RE: A Change Of Heart About Animals

I honestly think that Jeremy Rifkin had some very significant findings when he published “A Change of Heart about Animals”. If it wasn't for Rifkin many people like myself would have not known that animals share some of the same traits as humans like grief, self awareness, and the need for affection. Everyone needs to know that animals aren't some type of toy but rather a living creature with feelings. Rifkin wants his readers to believe that humans and animals are much alike and want some of the same rights for them but is that a good idea…

In the article “A Change of Heart About Animals”, Rifkin asserts that humans are treating animals in the most atrocious way, and he claims that in order for their lives to improve, we need to definitely adjust ours. He uses great amount of logos, and several experiments done with different animals and tries his best to closely relate animals to us, humans. Rifkin although, never inserts a call for action to this problem throughout his article. Instead, he puts the emphasis on the pathos of the argument. In the world we are living in today, there is about 8.7 million different living species. Whether they are land or marine animals, they do play a big role in our community such as being apart of the food pyramid, assisting handicapped people wherever they go, or being a transportation for people living on farms and fields. With this being said, the ranking of animals in our community has brought up a heated argument in connection to their rights and welfare. Eight legged, four legged, or two legged land or sea animals do not comprehend the concept of rights. If we, humans, give animals “rights”, we are basically inferring the fact that we are like animals, and they have the entitlement to share our rights. Although they don’t understand rights, the fact that many of these animals are being treated inhumanely is wrong and animal welfare should be ingrained into this community rather than the massive inhumane treatment.

In Chapter two of Moral, Believing Animals Christian Smith argues that human beings are moral animals because they are strong self-evaluators who inhabit morally based orders. In the next chapter, smith adds that humans are moral animals because they also believe. This ability to believe and act morally allows humans to stray away from our instinctive minds. In other words, it is apart of what makes us human. Smith finds that this way of viewing humans provides a better account of human religiousness. Religion is the manifestation of our capacity to be self-conscious. Smith uses Narrative morality writing to help explain his views on religion and human beings, which allow us to recognize our true moral capacity.

Contrary to what we might think, animals share similar characteristics with us in terms of their physical and psychological states. Jeremy Rifkin, author of twenty books on the impact of scientific and technological changes on the society and the environment, writes in his op-ed piece “A Change of Heart about Animals,” research which supports animals have behavioral, mental, and emotional states. Koko, a gorilla, was taught how to use sign language and has mastered more than 1,000 signs and can understand several thousand English words. To express their sense of individuality, orangutans use mirrors to explore parts of their bodies they can 't otherwise see. A common misconception is animals can 't feel anything, meaning they don’t understand suffering. However, elephants appear to experience grief by mourning for the dead and standing next to their dead kin for days (Rifkin). Also according to Victoria Braithwaite, a Professor of Fisheries and Biology interested in animal cognition, studies in her article "Hooked on a Myth" suggests nociceptors, specialized nerve endings that alert creatures to feel pain, are found in the mouths of fish. This study proves animals have the ability to experience pain. Rifkin’s

“In nature, animals naturally kill and eat each other. If the hawk does not care about the feelings of the rabbit it eats, why should humans be any different? (Bob Stevens 61)”. We need to eat certain animals in order to get specific nutrients and proteins that we need for our body to fully function correctly and efficiently. As well as social contact, how Rifkin states animals need affection and toys to play with. When he’s just overlooking the fact that there are still kids and even babies in this world who don’t even have that. He’s placing animals emotions ahead of our own childrens.

Furthermore, Rifkin discusses the cognitive abilities of animals, by informing us that learning is passed on from parent to offspring. Rifkin says that most animals engaged all kind of learning, Rifkin in paragraph 15 wants to make us get in our emotions and he says, “So what does all of this portend for the way we treat our fellow creatures?” Rifkin believes that a lot of animals are in the most inhumane

ear Editor, In the article published “A Change of Heart About Animals.” In there, the author Jeremy Rifkin states that “ [Animals] they feel pain, suffer and experience stress, affection, excitement, and even love- these findings are changing how we view animals.” I agree with this pretty bold statement and I feel like many parts of society are very neglecting towards animals and how they are treated, there needs to be a change. Like Rifkin said, many animals in our daily lives are like people in more ways than one.

In your article “A Change of Heart about Animals” you argue that animals should be treated more humanely. I agree. Animals are living things just like you and me. Why should they be treated like dirt until their death? Although I do not believe we should stop eating animals, I do believe they should be treated much better.

emotions in a ‘man-made’ species is not far off in a non-organic life-form, but the question with

My cultural immersion is season three, episode three of 30 Days, Animal Rights. I am employed in agriculture and have been for the last 12 years. Those who are involved with farming operations believe in animal rights, but those rights are different than what was portrayed in this video.I have taken stand against anti-farming measures and harshly against The Humane Society of the United States and PETA. Finding faults and misstated facts with the propaganda with these to organization. My new stance would be uncomfortable, as I do not view them as the good guys. The stance I am going to be will force me outside of the dominant culture that I live in.

Canis lupus familiaris, also known as man’s best friend. Man’s best friend has been around for many years. The dog, Canis familiaris, is a direct descendent of the gray wolf, Canis lupus: In other words, dogs as we know them are domesticated wolves. Not only their behavior changed; domestic dogs are different in form from wolves, mainly smaller and with shorter muzzles and smaller teeth (PBS 2001). With that being said, the earliest dogs were wolves. The earliest known humans took them in, started hunting with them and eventually turned them into one of our most faithful pets.

I shall be unwrapping Darwin’s and Lorenz theories to prove that anthropomorphism is present in their studies. Also, will be arguing that use of anthropomorphism and empathy being used for scientific theories is problematic for an objective study. To begin, we must understand the meaning of anthropomorphism and empathy.

Human beings are not the only species who benefit from animal testing. Table 1 depicts the advances in biomedical research for animals. Without animal research humans and animals would still be dying or totally wiped out from these diseases.

We have concluded that mind and body work together as one. In humans, we have a mental experience happen with a biological experience together whether we are conscious of it or not. This has led to recovery from illness, like an optimistic person with cancer or someone to become ill, like an aggressive type-A personality with cardiovascular problems. Our bodies work with the mind in the opposite direction as well. While it cannot be denied that humans display behaviors not seen in nonhuman animals, there is nevertheless theory that suggests that animals are more than simply something uncivilized that needs to be domesticated, eaten, or as a pet.

There is a great debate on whether humans and animals are alike in terms in the existence of a