Summary Of A Change Of Heart About Animals

They are more like us than we imagined…” these words written by Jeremy Rifkin in his article “A Change of Heart about Animals,” emphasize that like us humans, animals feel pain as well. Equivalently, Rifkin insists on the point that we need to change our ways in which we treat animals or in other words limit ourselves to a certain level of fair treatment with them. Alike us, they feel pain and suffer in many ways in cause of our actions towards them and it is not fair for an animal to be attacked this way by us humans when they as well are living their own lives and are already trying to survive themselves. In support of this, I am with Jeremy Rifkin and agree that our actions towards animals need either a change or limit.

We are not alone on this Earth. We, humans, have animals by our side. We share this inhabitable planet together with animals, and they should have same right as we do on this beautiful planet. Animals are pure instinctual living creatures who never think before following their instincts. They won’t think otherwise before killing a person. Animals who are able to surpass these barriers are able to receive our empathy and their rights, but in Jeremy Rifkin’s, “A Change of Heart About Animals,” he talks ideas about all animals should receive our empathy for great acts of the few. The individual animal receive its equal rights, not by a single entity achieving it for the mass, but by the individual must showing intelligences, emotions and feelings, and most importantly, the ability to co-exist with others; including human and other animals alike.

In the articles of Jeremy Rifkin, Victoria Braithwaite, and Ed Yong, there's a deep research and debate whether animals should be given the right to have human rights or not. All authors include their perspective on the issue and provide scientific evidence. However, I believe that there should be a separation of rights between animals and humans because there is no biological basis for drawing the line. Giving the right to apes, what factors exclude other mammals like dogs, cats, and birds.

16 November 2016 Dear Mr. Rifkin, Jeremy Rifkin writes an incredible article which is warm hearting and does not go over the top. He states that animals are more like humans and don't get the credit they deserve. He also backs up his evidence not with personal opinion but with facts. He talks about pigs who crave affection, intelligent animals, and devastating tragedies that animals feel when losing one of their own.

In his article “A Change of Heart about Animals,” Rifkin points out that “ they feel pain, suffer, and experience stress, affection, excitement and even love--- and these findings are changing how we view animals.” Currently people are treating animals with disrespect by abusing , eating them , and slaughtering them. Rifkins point of view is to catch people's attention to change their attitude towards animal abuse so that we can think twice about animal cruelty. He states that animals have the similar intelligence as us human beings. I agree with Rifkins point of view for the fact that we need to change the way we treat animals because they’re similar to us human beings.

What is the difference between wild animals and humans? Humans live in a world of affection, where emotions and self moral rights matter. In the same manner as humans, wild animals live in a world like ours where they too feel emotions. So what is the correct answer to the question… Nothing in reality, wild animals are like humans. In a very similar matter, they both have common characteristics that relate to one another. In many researches today, it has been proven that animals feel the same effectiveness we have towards them. Studies have shown that animals are more like us than we understand; therefore, they deserve human rights.

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”. (Pollan) Through this quote Pollan is explaining that he had taken speciesism as a joke, but in fact speciesism

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.

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

After attempting to save her dog from two angry pitbulls, the 53-year old woman had suffered severe injuries. The incident occurred at 7:30 am. The police later cornered the dogs. They shot and killed one dog after it started to charge at them, and they took the other pitbull to an animal control center in Milwaukee. Police took it there to test it for rabies and to quarantine it.

In the article,¨ A Change of Heart about Animals¨, author Jeremy Rifkin presents to the reader that he believes that animals are similar to humans in many different perspectives. In the article he talks about the emotions of different animals and he gives different examples such as the pigs that support his main claim. He then goes on to explain the cognitive abilities of the animals and starts to explain the thinking process of the animals. He also explains that the people should be more aware about animals and how they are being treated. He is trying to have people have a change of heart in how they view animals, he wishes people to be more aware of what goes on in animals and how they are so much like us, they should be treated and thought

I believe that all animals should be treated but not as equal as humans. I think that animals need to have The Animal Bill of Rights because it can stop animal abuse, unnecessary animal experiments, and the death of many innocent creatures but animals can not have an equal rights as humans have. We can not ignore human suffering and focus only on animals rights.

For my I.S., I am interested in how and when social movements that are based on the interests and needs of a particular race-based identity group are able to build alliances and mobilize support from the larger population. Specifically, under what conditions will Black social movements in the U.S. gain support from the White American population? Previous literature tells us that grievances, access to resources, and identity all play a significant role in an individual choice to join/support a movement. However, these previous studies do not explain why a person outside of the racial group around which the movement is organized would choose to join/support it. The concept of moral shock, a sense of outrage triggered by a specific situation that causes a person to seek political action, can be created and manipulated by social movement leaders in order to mobilize support from those who do not have a stake in the issues and who otherwise would be unaffected by the issues and events the movements are discussing.

In the next section, “The Case of the Disobedient Orangutans”, the author further delves into the concept of language and animal behavior by arguing that orangutans develop a “vocabulary”, a type of language when interacting with their trainers. The author uses situations found in literature, research, and real life examples to illustrate that animals are more sophisticated than initially considered and have an ability to work with a language. “Wittgenstein’s Lion” begins with a reference to Immanuel Kant and his role in separating human beings from animals by saying that animals apparently do not cry. This beginning is

Why do stray animals exists? Strays are not a random occurrence but a symptom of a bigger problem caused by the following: 1. Irresponsible pet ownership, 2. Pet owners not spaying/neutering their pets, 3.