More handpicked essays just for you.
Jeremy rifkin a change of heart about animals
Jeremy rifkin a change of heart about animals
Jeremy rifkin a change of heart about animals
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
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
This is a simple strategy to use in this essay because people have feelings towards animals. The “growing human population often pushes the giant beasts off their grazing lands” (par.7). This was an effective way of making the readers feel guilty of their actions. The amount of animals being killed also makes the audience feel bad. To many’s shock, “one elephant is slaughtered by poachers every 15 minutes” (par.10).
By blurring the line between animals and humans, Foer attempts to persuade readers to treat animals like
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
In the essay “The Moral Status of Animals”, published in 2006, Martha C. Nussbaum reflects the aspect of dignity and comments on the dignified existence of both human and nonhuman beings. Throughout her essay, Nussbaum draws parallels between classical doctrines and the treatment of nonhuman beings among other things on the example of a trial in India, which examined the “undignified” treatment and living conditions of circus animals. Although scientists still puzzle over the extent of a nonhuman beings ' morality, Nussbaum argues in her essay that animals should be entitled to a dignified existence as well as humans, because every living being has specific forms of “flourishing” and deserves to unfold its opportunities in life. Under consideration of Kantian’s, Rachels’s and Bentham’s theories, which differentiate in several points, Nussbaum examines the animals’ moral capabilities. She disagrees with Kant’s statement about the
Both Pollen and Singer share similar perspectives on the notion that mankind is the main cause for the injustices towards animal life, yet Pollen takes it one step further by claiming that “Animals are one of us”. Even though Singer like Pollen, understands the equal considerations of all beings (which is to avoid pain and suffering), his opinion emphasizes what us humans need to change. Focusing on human dignity, human rights and “speciesism”, Singer never considers how humans and animals have always coexisted despite our constant predation. On the other hand, “An Animal’s Place” takes Symbiosis into account, realizing that a radical change in diet is not the only option but rather to adapt our barbaric farm factories into humane
The re-establishing of templates for which humans are to live by and the rebranding and repackaging of the human animal being which brings about the natural psychological, societal and political outcomes which rejects that which is 'cast' as the differing other as this social psychology set in motion that which has been destructively and fatally repeated throughout history. The problem with humanity's inability to deal with the differing other is investigated as this fatal flaw results in the oppression and the obliteration of ‘the differing other' which is deemed inferior by the setting of such restricted standards which creates a cold war of societal disparity. The key goal in its ambition is to control humanity with this psychological template which has its basis on the concepts of humanism and individualism exaggerated as it creates a hollow self serving but overly controlled vacant society numbed out by pleasure seeking, status and materialism within this societal monopoly as it uses the guise of 'culture' as a way to create the delusion of the human animal being as 'supernatural' and therefore 'superior'. We live in a world where ‘Animals’ have no history yet we as humans never cease to reconfigure our societies and our narcissistic identities, and in this regard we investigate humanity's sense of supreme ontological entitlement in their behaviour
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.
Similar to her discussion of abortion Hursthouse’s discussion of animal cruelty strays away from the typical debate. Usually, discussions of animal cruelty center around the metaphysical status of animals (i.e. Are they conscious? Do they have rights?). Instead, most of her discussion is tied up with the virtue of compassion.
The first documented animal activist is believed to be Pythagoras, a Greek philosopher. Pythagoras strongly believed in the concept of transmigration of souls between human and animals which lead him to concur the reasoning for treating the animals with respect that’s why he opposed religious sacrifices and meat from fear of killing the soul of a loved one or an ancestor. Pythagoras famously says "Human beings, stop desecrating your bodies with impious foodstuffs. There are crops; there are apples weighing down the branches; and ripening grapes on the vines; there are flavorsome herbs; and those that can be rendered mild and gentle over the flames; and you do not lack flowing milk; or honey fragrant from the flowering thyme. The earth, prodigal of its wealth,
Nowadays we face many severe problems: drugs, wars, diseases, child abuse, and environmental pollution. Is the issue of animal rights so important to you?” I will answer affirmatively, because, undoubtedly, our attitude toward animals is a reflection of our moral
A11602683 In 1975, Peter Singer published his work, Animal Liberation, which is, as some animal activists have argued, the catalyst for the modern animal rights movement in the United States. In his work, Singer argues that the principle of equality requires that we not only take into consideration the interests of our fellow human beings, but also the interests of all beings with the capacity for suffering. Singer’s argument revolutionized the way many people thought about the treatment of animals – given that animals can suffer, there can be no moral justification for continuing the current practice of exploiting animals for our own interests and as such, activities like eating and experimenting on animals are morally unjustifiable and violate
1. I evaluate my progress towards achieving my goal against animal abuse as highly successful. The meaning of animal abuse is a malicious act toward an animal. I learned many things during my time of research, such as the behavior of an abused animal, steps to intervene and report, and the emotional and external after effects on the animal. There are two types of animal abuse, neglection and physical abuse.
I Speak For The Unspeakable: Animal Cruelty When we go to places such as the zoo, circuses, and aquariums we go to see animals that we have never seen before. Animals that have skills to do strange tricks. Though have you ever wondered if those animals you see are happy where they are?Being in cages away from home and family, do you ever feel like they aren’t treated as it seems?If they feel scared?Animals just like humans feel. They are aware of their surroundings.
