4 Pages

Alongside to the economic benefits that meat brings into our society, meat industries also help people from the lower class. Without meat industries, people from the lower class would eventually starve out as their easy and cheap access to food would be taken away from them. Simply eating small grains and vegetables would no longer provide the same amount of nutrients in their diet as previously mentioned in the paragraph above. It is for this reason that eating meat is ethical as taking it away would cause detrimental effects to our

Read More
1227 Words | 5 Pages

On the one hand, some people are favorable for killing animals. It has many opinions why they have accepted. Their reasons with cruelty make them get many benefits such as nutrient, knowledge, safety, prevention, and money. The first reason for killing animals is humans killed them for consuming such as pork made from pigs, beef made from cows, and lamp made from sheep. Human’s life exists to cause by plants and animals.

Read More

More about Consider The Lobster By David Foster Wallace Summary

Related Topics

Open Document