Rhetorical Analysis Of Gary Steiner's Animal, Vegetable Mineral

Rhetorical Analysis “Down on the factory farm” The last thing that comes to our mind when we order a piece of steak at a restaurant is how that animal we are about to eat was being treated while they were alive. According to author Peter Singer’s article "Down on the factory farm” he questions what happened to your dinner when it was still an animal? He argues about the use and abuse of animals raised for our consumption. In Singer’s article he states personal facts and convincing statistics to raise a legitimate argument.

Jonathan Safran Foer’s Eating Animals is a book about persuasion. Foer seeks to convince his readers to take any step in reducing what he believes is the injustice of harming animals. To achieve this, Foer employs many persuasion techniques and often changes his approach when he targets specific groups. His strategies include establishing himself as an ethical authority and appealing to his readers’ emotions, morals, and reason.

What is described appeals to the readers emotions, especially when they realize they will eventually eat this meat. This helps convey the tone of disapproval because it is so gross. Furthermore, the author appeals to pathos when discussing workplace safety in slaughterhouses. He stated, “Meatpacking is now the most dangerous job in the United States. The injury rate in a slaughterhouse is about three times higher than the rate in a typical American factory.”

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 Jonathan Foer’s argumentative essay “Let Them Eat Dog”, he makes a very convincing argument for the consumption of dog, a surprising topic to argue for. However, when one reads through his excerpt, it’s quite difficult to escape the sound logic he utilizes throughout the piece. Ranging from commentary on the taste of dog meat to points about the ecological impact it would have if the U.S. started eating dog, Foer is persuasive and reasonable. So reasonable, in fact, that it begs the reader to question exactly why he would put so much effort into arguing for eating dog, something that most people won’t change their minds on no matter how logical the argument is. Foer even admits at the end of his essay that despite his best efforts, people

In Michael Pollan’s article, he addresses the topic as to whether or not it is morally right to consume animals. Pollan’s opinion towards consuming animals is pretty explicit in the beginning. He saw no harm in consuming animals, but his opinion started to change after reading Peter Singer’s book, “Animal Liberation”. While reading through the book, Pollan learns that eating animals, wearing animals, experimenting on animals, and killing animals for clothing are all viewed as “speciesism”. He quotes, “speciesism”- a neologism I had encountered before only in jokes- as a form of discrimination as indefensible as racism or anti-Semitism”.

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.

Rhetorical Knowledge - Purpose: I feel that I successfully fulfilled the purpose of my paper which was to write about the impact of a teacher. I was able select three reasons that this teacher had an impact on me and create supporting details. Also in my opinion the paper all the requirement that were in the writing prompt. Critical Thinking, Reading, and Writing - Reading and research: For this paper I relied on the memories i had of being in Mr. Bolts classroom. I my happiest memories of the classroom to help myself describe what he was like as a teacher.

ENG-122 Reflective Essay My writing process has changed tremendously over the course of this class. I feel more accomplished, confident and I feel sometimes that my ideas and thoughts just come in to my mind out of nowhere and I start writing about anything now. I pay attention to my punctuation and grammar more as I have polished them more now, not only when I write but then others write as well. I am constantly looking for errors and I highly think this is helping me a lot in my career.

In Michael Pollan’s book, An Omnivore’s Dilemma, we are focused on many different views of eating meat and other foods that are products of animals. The majority of those who chose to consume

In Animal Farm, George Orwell warns how power will often lead to corruption. Napoleon was placed in a position of power after Major died, and he slowly starts to lavish in his power and become addicted to the lush life of a dictator. When Napoleon first becomes a leader, he expresses how everyone will work equally, but as his reign goes on, he shortens the work hours. At the very end of the novel, the observing animals even start to see that pig and man had become the same. The irony present in the above example, illuminates how regardless of how much a ruler promises to maintain equality and fairness, the position of power that they hold, will corrupt them. It is seen that the power rid of Napoleon’s conscience, and created a ruthless dictator.

The passage is saying that we should treat the animals that we normally eat just like we treat puppies, which are normally treated like family. Morality comes into play and presents that if we don’t torture puppies for our eating pleasures then we should not support factory farms since they torture animals, which end up being eaten for our pleasure. The author is unable to find a morally relevant difference between Fred and people who eat factory raised meat, at least ones that consume the meat that know what the animals have endured to end up on their plates. The passage relates greatly to the view of the author. The author explained that if we condemn Fred’s behavior, which was only to heighten his gustatory experience then shouldn’t we condemn

Imagine a day in the life of a common farm animal. Far from the peaceful grazing life one would envision, the livestock of today endure horrific conditions - from suffering painful diseases to being separated from their mothers at too young of an age. Not only are these conditions harmful to the animals, the food produced by them is unnecessary to humanity’s well-being and can even be damaging to society’s overall health. Since the definition of ethics is having well-founded standards of right and wrong, this process of producing meat for our consumption is unethical.

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.

“In 2016, the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) estimated that Americans ate an average of 54.3 pounds of beef, 92.1 pounds of chicken, and 50.4 pounds of pork, per person, per year” (Vegetarianism). Food production counts for only one of the many injustices animals face daily. Although they have been proven emotionally intelligent, mankind views these entities as subservient and continue to harm them. People around the world have created organizations that work to ameliorate the treatment of animals. As the animal rights movement nobly fights to improve the conditions of these living creatures, daily human activities and the moral values of some prolong the acceptance of animal equality.