Let Them Eat Dog by Jonathan Safran Foer is an argumentative essay that gives some conflicting ideas about the ethics of eating meat. In the first place, people place the argument that dogs are the best friends of human beings, and so since these animals are wonderful, they are exceptional in several ways. They are naturally exceptional in their intellectual and experimental capabilities because they can do smarter things than other domestic animals. In this particular case, taboo restricting people to eat a dog’s meat has great things to conceal about dogs and humans.
Despite the contradicting ideologies from different customs about the facts of not eating dogs as compared to other animals like pigs, cows, or chicken, dogs are not exempted from making a meal for people. The author posits that such taboos are not explicitly convincing because dogs are eaten in many parts of the world. The major point here is that if dogs are eaten in many other places like India and China, then why should other races exempt themselves as specials who cannot take a dog’s meat? If a dog’s meat is hygienically prepared, then chances of it posing health risks minimal. After all, it is meat just like any other.
…show more content…
From this point, there is a proud pedigree of eating it. However, what these people do not know is that many races of the world have been using the dog’s meat for various reasons. Take for example, the Hippocrates, who claimed that a dog’s meat is a source of strength, the Dakota Indians enjoyed a dog’s liver, the Chinese and Koreans used it as medicine, and the Nigerians used it as a source of libido. In simple terms, dogs’ meat has been used in many parts of the world for various reasons, and so there is no better reason for some other races trying to give reasons for not eating this