An Analysis Of Pollan's Conception In Virtue, Biblical Perspectives

In his article "Vegetarianism and the Other Weight Problem", James Rachels argues that meat eating is immoral and it is a moral duty to be vegetarian. In order to discuss the problems and come up with his conclusions, Rachels considers two arguments for vegetarianism.

A happy sunny farm versus a dark and bloody slaughter room. This is where most naive young children think where their meat comes from versus the reality. The Omnivore’s Dilemma by Michael Pollan is a book with a purpose to educate people about their food system so they can make informed choices. The three writing techniques Michael Pollan uses to persuade his readers are ethos, pathos and logos. He uses the method ethos by making his readers think he is a reliable and credible source. He uses pathos by evoking an emotional response from the readers. Michael Pollan uses logos to appeal to logic and reason. The persuasive techniques ethos, pathos and logos used by Michael Pollan helped him to convince his readers to feel plus think a certain

When Pollan's states to eat food as his first rule, he means exactly that, eat real food. While this statement seems so obvious that it shouldn't need to be a rule, Pollan explains how we are trapped by the Western diet and that access to real food over highly processed food products is harder then it seems. "Taking food's place on the shelves has been an unending stream of foodlike substitutes, some seventeen thousands new ones every year"(Pollan 147). For those that don't know, the Western diet is a term coined to describe our pattern of eating, which is characterized by "lots of processed foods and meat, lots of added fat and sugar, lots of everything except fruits, vegetables, and whole grains"(Pollan 89). Using deductive reasoning,

He probes them to learn the what, where, and how of dinner – knowing what is going into the body, knowing where that food came from, and knowing how that food was made. By first knowing what is being consumed, people can make better informed decisions about their purchases. Nutrition, or lack thereof, is a key component in the battle against obesity. Food giants are hoping to hide the often unnecessary filler present in their products by use of dodgy claims and socially engineered advertisements. In general, most consumers probably couldn’t say where their food came from. This usually boils down to the fact that shoppers typically don’t think about it. Breaking this reliance on mass-grown foods is the second part of Pollan’s proposition. The third and equally important element is how the food is produced. More specifically, Pollan is concerned whether or not the food has been produced in a sustainable manner. Preserving the biodiversity of food, maintaining fertile land for future generations, and ensuring consumers receive food that does not compromise health are all factors of sustainability. Without informed consumers, what, where, and how will continue to be unanswered questions. Whether it is for nutritional or ethical choices, a particular food’s history is something that needs to once again become common

He advises us to eat only things our grandmother would recognize. Foods without any unpronounceable ingredients or high fructose corn syrup. He tells us to stop eating on the go or in front of a television. Pollan also warns us to beware the dangers of reductionist science, especially when it is applied to food. It is this part of Pollan's advice that I believe to be the most critical and informative much more than avoiding high fructose corn syrup or taking time with meals. It is the most challenging because it requires us to change the way we approach food. It requires a change not what loaf of bread we choose to buy or the places and time we spend eating, but a change in the way we think. It requires us to think in terms of relationships. But if we can start to discuss food and health concerns along with health care, environmental, and immigration issues, recognizing that they is a problem, maybe we can come closer to finding a

The answers Pollan offers to the seemingly straightforward question posed by this book have profound political, economic, psychological, and even moral implications for all of us. Beautifully written and thrillingly argued, The Omnivore’s Dilemma promises to change the

As humanity becomes more civilized, many of us perceive that eating livestock is morally incorrect, but aren’t we are designed to be an omnivore? Our teeth and digestive system serve the purpose of breaking down animal and plant foods and to bring these important nutrients to every part of the body. Despite the fact that, in 2011, U.S. meat and poultry production reached more than 92.3 billion pounds, the ethic of killing and eating animals as well as the concern of the environmental burden caused by the production of meats is debatable. However, animal based diet is necessary for the human body to function properly and we can choose the meat produced from environmentally sustainable farms to avoid the moral ambiguity.

The Omnivore’s Dilemma, written by Michael Pollan, gives light to the question, “What should we have for dinner?” that he thinks Americans today cannot answer simply due to the fact that there are too many food options. This book serves as an eye-opener to challenge readers to be more aware and accountable of what is consumed daily. In order to understand fully where our food comes from, we must follow it back to the very beginning. Pollan goes on to discuss three different modern food chains in which we get our food: the industrial, the organic, and the hunter-gatherer. By tracing our food back to the beginning, we can understand that most of the nutritional and health problems America is going through today can be found on the farms that make our food and the government that can decide what happens. America deals with many food related illness such as, heart disease, obesity, and type II diabetes. Majority of a human and animals diet consists of being corn-fed leading to a high cause of obesity in the United States these are just some of the many diseases that come with over processed foods and diets we are unaware of. In this study, we will highlight the environmental and health issues and impacts related with modern agriculture and how these systems can be made more sustainable.

In his book " In Defense of Food " author Michael Pollan takes an interesting and thought

Michael Pollan the author of Omnivore 's Dilemma discusses and asks, “what should we have for dinner?” He attempts to answer one of the pressing questions of sustainability in today 's society, to save money or to save the planet, and how? Pollan talks about how humans are omnivores and we have the choice to eat whatever we want, no matter the health and sustainability implications of our decisions. Pollan discusses three main food chains, industrial (corn), organic, and hunter/gatherer. He analyzes each food chain, learning eating industrial is basically eating corn, and goes into the complex issues

What am I exactly eating? Where does our food come from? Why should I care? “The Omnivore’s Dilemma” may forever change the way you think about food. I enjoyed Mr. Pollan’s book, “The Omnivore’s Dilemma” and learned a great deal of information. Pollan’s book is a plea for us to stop and think for a moment about our whole process of eating. Pollan sets out to corn fields and natural farms, goes hunting and foraging, all in the name of coming to terms with where food really comes from in modern America and what the ramifications are for the eaters, the eaten, the economy and the environment. The results are far more than I expected them to be.

The Omnivore’s Dilemma by Michael Pollan is a comprehensive look into the present day food culture of the United States. Throughout the book the author tries to find out the true composition of the diet that is consumed by Americans on a daily basis. There is an excessive dependence by the American population on the government to know which food is good for them. This paper will critically analyze the book as well as the stance that the author has taken. Since there is a deluge of information about diets and health available today, the relevance of this well researched book in the present day world cannot be emphasized enough. Its relevance is not limited to the United States alone but to the entire human society which is moving towards homogenous food habits.

Brought up in the southern of China, I often heard about that people from there “eat anything with four limbs except tables, anything that flies except aero planes, and anything that swims except ships”. Nevertheless, I eat more fruit, vegetables, nuts, and whole grains but less meat to make careful choices for environmental protection. Similarly, Kathy Freston argues that animal agriculture is one of the top contributors to global warming. In her Huffington Post selection “Vegetarian Is the New Prius,” Freston lists how many emissions of greenhouse gases people make when they eat meat and illustrates the consumption of tree in animal agriculture. She effectively convinces her audiences that the livestock results in the most serious environmental problems and encourages people to lead a greener diet to protect our environment. However, ardent craving, poor health, and perpetual hassle and cost prevent all Americans from being vegetarian.

​In conducting a rhetorical analysis of the two articles, "Joel Salatin: How to Eat Animals and Respect Them, Too" by Madeline Ostrander and "Humane Meat? No Such Thing" by Sunaura Taylor, both articles stand in stark contrast in terms of the viewpoints of meat that they present. In order to gain a better understanding of these viewpoints, it's important to understand the persuasive techniques that both authors use in the article for the reader. More specifically, the ethos, pathos, and logos that they employ, as well the way in which the evidence and support is presented will further elucidate upon the arguments that appear in both articles.

Within the battle of opposing opinions about living a carnivorous lifestyle, there’s the underlying battle of judgment in human nature. We, as humans, have the conscious ability to choose a moral right or wrong. According to Scruton, “it is the residue of religion in us all,” that determines what is moral right and wrong (A carnivore’s Credo 259). This causes the essay to become applicable to every area of life where some moral controversy is present. There is no black and white anymore. The argument is not about what Scruton calls eating versus feeding or whether it's virtuous or vicious. There is a definite gray area. This calls for people to reconsider every action before it is even made. There is no need to “abandon habits” when they can simply be “remoralized” (A Carnivore’s Credo 264). In this example of carnivore vs vegetarian, neither one is more correct than the other. There merely is now an open discussion about what is truly moral.