Argument Essay: The Animal Farm Debate

Animal Farm by George Orwell is a novel about rebellion where the animals are not under human control. Old Major is a Middle White boar who has a dream where animals live without (the tyranny of men; they are free, happy, well fed, and treated with dignity) (Spark Notes). Old Major´s purpose is to convey the idea that animals are the only way to run a farm. animals are not treated right there is going to be a rebellion. Old Major adopts a logical tone in order to show the animals they need to be treated greater if Mr. Jones wants them to work on the farm.

Is it ethical for animals to have the same rights as humans? During this paper I will present the views of both sides. I will try my best to give the reader a chance to come to there own unbiased conclusion. I will talk about the key areas of animal ethics. I will present the facts and reasoning behind the arguments over Animal cruelty, testing, hunting, and improper housing. My conclusion will hopefully bring us closer to answering many of the question surrounding “Animal Rights and Ethics”.

In the book Animal Farm the animals take over the farm shutting out Mr. Jones. Then the pigs tell the animals that they are more intelligent and know how to read and write so therefore they should be the leaders of the farm. The animals basically a agree without any objections in play. This doesn’t include Snowball and Napoleon. These two are always fighting and debating about what needs to be done. Which all leads to the pigs gaining power.

Animal testing has been one of the issues that people are fighting overtime because of its moral. Even though some results of tests are successful on people, many people are still fighting for the animal’s rights. They believe that animals should have their own rights to live a free life where they belong, just like their species. In scientists point of view, animals have been one of the main subjects to test on, but a lot of them are currently looking forward to use and develop alternatives for the cruel act of animal testing.

Propaganda is a way of information in an effort to manipulate or influence society. The language people use in a persuasive speech, news articles, or other communicating articles of can be a very powerful tool for propaganda. There are many different types of propaganda such as suggestion/stimulation, hints, insinuations, indirect statement, and appeal to the known desire/fear, songs, slogans, and poems (American Historical Association). All of these were used in the 1946 novel, Animal Farm, written by George Orwell. Also most of these methods in modern day. In the novel they use propaganda to show how a revolution, no matter how good a person's intentions is at first, can slowly turn into a system that was no better than when they began. Language used in propaganda is a very powerful tool.

Imagine that Christ meant these words literally. Imagine that accepting Christ as your personal savior required lunching with him. Of course, if Christ were coming over today for lunch, you would probably dust, vacuum, adjust the pictures on the walls, pick your best outfit, comb your hair, jot down a few questions about heaven. But what would the two of you eat? Would you serve Christ fried chicken? How would you feel about setting a plate of steaming, sizzling pork chops in front of your savior? A few hard-boiled eggs wouldn't hurt, right? Maybe a glass of milk to wash it all down?

We should not be blind to arguments made by our peers and professors, rather we should argue for our specific beliefs. If these beliefs turn out to be incorrect, we should be willing to change our stance on the issue.

A couple of weeks before our presentation, it was time to start looking over my chapter and figuring out what facts could be used to build a strong case. Reading through it, though, there appeared to be an apparent winning side already. Unfortunately for me, it was not mine. At the time, I was working 40 hours a week and taking a 15 hour semester, so, for a few days, every night after work was spent poring over the case.

Seems rhetorical, but the fact is animals live through this everyday, without even given the choice. As humans, we establish our authority among all living beings, but for what reasons? Are humans better than all other species? Or is it true that we should hold a precedence over nonhuman animals? The ultimate question then remains, should animals have as much or equal to the same rights as humans? Their are endless arguments for and against this question, and many sub arguments that go hand in hand with each side. In this paper, I will discuss the definition of what animal rights entails and expand on the history that developed it’s meaning. Furthermore, I will thoroughly discuss, reason, and explain each opinion presented by our current society as well as the positions held by previous philosophers. Lastly, I will draw a conclusion to the opinions presented by discussing my personal position on the argument of animal rights.

There's a lot of things going on in this world some people know what’s going on and some don't even know what's even going on they don't even know what kind of mistake we have done.We people are losing the freedom and everything that is helping us are basically almost gone because of our new president Donald Trump.There's a book called Animal Farm by George Orwell that talks about animals that want freedom and want an honest respectful leader well there’s an animal named Napoleon that makes animals lose freedom and everything that the animals wanted.Napoleon is a leader from the book Animal Farm. I chose Napoleon because he was the meanest, fearful, mercilessly, and stricter animal on the farm it’s like our president,he's trying to protect

The practice of animal testing should continue to be used due to the remarkable success of medical treatments among humans, medical discoveries (look up progression), and psychological examinations.

After rumours have spread in the outside world that the animals' food is declining that slightly exposes Animal Farm's dilemma, Napoleon devises a plan to trick the solicitor, Whymper, into thinking that their rations have in fact increased, and hopes for a positive report about them to be delivered to the humans instead. He plans to fill the empty bins with sand and covering the top with their remains of grain and meal which would suffice during the Whymper's investigation, but unfortunately fails from the man's sharp eyesight. Whymper knows the truth about their continuous loss of rations so Napoleon has formed a contract with him of trading four hundred eggs a week in exchange for grain and meal to keep the animals fed.

Argument for Animal Rights The argument for animal rights assumes that animals posses their own lives and deserve to be assigned rights in order to protect their wellbeing. This view insists that animals are not merely goods utilised only to benefit mankind and they should be allowed to choose how they want to live their lives, free from the constraints of man. But if animals are given absolute rights, then surely they shouldn’t be allowed to kill each other, as this would be a violation of these rights.

For the past 20 years, there has a been an on going heated debate on whether experiments on animals for the benefit of medical and scientific research is ethical. Whether it is or isn't, most people believe that some form of cost-benefit test should be performed to determine if the action is right. The costs include: animal pain, distress and death where the benefits include the collection of new knowledge or the development of new medical therapies for humans. Looking into these different aspects of the experimentation, there is a large gap for argument between the different scientists' views. In the next few paragraphs, both sides of the argument will be expressed by the supporters.

Non-human animals are given rights only because of their interactions with human beings. Without involvement with humans, animals do not deserve rights. It is through this interaction with humans that animals are even given moral consideration. We do not give rights to a rock simply because it is a creation of Mother Nature, similarly non-human animals do not have rights unless it is in regards to humans. As pointed out by Jan Narveson "morality is a sort of agreement among rational, independent, self-interested persons who have something to gain from entering into such an agreement" (192). In order to have the ability to obtain rights one must be consciously able to enter into an agreement, non-human animals are