Rifkin A Change Of Heart About Animals Summary

Animals and humans can actually share a lot of characteristics. For example in the stories “Hachiko” by Turner, and “My Life with Chimpanzees” by Goodall. Some of the characteristics humans and animals share are loyalty to one another, to help one another, and to use tools. One characteristic that humans and animals share is loyalty. For example in Goodall’s story, “Life with Chimpanzees” the chimpanzees are loyal to Goodall after she keeps feeding them, just like humans the ones that care for us we are loyal to.

Jeremy Rifkin is a very talented writer. In his article, “A Change of Heart about Animals,” Rifkin states the many different examples and studies that prove his argument, which states, “…many of our fellow creatures are more like us than we had ever imagined.” Rifkin is completely correct in this and does a wonderful job of proving his point. Animals are a lot more like us than imagined.

In the article “A Change of Heart about Animals” (1 September 2003), published by Los Angeles Times, author Jeremy Rifkin discusses how “... researchers are finding [is] that many of our fellow creatures are more like us than we imagined.” (Rifkin 61). Using academic diction, Rifkin develops his main idea with evidence such as “They [animals] feel pain, suffer, and experience stress, affection, excitement, and even love -- and these findings are changing how we view animals. ”(Rifkin 61). This suggests a pathos and logos persuasive appeal that broadens the reader’s understanding and knowledge in changing our perspective of the inhumane and inequality treatment that non domestic animals receive. Rifkin’s use of pathos and logos appeals is to

In the article “A Change of Heart about Animals” (2003), published by Los Angeles Times, author Jeremy Rifkin discusses how our fellow creatures are more like humans than we had ever imagined. Using academic diction, Rifkin develops his main idea with evidence such as Caledonian crows being able to make tools to complete a task. These birds were given the task of grabbing meat out of a tube with a choice of two tools, a hooked wire and a straight wire. Both of the birds were able to complete the task, however, one bird showed exceptional cognitive abilities when she bent a straight wire into a hook to grab the meat. This suggests a logos persuasive appeal that broadens the reader’s awareness of the conceptual abilities of crows. Rifkin’s use

In the article “A Change of Heart about Animals” Jeremy Rifkin uses scientific evidence to reason with us that “many of our fellow creatures are more like us than we had ever imagined”. Rifkin suggests that animals should be treated better and be provided with better living conditions. He uses Betty and Koko as examples that animals have higher intellectual abilities and emotions than we thought. Many scientists also argued that animals do not have an understanding of death or capable of grief, but Rifkin counteracts that argument by using elephants as evidence to show that they are capable of grief.

As Rifkins said “ many of our fellow creatures are more like us than we have ever imagined.” (Rifkins 33) I do agree what Rifkin is saying. As you see the example he has given us about Betty the New Caledonian crow and Coco the three hundred-pound gorilla. Betty was under a controlled experiment and had to choose which stick to use to get a piece of meat out of the tube. As the study, nine times out of ten, show after she hooked wire was taken away by a fellow bird she then use the straight wire to convert it into a hook. Coco the three hundred pound gorilla was taught sign language. She has mastered over one-thousand signs and understood thousands English words On an IQ test her score was between seventy and ninety five . Which places

Jeremy Rifkin wants us to believe that animals are similar to humans. I personally think that I agree and disagree with his argument. One reason why I agree with Rifkin is because I believe animals have feelings, just like Rifkin said “They feel pain, suffer, and experience stress, affection, excitement, and even love.” (Rifkin 33). On the other hand, I disagree with Jeremy’s argument because I don’t think we should go out of our way to pay more attention to these animals feelings when we have millions of children that don’t even get the amount of attention these pigs are getting.

“What these researchers are finding is that many our creatures are more like us than we ever imagined. They feel pain, suffer and experience stress, affection, excitement and even love -- and these findings are changing how we view animals,” said by Rifkin. In Rifkin’s article, A Change of Heart about Animals, highlights the fact we should have empathy of the way we treat our creatures that we share the earth with. He supports his argument with examples of animals having adroitness such as human do. Rifkin also addressesthe brain anatomy and chemisty similar to us.

The idea that people are not so different from animals is reasonable to me because of the fact that we have descended from an animal and human habit shows that we have kept a few characteristics that animals present today.

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

What is the purpose of the bill of right in the united states of america? The bill of rights is the first ten amendments of the US constitution ratified in 1791 and guaranteeing such rights as the freedoms of speech, assembly, and worship. By humans creating the bill of rights many believe that the US should grant a bill of right to non-humans. In Jeremy Rifkin's article, “A Change of Heart about Animals”, the author claims that animals should be guaranteed similar rights as humans by describing how similar animals and humans are. In Victoria Braithwaites article, “Hooked on a Myth”, the author states the question why do we treat fish differently than mammals or even birds.

Peter Singer has written many works in support of animal rights. In one of his greatest works Animal Liberation, Singer goes into great depths on how similar in biology animals are to human beings. Another strong point was not only the biological resemblance, but also the behavioral tendencies and traits humans and nonhuman species share. There are two major areas of focus that Singer puts emphasis on that need to be recognized for the purposes of my argument. One focus is this utilitarian approach that only the human species carry: the belief of ethical and morally good behavior should be extended to the consideration of nonhuman species. The second focus that is the basis for my argument is Singer’s argument against a huge human social construct labeled speciesism.

“A Change of Heart About Animals” by Jeremy Rifkin says that scientist are discovering that animals are more like humans than ever imagined. It states that, ‘‘what these researchers

Both in and out of philosophical circle, animals have traditionally been seen as significantly different from, and inferior to, humans because they lacked a certain intangible quality – reason, moral agency, or consciousness – that made them moral agents. Recently however, society has patently begun to move beyond this strong anthropocentric notion and has begun to reach for a more adequate set of moral categories for guiding, assessing and constraining our treatment of other animals. As a growing proportion of the populations in western countries adopts the general position of animal liberation, more and more philosophers are beginning to agree that sentient creatures are of a direct moral concern to humans, though the degree of this

“The difference between the brain of the human and the higher animal obviously lies in the degree, not the difference on the essence” (Charles Darwin). The purpose of the quote is to express the feeling that the animal and human is similar, they have the human-like qualities. In Life of Pi written by Yann Martel, Pi uses animal imagery to show that animals that can be mad, suffer, and sad which are all human qualities.