Can We End Animal Forming Forever?
Human beings have been mistreating and killing both domestic and wild animals for centuries. One main reason why people perpetrate atrocities to animals is that they are not aware that they also emotions and experience pain, just like human beings. Mostly, people kill animals to exploit their product, which includes meat, hides, and skin. Additionally, some people hurt animals for pleasure. For instance, children kick pets such as dogs and cats while playing, not knowing that they are hurting the animals. However, people hurt pets like dogs by beating them when trying to train them against actions like getting in the house or attacking animals such as chickens.
In the article Can We End Animal Forming Forever.? Nathan Robinson is concerned about the mistreatment of animals by humans. However, he mentions that it is possible to eradicate the vice without people having to quit eating meat. Robinson reveals the challenges that animals face to satisfy human’s meat desire, including chicks being kept in crowded states where most suffocate. Robinson reflects on Jacy Reese’s argument in the latter’s book The End of Animal Farming where Reese proposes that animal farming can be ended in the coming years if an effort is put. He suggests improving non-animal-based products by making them perfect substitutes to cater to animal products demand. Reese is confident that people will consume the non-animal meat if it has a good taste since they eat animals irrespective of the production method. He also mentions the possibility of soon having lab-grown meat but emphasizes that the meat should be given an appealing name such as pure meat to encourage consumption. The rhetorical strategy was effectively applied because the author proposes for the popularization of non-meat products to replace animal meats. More importantly, the author portrays the excessive human desire for meat that make them violate animal rights as immoral.
The author has used Aristotelian appeals to persuade the audience to avoid killing animals for
meat. Aristotelian appeals are made up of ethos, pathos, and logos. In this article, the author
shows his credibility (ethos) towards the topic by portraying the knowledge about the effect of
killing animals and other sources of meat flavours. Robinson is a reliable source of this information because he has cited the book where it was obtained. Additionally, the article has no grammatical and spelling mistakes. Also, the author represents his emotional part of the story (pathos) by showing how it is not beneficial to slaughter animals for meat after feeding them for some years. The logos of the article are the sources of meat that can be used instead of killing animals because it is economical and morally right to consume lab-grown meat since unlike animals, it is manufactured within a short time, and there is no guilt involved as in the case of killing animals for their meat. The author’s language also represents a good use of Aristotelian appeals. In this case, the author compares the wastage of resources, which includes lands and money used to purchase food for the animals and act of slaughtering them for meat, which will be eaten for some days, with lab-grown meat which has the same taste as that of animal meat but is made using fewer resources and minimal time. The author also gives positive names to the animal meat substitutes to create the right image on the minds of the consumer. For instance, he refers plant meat as natural meat which is appealing to consumers as compared to lab-grown or manufactured meat which may make them perceive it as having no difference with other manufactured household items like utensils. He believes that positive names will promote the consumption of lab-grown meat and plant-based products.
Can we end animal farming is a persuasive article that was written on 12/11/ 2018 by Nathan?
Robinson? Nathan uses imagery to deliver his message to the audience. In this case, Nathan draws a clear mental picture of the pain, sorrow, and fear that are subjected to non-human animals when exposed to cruel practices through the vivid description. Also, Nathan shows the unfavourable environments that birds are exposed to, which leads to stress and suffocation. These two aspects are the primary cause of low growth and reproduction of animals, which eventually decreases their population. In the article, Nathan includes Reese, who portrays a brilliant knowledge about reducing animal killing. In this case, Reese reports that industries have introduced meat flavours that are cheap and healthy, which is an effective method of lowering animal deaths. Farmers can also use this method as a saving plan because the prices of animals can purchase more plant meats. The consumption of animal meat also reduces the death of animals, which offers a suitable environment for their growth and reproduction.
Animal killing cannot be controlled. Controlling animal killing is difficult because it is challenging to convince people about the effect of animal killing. Notably, people believe that they have the mandate or authority to kill animals because they are their owners. Others think that there is no problem if they kill animals for food, yet this assumption is wrong. The argument that ending animal killing is impossible is true because consumers may not appreciate the substitute for animal meat because most of them think that plant meat contains poison.
Cruel practices affect animal farming. Notably, animals, like human beings, are subjected to sorrow, pain, and stress, which affects their growth and productivity. Additionally, psychological problems such as stress and sorrow that they develop when treated cruelly make them develop aggressive behaviors as a way of self-defense. Furthermore, the population of animals gradually decreases when they are slaughtered which is disadvantageous since products like milk may decrease when dairy animals such as cattle reduce. The statement that cruel practices affect animal farming is true because mistreated animals mostly are unhealthy thus, they provide less products including meat and milk.
Names given to plant meat may influence their consumption. Notably, names given to products suggests whether they are good or bad. Therefore, industries must give the plant meat names that will be appealing to customers by suggesting the products are healthy. Failure to change the negative names may scare away consumers because chemical names might create a mentality to the consumers that plant meat is toxic.
Conclusion
Overall, the article shows that human beings should keep animals safe. The author proposes that it is possible to end animal cruelty without quitting meat consumption. I feel that a time has come for us to stop animal cruelty which has existed for centuries. I believe that it is possible to end the vise in this era where we can use technology to produce commodities that have same taste and nutritional value like that of animal meat. Lastly, I believe public awareness of animal rights will significantly help in ending animal abuse because people kill and hurt animals because they think they do not suffer emotionally and physically.
Works Cited
Perdue Abigail, Lockwood Randall, et al. Animal Cruelty and Freedom of Speech: When Worlds Collide. Purdue, 2014. (pg. 11)
Reese, Jacy. The End of Animal Farming: How Scientists, Entrepreneurs, and Activists Are Building an Animal-Free Food System. Beacon Press, 2018. (pg. 57)