Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
An essay on animal rights
A change of heart about animals jeremy rifkin
Animal rights and ethics
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: An essay on animal rights
In the op-ed piece “A Change of Heart about Animals”, Jeremy Rifkin emphasizes the similarities between humans and animals by providing results on scientific research studies to illustrate that humans should be more empathetic towards animals. In addition, he further explains how research results have changed the ways humans perceived animals and indicates solutions that were taken by other countries and organizations to help improve and protect animal rights. Rifkin provides examples that demonstrate animals have emotions, conceptual abilities, self awareness, and a sense of individualism just like humans. For example, Pigs crave for affection and get depressed easily when isolated, two birds Betty and Abel have tool making skills, Koko
Jeremy Rifkin, the president of the Foundation on Economic Trends in Washington D.C and author of “A Change of Heart About Animals” (2003), argues in this article that animals are much more like humans than we thought and that we should expand our empathy to our fellow creatures. Rifkin develops his thesis by comparing the similarities between humans and animals. An example of this is in paragraph 11 when he claims that animals show a sense of their own mortality and the mortality of their kin just like humans do. He supports this claim by giving an example of elephants standing next to their dead children for days after they have passed. The author gives that example of the elephants in order to make the reader understands just how aware these
When the animals looked outside they no longer recognized their surroundings and leaders. The had realized that they have been blind and could no longer tell the difference between man and pig. They had become indifferent. This was said by the narrator yet really explains the thoughts going through all the animals on the farm’s heads except the pigs.
In her work “What’s Wrong with Animal Rights,” Vicki Hearne challenges common beliefs of animal rights, arguing that animal rights groups do very little to actually benefit animals. She argues that natural selection should be allowed to take place for wild animals, and animals such as cats and dogs should not be seen as property. To persuade the audience to support her position, she uses ethos, pathos, and logos. Her credibility as a trainer makes the logic behind her views reliable, her logic reinforces the examples she uses, and she appeals to emotion using her relationship with her Airedale, Drummer, to support everything her argument is saying. Through these strategies, Vicki Hearne effectively counters the current, popular views of the
In the book, The Omnivore's Dilemma by Michael Pollan, Pollan claims we should be more knowledgeable about what we consume as omnivores. As omnivores we have a variety of food, we can choose from, however, we don’t regularly make the best decisions for ourselves. Pollan argues this by showing us where our food really comes from and how we can find many unwanted extras. Pollan shows us that we’ve evolved as humans from how we used to eat to how we eat now. Pollan argues this by introducing us to all the food chains we value today, some much more than others.
As a whole, Rifkin argues the importance of treating animals with respect based on the fact that animals share characteristics with humans. I agree that animals do deserve to be treated with respect and honor, but should animals really be treated like human beings? One must look at the imperfect world we live in, it is man against man, the survival of the fittest. This evolutionary concept even takes place in the animal kingdom, one must hunt and kill for survival. Thus, will giving a pig a toy or assuring that animals are happy, change the fact that they be slaughtered and become man’s source of nutrition?
In the article, Untamed: On Making Friends with Animals, written by David Sedaris, claims that pets with their diets and owners care for them is just nonsense and a nuisance. Sedaris notes that his siblings own pets, of which he does not wish to have one for the fact of knowing what the pets of his siblings do. The author claims that his brother “has to change his doormat” knowing “that’s how much his savages drag home.” (Paragraph One). After his brother, Sedaris mentions that his sister is “returning home from work to find a chipmunk on her sofa, its head chewed to paste, or a bird that’s not quite dead flapping the stump that used to be a wing” (Paragraph One).
In this paper, I will focus on Bonnie Steinbock’s claim on whether or not we should give equal moral consideration to species outside our own species group. I will first determine what moral concern means, according to Peter singer, and explain how he views the human treatment of animals. I will then outline Steinbock’s argument against Singer’s position and explain how her criticism is part of a much broader issue: that is moral concern. I will finally make my argument against Steinbock as well as address any issues she could possibly raise against my argument. Peter Singer believed that all species, whether it be human or non-human, deserve equal consideration of interests and quality of life.
In An Animal’s Place, Michael Pollan describes the growing acknowledgement of animal rights, particularly America’s decision between vegetarianism and meat-eating. However, this growing sense of sentiment towards animals is coupled with a growing sense of brutality in farms and science labs. According to Pollan, the lacking respect for specific species of animals lies in the fact that they are absent from human’s everyday lives; enabling them to avoid acknowledgment of what they are doing when partaking in brutality towards animals. He presents arguments for why vegetarianism would make sense in certain instances and why it would not and ultimately lead to the decision of eating-meat while treating the animals fairly in the process. Pollan
One topic that many scholars are debating right now is the topic of animal rights. The questions are, on what basis are rights given, and do animals possess rights? Two prominent scholars, Tom Regan and Tibor Machan, each give compelling arguments about animal rights, Regan for them and Machan against them. Machan makes the sharp statement, “Animals have no rights need no liberation” (Machan, p. 480). This statement was made in direct opposition to Regan who says, “Reason compels us to recognize the equal inherent value of these animals and, with this, their equal right to be treated with respect” (Regan, p. 477).
In the article All Animals Are Equal, written by Peter Singer addresses the inadequacies surrounding the rights of animals in the societies of today. Singer opens the article by presenting a scholarly parallels between the fight for gender equality, banishment of racism and the establishment of rights for “nonhumans.” In order to explain this constant set of inequalities that seem to riddle our society, Singer readily uses the term “speciesism”, which he acquired from a fellow animals rights advocator, Richard Ryder. Essentially, this term is defined by Singer as a prejudice or attitude of bias in favor of the interests of members of one's own species and against those of members of other species. Singer claims that if this idea of speciesism
In section 3. Why Animalism is Unpopular, of “An Argument for Animalism,” Eric Olson argues that animalism is unpopular amongst contemporary philosophers. Animalism, according to Olson, is a theory that humans are numerically identical to animals (“An Argument for Animalism”, 610). This means that there is a particular human organism and that organism is you; the human organism and you are one in the same. When thinking about personal identity, Olson reasons that contemporary philosophers don’t ask what kind of things we are.
Benjamin Franklin, an American politician, once said, “There never was a good war or bad peace”. This expresses the importance of peace and the problems that war brings. The war story, The Zookeeper’s Wife by Diane Ackerman, takes place in Warsaw, Poland, during World War II. It mainly follows Antonina, a woman who cares for a zoo with her husband Jan, a zookeeper. When war breaks out, they are forced to leave their happy life and flee in order to survive.
Robert has a strong connection with humanity and its purity, especially in the aspects of animals and the elements. The imagery of animals throughout the novel is prominent. Robert often draws guidance from animals and in fact, Robert in the story is often described as an animal see in “Robert sat on his haunches” (148) and “Robert saw a white farm with cows in the yard and he thought there cannot be a war” (191).
Sentientism has utilitarian views in which it is defined by what right institutions and actions can maximize the most amount of “happiness”. This supports sentientism in the sense that in order for a being to have moral rights, they must have the capability to feel happy or unhappy, and in order for them to feel these emotions, they first must be sentient. This then means that sentientism is another form of animal liberation. In “Animal Liberation and Environmental Ethics”, Mark Sagoff extends the meaning of what environmental ethic is. This means that there is a value towards the ecosystem that can end up hurting individual animals.