The Human Nature Of Animal Border

The starting point of this essay is to establish and lay out an animal rights claim. The point here is not to solely list which specific rights animals have, as that goes beyond the scope of this essay, but to discuss why animals do in fact have a claim to rights, and what this means for humans. The need to understand the intrinsic, or inherent value of animals allows us to see the base from which their claim to rights is derived. Inherent value refers to the idea that animals are valuable in themselves, not in what they provide us. Tom Regan, an animal ethicist, sets out the moral grounding from which we can

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

Michael Pollan’s, An Animal’s Place, analyzes the controversial topic of animal abuse while Pollan himself struggles to comprehend the relationship between humans and non-humans. Whether animals are used for food or clothing, Pollan’s impartial view of the moral ethics behind the treatment of animals acknowledges that we as readers are susceptible to influence and he encourages the questioning of our own beliefs. Rather than succumbing to Singer’s, All Animals are Equal demands of making it our “Moral obligation to cease supporting the practice” (pg.4), Pollan conveys the benefits as well as the concerns to the consummation of animals. From the personal connection Pollan establishes with his readers, his progressive beliefs

Human beings are considered to be the greatest creations that were given knowledge, skills and power to rule over the entire planet. However, at the same time, their relationship with other animals and its implications in human civilization cannot be denied. Historically, it is proven that for thousands of years, human beings have developed close contact with animals who were their means of living and at the same time often, great companions. Considering the great significance of animals in the lives of human beings, often their relationships were portrayed in literature by authors. It was meant to help the global community to have a clear understanding of the impact that animals have in the lives of human beings which is very much significant.

Anthropomorphism plays a crucial part on the child’s developing mind. Between the ages of three and five years old, children become exposed to anthromorphic depictions when beginning to learn about real-life animals. This skewed view of the natural world and how children are taught to interpret it may be why children become confused when faced with real animals because of the human qualities are not really present. Throughout the article the author discuses different cross-cultural and experimental studies to show the different ways that children responded to various representations of animals. For example, a child that has a pet at home may be more likely to tell the difference between anthromorphism and real-life animals as opposed to a child who does not have a pet. Other studies have

Alberto Rios claims that the border is unnatural, complex, and seen as a boundary. He discusses empathetic relationships in a global society when he uses many literary devices to claim that the border is an unnatural thing in a natural world, it has become so complex that it is unrecognizable, and that many people view it as a boundary when it should be viewed as what joins us together. The border is unnatural because it is something manmade placed in the natural world as if the people believed that it was supposed to be natural as well. What started as a simple rancher’s fence to fix a simple problem, quickly escalated to be something as complex as a third grader trying to understand calculus. The people view the border as a boundary meant to divide when in reality, it is what joins us together as a global society.

In chapter four of Melissa Milgrom’s Still Life, How the Orangutan Got Its Skin, Milgrom gains access to the Smithsonian National Museum of Natural History (SNMNH) and its workshop where taxidermy specialists prepare and create mounts for museum displays. Throughout this chapter, she makes several points about people taking extreme measures out of love for preserving animals. These points are very similar to those found in the documentary The Elephant in the Living Room, where exotic pet owners, such as Terry Brumfield, do crazy things out of love for their pets.

In an article based on an interview published in Time Magazine, “A Change of Heart About Animals”. Jeremy Rifkin expresses his views about the similarity behavior and emotional state between us humans and animals, with the purpose to change the way of how we see and feel about them. “We’re so skewed toward efficiency that we’ve lost our sense of humanity. What we need to do is to bring back a sense of the sacred”, Rifkin, argues. He supports his arguments with the findings of many researchers around the globe. Researchers that come from very prestigious institutions using different species of animals, we’re talking about crows, elephants, geese, etc. Not your ordinary lab rats and monkeys (which they don’t have anything

“It’s starting to look as if the most shameful tradition of Western civilization is our need to deny we are animals” (Barbara Kingsolver 10). In “High Tide In Tucson”, the author Kingsolver proposes a counter-narrative that human should recognize themselves as animals. In “

Because of this, humans view animals as lesser beings which can be controlled, eaten, and abused at our discretion. Singer argues against this way of thinking by acknowledging the similarities between humans and other “lesser

To the editor of “A change of heart about animals” Los Angeles Times, September 1, 2003: thank you for the well-written article by Jeremy Rifkin on animal emotions and cognitive abilities. Animal emotions are, indeed, important. When watching the full documentary last week on Koko, the gorilla who can, do sign language, and understand several thousand English words made me eager to write you. I agree with your statement that animals are more like us than we imagine in your opening sentence. We do need to respect animals around us because we take them for granted lots of times.

     The last decade of the twentieth century in America saw a rise in programs for human’s “self betterment.” A popular form of betterment is that of the inner animal. Interest in Native American animal mysticism, vision quests, and totem animals have increased dramatically in the past few years. No forms of media have been spared; Calvin Klein’s supermodels come on during sitcom commercials to tell viewers they need to be a beast, or to get in touch with their animal within. In the last decade of the nineteenth century, however, animalism was viewed not as a method of self-improvement but as the reprehensible side of humanity that lingered beneath the surface, waiting for an

Regan, Tom. "Animal Rights, Human Wrongs." Forming a Critical Perspective. Boston, MA: Pearson Learning Solutions, 2010. 336-40. Print.

Human-animal interaction (HAI) is a concept that has been around since the beginning; ever since man knew what animals were. We have interacted in so many ways with animals - ranging from hunting as a resource to observing in the wild, and from holding in captivity as a means of labor to domesticating for companionship. Throughout these centuries of interactions, it's become abundantly clear as to what these encounters do for us as far as productivity/research/ entertainment/companionship, but it's never been completely clear as to what our presence and encounters do to them - more specifically, what does it do to them psychologically and behaviorally? The word interaction is key, and it's important to note what an interaction means: both individuals affect each other- “... both human and animal are active and reactive during an interaction, independent of who is the initiator” (Eddie A.M. Bokkers, 31). So, what does this mean for animal development? An animal’s psychological development (just like humans) is most influenced at a very young age, but behavioral development (though still very impressionable at a young age) can be influenced at virtually any point in their life. This, in regards to the influence of human interaction, means that it influences these two branches of development through positive and negative stimulants that allow a psychological learning adaptation to take place, prompting a behavioral action.

The behavior of different species of wildlife which are brought into the circus industry also varies, and they therefore require different living conditions. Observing the natural behavior of tigers versus lions illustrates this fact. Unlike tigers, which have a mainly solitary existence, lions are very social, and are really the only big cats which display this characteristic (Whitney). Furthermore, elephants have yet another type of lifestyle, and “form deep family bonds and live in tight matriarchal family groups” (Whitney). By looking at just these few select animals, one can see that they all require different treatment based on their natural predilections. Tigers may be comfortable to exist in solitude with the circus, but a lion would be more accustomed to travelling with his pride, not alone, a sentiment which would be shared my an elephant used to being with a family. Moreover, separate from their preferences for company, both tigers and lions are extremely territorial and are usually in charge