A Change of heart About Animals Essay

Although much of modern day technology is focused on materialistic things rather than the issues, such as animal rights, which are more important. â€Å"A Change of heart About Animals†, by Jeremy Rifkin, is an article where he argues how animals have feelings and should have their own rights. He describes how animals have the ability to learn. What he doesn’t do is describe animals as a lower class, but as â€Å"Our fellow creatures† so he states in his article. In Rifkin’s article he uses language such as ethos, pathos, and logos while using a persuasive tone. Ethos is expressed when Rifkin credits the scientists at Oxford University with the testing of two crows and their ability to snag a piece of meat from inside a tube. Pathos is also expressed towards the end of the article when he emotionally calls animals â€Å"our fellow humans†. Last but not least logos is expressed when he states how the European Union outlawed the use of isolating pigs in stalls. Some have argued that by simple jester’s animals can live happier lives. For example, in Germany pig farmers are encouraged to give pigs twenty seconds of human contact each day. Some of the sponsors that provide this research are fast food purveyors, such as McDonalds, Burger King, and KFC. Their contribution has eased the pressure off of animal rights activists. Even though steps have been taken towards research development, there is still more to be learned. Because of such inhumane behavior shown by some farmers, some universities have introduced law courses on animal rights. Some of these Universities have filed law suits for animal rights. As a result of this Germany became the first nation to guarantee animal rights in its constitution. It just goes to show that there are still some good people out there. It’s obvious that more action needs to be taken towards achieving our goal at animal rights. With the help of animal activists and some major universities, we can achieve animal rights. It isn’t fare to them. That’s why it’s up to us to give our fellow creatures the rights and protection that they deserve. Just think, would you like to be caged all day with no say on what to eat, and live in hard conditions? A Change of Heart about Animals Essay In â€Å"A Change of Heart about Animals† Jeremy Rifkin says that animals have the same human qualities that humans have. And with that they deserve more if not the same amount of respect as human beings. He gives many examples on how some animals are human like emotion and skilled wise. I disagree with Rifkin. I think that most animals should not get more respect than human beings reason being that most of the animals he listed are going to be killed and be used for reasonable human use. To begin with, Rifkin gives many examples that are self contradicting to what he is trying to argue. First Rifkin says â€Å"Studies on pigs’ social behavior funded by McDonalds at Purdue University†¦ they crave affection and are easily depressed if isolated†¦ lack of mental and physical stimuli can result in deterioration of health.† Here Rifkin is saying that pigs need attention in order to stay healthy. I disagree with this because in the end the pigs are going to be killed and be used for human consumption so why would it care if they are depressed or not. Also, it contradicts itself because the people funding it are one of the major corporations killing thousands of pigs day in and out so it makes it seem like they are trying to save the pigs. Later he states â€Å"Philosophers long argued that other animals are not capable of self awareness because they lack individualism†¦ At the Washington National Zoo, orangutans given mirrors explore parts of their bodies they can’t otherwise see, showing a sense of self.† Here he is stating how animals do in fact have a sense of self awareness and that orangutans are a prime example. I disagree with this reason being that Rifkin didn’t give the name of the philosophers who said this, making it not credible because anyone could have said that. Also they are not really giving the orangutans to freely observe themselves because they have them locked up in enclosure at the Washington national zoo. All in all I think Rifkin does not give a strong enough argument. He gives examples that easily contradict him making his argument not credible enough for the reader. With this I think Rifkin is in no position to say that animals deserve more rights than human beings.