Imagine piercing a tender piece of lobster with a fork, drenching the piece in the golden melted butter, and the flavors that erupt in your mouth when a piece of lobster is eaten. It may taste delicious to some; conversely, some people find the cooking process to be too unbearable to even consume lobster. In “Consider the Lobster,” David Foster Wallace argues that people should not consume lobster on account of the animal’s suffering during the preparation and cooking processes. He makes his argument by invoking the principle that creatures should not suffer in order to fulfill the needs and wants of people. Also taking a stand on whether or not to eat meat, Jay Bost also invokes a principle in his essay, “Sometimes It’s More Ethical to Eat Mean Than Vegetables,” that was published in the New York Times. He invokes the principle that eating meat is ethical because it preserves the natural systems that exist in the environment. While David Wallace invokes the principle that creatures should not suffer in order to satisfy our needs and wants, Jay Bost arouses the principle to preserve the environment; however, they both overlook that core values that influence a person’s principle vary from person to person, and not everyone is going to be persuaded to agree with their
The consumption of animal meat is highly accepted in today’s society, however, the methods, in which the animals are killed are sometimes questioned for their cruelty. David Wallace, in considering the Lobster, takes the readers to the Maine Lobster Festival, where the consumption of lobsters is exploited, and the festival's attendees celebrate these acts. However, the essay goes furthermore than narrating the lobster’s festival, because through sensory details, and different techniques, he makes the readers question society’s morality. By stressing the cruelty it takes boiling lobsters alive, Wallace is capable of creating a sense of awareness in society decisions that demonstrate their corrupted morality, and how it affects directly others (like lobsters)
In today’s world, you can have your baby with blue eyes, perfect height, and how you want your baby to look when is old. Now we can even make a baby be born smart because now scientists are more specialized in genetic and how the genes work. For example, if women can’t have babies she can rent a belly from another woman so she can have the baby but the baby is going to have the DNA of the women who can’t have babies, not of the other woman. Is pretty impressive how today scientist can modify genetically the genes of babies before they are even born. Now in today’s world is almost possible to create the perfect baby if we want.
Wallace establishes this persona from the very beginning of his speech by saying, “If anybody feels like perspiring, I’d advise you to go ahead, because I’m sure going to.” This makes Wallace appear much less like the famous novelist commonly known by the students at any liberal arts college, and much more like any average Joe. This creates ethos and establishes common ground with his audience, reinforcing his statement when he insists that “I am not the wise old fish,” which may seem ironic in the sense that he is the wise old fish. Regardless of this, the importance of Wallace’s ethos is found in the idea that he does not seem like the wise old fish. Instead, Wallace alienates his sense of authority and presents himself as an average person attempting to give some advice about life.
From personal experience, I sense acidic undercurrents, a bursting bubble, and a rusted infrastructure; a western world that is growing, yet sinking. All these forms of decay make me speculate on how things got to be this way, but also what I should do in an attempt to change the tide. In David Foster Wallace’s “Consider the Lobster,” I am consistently puzzled on his concept regarding animals’ ‘right to life’ deeming some sort of equality in animal lives compared to human lives. A selection from this text that that sticks out to me and could stand alone as the main point of this text is when Wallace talks about how people would never stand around at a food festival where cows are publicly slaughtered. He says, “Try to imagine a Nebraska Beef Festival at which part of the festivities is watching the trucks pull up and the live cattle get driven down the ramp and slaughtered right there on the World’s Largest Killing Floor or something - there’s no way” (Wallace 24?). Here, Wallace makes the point that as people we obviously have a natural notion to point at a mass killing of life and point out that it is wrong.
Fukuyama brings up topics that can be split into two categories: risks and benefits of genetic engineering along with the affordability of genetic engineering. Considering scientists aren’t entirely sure how genes work, they bring about several ills they wouldn’t be aware of, whether they be immediate ills or ills that show up much later (Fukuyama, 678). Genetic Engineering could have horrific effects on a population which could lead to the abandoning of genetic modification, just like in the way that hydroelectricity is no longer used as much because of the potential of dam breaks or environmental effects (Fukuyama, 680). There is also a possibility that only the rich will have access to this technology, so the state would possibly have to intervene to fix this inequality (Fukuyama, 680). Fukuyama concludes his writing by posing the fact that no matter what happens with genetic engineering, genetic engineering will change the course of human history on several levels, and on levels greater than that of any human biotechnology (Fukuyama, 681).
Throughout humanity, the idea of suffering played a major role in human lives, in some cases by ending it. Nevertheless, according to popular religious traditions, the first humans, Adam and Eve, were placed on Earth to suffer for their sins in a life of misery. All humans are a part of this “original sin,” thus there is no such thing as innocent humans suffering in the world. “All have sinned and come short of the glory of God” (Romans 3:23). Popular religious themes are centered on the idea of continual suffering in life, like the Israelites who continued to suffer through the Holocaust.
“Thou shouldst eat to live; not live to eat”, is a famous quote by the well known philosopher Socrates, who believed this is the perspective we should take when we are eating food. Unfortunately, the times have changed and so has the way we eat. We no longer have to go hunting for our food, or grow crops to receive all of our fruits and vegetables. Because we have become a society that has grown into the new world of technology, there would be no need to rely on ourselves for what we need-- we can simply gather our resources from other people. In the book, “The Omnivore’s Dilemma”, written by Michael Pollan, takes us on a journey full of concerns of the “Food Industrial Complex”.
In David Foster Wallace’s article “Consider the Lobster,” he describes the harsh reality of lobster eating. At the site of the World’s Largest Lobster Cooker at the Maine Lobster Festival, Wallace describes in detail the brutal treatment of lobsters in order for people to seek pleasure in their appetite.
As technology improves, so do human capabilities of altering nature, which in turn creates increased responsibility. This directly relates to genetic engineering, which is beginning to morph into a reality. There are advocates for both sides that convey their personal opinions about the hypothetical results, but neither is clearly superior since both arguments speculate upon an unknown future. Hungarian psychologist, Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, outlines this topic in his essay “The Future of Happiness,” which focuses on the history of selective breeding and compares the goal of happiness with genetic engineering. Csikszentmihalyi alternates between viewpoints regarding genetic engineering but presents a perspective dominated by warning.
On the one hand, some people are favorable for killing animals. It has many opinions why they have accepted. Their reasons with cruelty make them get many benefits such as nutrient, knowledge, safety, prevention, and money. The first reason for killing animals is humans killed them for consuming such as pork made from pigs, beef made from cows, and lamp made from sheep. Human’s life exists to cause by plants and animals.
In today’s world, there is a division among the people in the world regarding whether or not it is ethical to eat meat. After researching about eating meat and vegetarianism, I have come to the conclusion that it is indeed ethical to eat meat in today’s society. Sure, eating meat might have its drawbacks, but I have found that the benefits of eating meat far outweigh the negatives of eating it. Eating meat not only helps improve people’s health, but it also helps strengthen our economy and it has little difference in the environmental impact that involves in the farming of vegetables. Eating too much of anything usually results in a negative outcome.
Although people irrefutably need sustenance to survive, humans have developed an unbalanced reliance on creatures like cows and chickens as their main food source. “In the United States, about 35 million cows, 115 million pigs, and 9 trillion birds are killed for food each year” (Vegetarianism). This constant demand for meat illustrates the endless cycle of breeding animals and then slaughtering them. However, many first-world countries hold a surplus of provisions that supplies more than enough to feed their people, making the use of livestock pointless.
There are ethical challenges as the technology develops, such as the autonomous machines may supersede humans and threaten human existence, and new DNA-based treatment might be the trigger of privacy problems. First, ethics is the philosophical study that deals with what is morally right and wrong in wide scale not only in the scientific field, but also in public, and ethical problems occur as the new technology emerges. Emerging technology includes new technologies and technologies that are starting to be used. For instance, fuel-cell vehicles, artificial intelligence the digital genome, and robots are the emerging technologies. (Al-Rodhan 2).