Although Jeremy Rifkin, Bob stevens, and Lois Frazier have all written about their view on animals and how they are treated globally, but when bringing in animal rights groups like ASPCA and PETA, different bias and tactics are newly introduced. Of all the articles, Jeremy Rifkin uses the most credible sources such as lab studies and examples. In the article “A Change of Heart about Animals” Rifkin uses sources such as Purdue University and the European union when talking about situations. One situation he writes about is how pigs need social activity so the pigs are not “lacking mental and physical stimuli [which] hand result in deterioration of health”. (Rifkin) For the subject of pathos, he tries to sway with what he calls the “ultimate test of what distinguishes humans from animals” (Rifkin) which are a test of …show more content…
With what little evidence he has his logos is more common sensed based then credibility. Stevens wrote that in nature animals kill each other. In the example of this, he put that “if the hawk does not care about the feelings of the rabbit that it eats”(Stevens) and it does not because that is the hawks only food for miles. When talking about pathos, he tries to make the reader feels bad not for the pigs in Rifkin’s article. Stevens’s says in response that “there are many real human children in the world who do not have these things. By saying this he wants to makes us feel bad that we are wasting our resources on pigs than actual humans who would benefit from the toys more. Third, the ethos for this is as simple as pie, he uses pet owners “know that animals can feel pain, happiness anger, and other simple emotions”.(Stevens) He discredits Rifkin and his research by saying that everyday people know the thing you are trying to prove with science. Although Bob was very biased about his views, he still made his