Go Vegan Analysis

1061 Words5 Pages
Is veganism a lifestyle change that is worth making? What should a person’s reasons be for going vegan? What impact does veganism have? These are the questions that both Gary Steiner and George Wang want to answer in their respective articles “Animal, Vegetable, Miserable,” and “Go Vegan, Save the Planet.” But, the answers they come up with are very different. Steiner is a strict “ethical” vegan who believes that veganism is necessary because using animals for human consumption is morally wrong, while Wang argues that veganism is a transaction that could save the planet from its current fate. So, who is right, or is there really a definite answer? First, Gary Steiner offers an emotion-based, tug at your heartstrings perspective on why we should become vegan. His main claim (of policy) is that we should become vegans because it is inhumane to kill animals for human needs. He supports his cause by refuting two counterarguments from those who ask if animal suffering is comparable to human suffering: those who believe animals are not as important as humans because they are not in God’s image, and those who believe animals do not think as humans and so cannot suffer as…show more content…
Clearly then, their reasoning is entirely different, perhaps because of their audiences. Wang is writing for CNN, a news network that puts a lot of emphasis on climate change, especially in a political light. His audience is primarily educated, politically involved individuals that respond well to facts and figures. Steiner, on the other hand, is writing for the New York magazine, which is more targeted towards the “average American” who might respond better to emotional reasoning than to statistical facts. He is writing specifically for the Thanksgiving issue, to appeal to the families who put turkey on their plate for the holiday, to convince them to pass the tofu
Open Document