Animal Rights: An Argumentation: This 3-page paper is an argumentative analysis of the article, "Animal Agriculture: Myths and Facts."
The thesis of the article, "Animal Agriculture: Myths and Facts," is that the public in general accepts the growth of animals for food and that it is in the best interests of all parties concerned for the farmers to care for their stock in a humane manner. It is the purpose of this essay to evaluate the article in terms of key concepts, fallacies in argument, and reasoning in the conclusion.
The article is easy to read and all the key terms are clearly defined. Even someone who was completely unfamiliar with animal husbandry could understand the article. The format of two columnsùmyths and factsùhelps the reader follow the thinking of the writers, point by point. This is a strength of the article.
However, in terms of assumptions underlying the arguments of the Animal Agriculture Alliance, the central questionable one would be that "the general population accepts the human right to use animals" (Animal Agriculture Alliance 191). Without thoroughly researching this fact, it would be impossible to know who does and who does not agree with raising animals to eat. Certainly vegetarians and vegans do not agree with the Alliance's opening statement. It seems that the writers dismiss these groups as unusual, alternative fringe persons in their hasty conclusions in their own favor. Upon closer evaluation, one could assume that the appeals to authority of the federal government in terms of diet are an attempt to persuade the reader that protein for a healthy diet must come from meat, milk and eggs. Protein is also widely available in the form of nuts and various vegetables. It also seems inaccurate to say it is a myth that "a vegetarian diet is healthier than a diet that includes meat, milk and eggs" (Animal Agriculture Alliance 195). One would have to see research on this statement and ap...