Analysis Of An Animal Place By Michael Pollan

In “The Animals: Practicing Complexity”, the idea of morals and ethics is brought to question. Michael Pollan offers the idea of giving animals a better life before they are killed for food. He depicts a farm where the animals are used as a natural sort of farm machinery that never needs its oil changed and when they are done working can be eaten (Pollan 350). This concept makes killing animals for food morally acceptable. By changing the treatment of the animals before they are killed the suffering aspect is eliminated. It is almost as if people would be able to give the animals a purposeful life before being used as a source of nutrition. The morality and ethics could then be justified. However, this simple idea is more complex then it may

On the topic of animal rights, Vicki Hearne and Peter Singer represent opposite ends of a belief spectrum. Singer describes, in numerous articles, that he believes animal rights should focus on if the animal is suffering, and the best option to prevent it is to limit interaction between animals and humans. Specifically, in “Speciesism and Moral Status” Singer compares the intelligence and ability of non-human animals to those with severe cognitive disabilities to establish an outrageous solution to animal belittlement. He uses logos (the appeal to reason) and ethos (the appeal to ethics), to question the current rights in place to appeal to other scholars. Nevertheless, his approach can cause an emotional disconnect to the readers; this apparent in contrast to Hearne’s pathos (the

Despite being ‘cruel’ in order to meet the requirements of ‘Australians for Animal Rights’, humans have considered the report ‘alternative’ and ‘important’, compounding the agency’s apparent guilt. This attack on humans invites both readers and carnivores by choice to support the tough action done by the Australians for Animal Rights in defence of the animal society. The tone of the article becomes less forceful when explaining the Australians for Animal Rights’s response. Talk of ‘compassionate people’ and ‘breaking the law’ gives way to a more conciliatory tone, reporting an agreement between humans and the Australians for Animal Rights in order to ‘justify’ to ‘damage’, risks and ‘poor creatures’ involved. Jo’s use of language is most likely intended to encouraging the readers to accept their ‘self-serving purposes’ and to perceive of ‘animal rights’ as a

By evaluating the social aspects regarding the “omnivore’s dilemma,” Michael Pollan argues that people “don’t really know” where the products we consume come from. Thus, he decides to embark on a journey to discover “what exactly it is” society consumes and how this affects their health, as well as the way they enjoy their meals. Furthermore, Pollan accentuates that the role the government plays in the manufacturing of agriculture, implicates the quality of the products at local grocery stores.

When I first looked at the book The Omnivore's Dilemma by Michael Pollan, my first thoughts were that I was not going to be fascinated by a book about organic food and factory farms. When I started to indulge myself into the book I started to consider how much hard work, and time it took to get an entire meal onto my plate. Each meal, with its different ingredients, all have unique paths from which they have come from. The main notion that stayed with me throughout the entirety of the novel were the use of industrial farm systems. These factory farms completely contradict my false perception of a red barn and miles of seemingly endless pasture, filled with cattle. In these industrial farms one of the most frightening aspects, other than the slaughtering of innocent animal, is there standard of living. For example, when Mr. Pollen went to the Petaluma “organic” farm many of the Cornish Chickens were so congested together that by their

Michael Pollan argues the traditional approaches to animal rights and welfare, as well as the environment that the animals live in, are unacceptable. He addresses the issues and gives his own feedback and opinions about the topic and what he thinks the overall outcome should be. A large portion of the article is spent with ideas running through Pollan's mind and he is trying to gather enough information to realize if the process is correct or not. First, Pollan explains what's wrong with industrial farming. Pollan states that beef cattle are used to standing ankle deep in their own waste, as well as eating corn which they can't digest. Chickens get their beaks snipped off and are placed in cages that are entirely too small. Pigs are taken away from their

Pollan’s main reason for increasing the quality of life of animals before their deaths is that they have rights just like humans. He recalls Peter Singer’s comparison of the animals rights movement to the civil rights and women’s rights movement, saying that “in each case, a group once thought to be so different from the prevailing “we” as to be undeserving of civil rights was, after a struggle, admitted to the club” (Pollan 1). Though at the time all these movements seemed senseless to some people because they had their own definition of what gives you civil rights, these movements eventually gained popularity and became the law of the land. Some argue animal rights are the same, and that the mistreatment of animals will eventually be viewed with the

Authors Khullar, Barlett and Steele, Singer, and Hurst in Food Matters, argue many valid and important points previously discussed. Singer suggests that “competition in the marketplace” has a higher cost in the lives of the animals, so that their “flesh” can be provided to the consumer at a lower cost, and I agree because people can cause a strain with product demands (Singer 179). It’s easier to believe that chickens, cows, and pigs live on Old Macdonald’s happy farm than to actually

Ultimately, these particular articles hit a spot that I hold very dear to my heart and that is my undeniable love of animals. Therefore, by reading Pollan’s “An Animal’s Place” I finished it wide eyed and horrified by the burger I had the night before for dinner. I was given a reason to question an industry that before I hadn’t batted an eye at, yet now I was filled with questions. However, upon reading “The Omnivore’s Delusion: Against the Agri-Intellectuals” by Blake Hurst and I realized that in some instances the industry necessarily a terrifying thing. In the end there is a continuous theme of the welfare of animals, human needs and the environment. I learned a lot about the personal perspectives of Pollan and Hurst when it comes to the

In “The Case for Animal Rights,” Tom Regan emphasizes his philosophy on animal and human equality. After reading further into his work, he illustrates a societal system that belittles animals and their significance to our own existence. Regan conceptualizes that animals won’t have real rights unless we change our beliefs. We need to acknowledge a problem. After identifying the issue, we must recognize that there is a need for change in society. In addition, he also reiterates the importance of the populace changing the way they view animals. The way society views animals will create a snowball effect that will influence politicians to also believe in animal rights.

In Peter Singer’s piece “All Animals Are Equal”, he begins his argument by an in-depth consideration of notable rights movements, such as the Black Liberation and women’s rights movement, then segues into the justification for equal consideration of rights regarding animals, before finally exposing the immorality behind factory farming and animal cruelty. According to Singer, “the basic principle of equality…is equality of consideration; and equal consideration for different beings may lead to different treatment and different rights” (Singer 1974, 506). Based off proposed animals’ rights to equal consideration, Singer formats his main arguments against factory farming and the mistreatment of animals in general. These arguments stem from

The abolitionist approach to animal rights discards all use of animals and conserves that all sentient beings, whether humans or nonhumans, have one right: the simple right to not be treated as the possession of others. The acknowledgement of this one simple right indicates that we must eradicate, and not just regulate, established animal mistreatment— this is too get rid of the belief that assumes that animals belong humans. It is recognised that it will take a long process to abolish the property positioning of nonhumans, but they believe it can be achieved if they support only the campaigns and positions that clearly encourage the abolitionist agenda, and not give backing to those that believe in regulations of animal exploitation – such as Professor Robert Garner who argued that animal welfare regulation can cause a ‘ significant reduction of animal use and animal suffering’ (The animal rights debate: abolition or regulation?, 2010). The abolitionist approach sees abolition as the objective of animal ethics and sees creative, nonviolent vegan advocacy—and not welfare reforms—as the means to that end (Animal Rights: The Abolitionist Approach, 2015)

An important part of the debate over animal rights centers on the question of the moral status of an animal. Most people agree that animals have at least some moral status – that is why it is wrong to abuse pets or needlessly hurt other animals. This alone represents a shift from a past view where animals had no moral status and treating an animal well was more about maintaining human standards of dignity than respecting any innate rights of the animal. In modern times, the question has shifted from whether animals have moral status to how much moral status they have and what rights come with that status.

Regan, Tom and Singer, Peter, “All Animals Are Equal.” Animal Rights and Human Obligations. Eds. Tom Regan and Peter Singer. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1989, 148-162. Print.

Plutarch a Greek biographer and essayist known for his essays on ethics and virtue once said: “But for the sake of some little mouthful of flesh we deprive a soul of the sun and light, and of that proportion of life and time it had been born into the world to enjoy.” In reading this, it is understandable that he believed all creatures living on this earth are meant to live an enjoyable life. Similarly, Peter Singer a moral philosopher wrote a novel entitled Animal Liberation which shed light on the topic of animal liberation. Singer argued that human life is not superior to the life of an animal, in essence; making it unethical to slaughter animals for human pleasure. Michael Pollan’s essay An Animal’s Place is written as a reaction to him reading Singers novel. Pollan makes some points insinuating eating animals is ethical. Pollan’s stance uses the utilitarian’s point of view as well as; environmental and evolutionary aspects which support the idea that eating animals is ethical.