10 thoughts on “JOURNAL (# 6)

  1. 9-16-18

    Journal 6

    Pollan took a very hands on approach when writing “An Animal’s Place”. He wanted to know different places that animals live in. Throughout his writing we saw points of view from people like SInger who thought vegetarians were good and that meat eating isn’t always right. Then we say Salatin who owns a farm and his animals are well fed and happy. I was surprised throughout though at the difference in sources. He made his spectrum very broad. We read about pigs being “tail-docked” and chickens having their beaks chopped off to reduce pecking each other. Then we saw a system between cows, pigs, chicken and sheep where everyone was well fed and had a rotating system. I really like that difference in perspective. He said himself while reading that he was sitting in a steakhouse waiting to eat some steak. Although we saw what he liked to eat he didn’t shy away from the other end of the spectrum and talking about vegetarians. He didn’t highlight that eating meat is the only good way and that animals are just meant to be food and nothing else.
    Pollan’s conversations with his sources were almost agreeing and disagreeing. We heard his sources point of view but then heard his side. We got both sides to the story and i didnt feel cheated or left with questions about who stood where.
    I think the conversations we saw most were Singer and Salatin. They are both very different perspectives and showed two very different ways of their take on animals. One side was that animals should not be eaten and how by reading his story people have believed that. Then there is Salatin who showed that animals can be raised right and happy. I think he chose these because he didn’t want to stay on the same topic for so long and wanted to show everything and not just a little piece of the story.
    I have learned from this that there are two sides to every story and that everyone has an opinion. Sometimes it’s nice to hear from both sides and you can from your own ideas from that then if you wanted to, you could do more research into that topic. I also know that this is a conversation that will forever be on going. There are going to different sides and everyone will want to say something when they hear about it but if you ever bring it up i’m sure you will get an on going and never ending conversation.

  2. Pollan engaged with other sources by having people talk about their experience(s) and their thoughts on how eating meat can either be a good or bad thing. People gave their thoughts on animal tortor and facts how this information was proven. Pollan used sources by talking about both sides of the conversation. Pollan had people either relating to why we should or should not have meat. In this source, Pollan had an endless conversation to why eating meat is good or not. He had conversations from the people who related or did not relate to the idea. Having more than one source in the conversation left the conversation more open and free to thoughts. Pollan wanted both sides of the conversation and why they thought this way. I have learned that most conversations never end and can be brought up at anytime and be connected.

  3. Alex Smyth:
    Pollen starts his article with, what appears to be irony, of eating a steak while reading an article that abolishes the idea as a animal rights activist. The purpose is to lead the reader that Pollen and the reader should be skeptical in this ongoing issue joining in the endless conversation. Pollen doesn’t necessarily agree with Singer’s idea of him dining in a steakhouse and calling the view of “speciesism”a word he used only in jokes. Pollen notices though that this activist group has been getting attention in many ways with laws being passed in several continents and countries with America started to do the same with, “Thirty-seven states have recently passed laws making some forms of animal cruelty a crime.” This has even entered politics with this just being a “left-wing concern” or liberal now crossing both ideological lines, which is what opens up out skepticism as the reader and in Pollen’s eyes.

    Now with getting some background information of the animal rights, Pollen looks over what the activist are arguing for. That, “Can an animal suffer.” or “whether we own animals that can feel pain any moral consideration.” Pollen still remaining as a skeptic to the idea due to the difference of humans and animals. Calling this question a “vexed question” due to not knowing what is going on in the mind of an animal such as a cow, sheep, or pig. Pollen starts going into the differences by having the reader image castration from a human to an animal. The human will remember that procedure with some aftermath of emotions while an animal will just continue with it’s everyday life.

    Pollen starts to look into what he considers to be the best idea of a “PolyFace Farm,” having domestic animals express their character while still benefiting us with food. He brought on the new idea of the right to look at what is going on. To watch the animal get slaughtered giving the respect that the animal deserves or to look away from the situation at hand. Leaving it to the reader to concluded what they should do to make a difference. To look away or give a thoughtful opinion in this endless conversation.

  4. In Pollan’s “An Animal’s Place”, he engaged with many sources that surprised me. Two major sources he talked about were the opinions of Salatin and Singer. On page three, Singer quotes “Equality is a moral idea, not as assertion of fact.” (Pollan 3). Singer makes us question the difference between an educated person and someone who isn’t. If someone is more intelligent than another person or acquires better qualities how can we treat them the same? In the sentence, “If possessing a higher degree of intelligence does not entitle one human to use another for his or her own ends, how can it entitle human to exploit nonhumans for the same purpose.” (Pollan 3) we think, if humans are no more entitled to one another even if they are more intelligent better or better looking, then how can we treat animals as a lesser being. Pollan’s choice of Singer as a source in his writing commands us to question, is there really a difference between humans and animals? We all have the same goal, which is to prevent pain. Pollan engaged his readers into a conversation about Singer’s opinion that also makes us question why people eat meat, or more importantly, why we shouldn’t.
    The next source we heard from was Salatin. Salatin and his family own a 550 acre farm that six animal species occupy. They raise cattle, pigs, chickens, rabbits, turkeys and sheep. When Pollan visited this farm he developed a new perspective on domestication and vegetarianism. “I thought a lot about vegetarianism and animal rights during the day I spent on Joel Salatin’s extraordinary farm. So much of what I’d read, so much of what I’d accepted, looked very different form here. To many animals rightists, even Polyface Farm is a death camp. But to look at these animals is to see this for the sentimental conceit it is. In the same way that we can probably recognize animal suffering when we see it, animal happinesses is unmistakable, too, and here I was seeing it in abundance” (Pollan 11). Unlike Singer’s opinion, the Salatin’s are in favor of eating meat. The animals they raise are not tortured, but instead they live in tranquility and an enjoyable life on the farm before they end up on the dinner table. Pollan uses Salatin as another source to show both sides of the meat industry.
    Pollan choose to be in conversation with one side more than the other to engage his readers and make them question their own opinions on this controversial topic. These exercises helped me learn that there will always be ongoing opinions about specific subject matter and having two sources with different opinions help people express their thoughts but also hear what others think.

  5. Journal 6

    One way that Pollan engaged with his source that surprised me was when he went to the Polyface Farm to see if it was a better way to kill animals and still not feel as bad about it. One way he used a source that I would like to match is when he talked to Salatin a farmer himself who’s been a vegetarian for 16 years and would only eat meat if he killed it himself. I like how Pollan found someone who doesn’t eat meat, would only eat meat in a certain situation. The conversation that Pollan engaged with his sources were sometime opinionated base, informative, and sometimes a conversation of just reason. The reason Pollan choose to be in some conversation more than other because he wants to talk to the person who has the most persuasive argument to help his article. One thing that I learned from these conversation with these sources is that you need others opinions,information, and reason to support your writing so it’s that much stronger when people read it.

  6. In the reading pollan is ultimately having a conversation with himself but also having a self conflict. In the reading there is many ways that this is shown like when in the section we were reading when he was eating the steak. It was like he couldn’t help but stop and think whenever singer made a good point to explain it to us or himself. Another way is when he is comparing and contrasting whether to be vegan or not. He states a lot of good points for both sides of the argument. In the beginning of the passage he comparing the brutal treatment of animals or speciesism to racism, which creates a big debate throughout the passage. Along with the ability to change the subject towards another topic while staying on the same main idea is used so well in this passage.

  7. In the article “An animals place” written by Pollan there were many places where he surprised me with his writing style. One particular area was when he mentioned the word “speciesism” this word was written in the context with the text “ I had encountered before only jokes asa form of discrimination as indefensible as racism or antisemitism” I find this very interesting for the fact that he compares speciesism as a very high issue to be dealt with. Personally I feel as though there are other issues that can be dealt with that are of more importance and that yes, the animals in the article, “ An animals place” this is an issue that needs to be dealt with for the fact that they are treated badly. But personally I feel as though we can put it off for awhile and that we need to deal with the bigger issues such as; hunger, water deprivation.
    Another part that had surprised me was when he said, “ The eye contact always slightly uncanny, had provided a vivid daily reminder that animals were at once crucially like and unlike us…” I find this statement to be very interesting for the fact that its true. There was a time where we all used to be semi the same and that we had the same ideas and we were all at the same level, but as we evolved faster and better than most we had become the higher/better more dependent species.

  8. In the article “An animals place” written by Pollan there were many places where he surprised me with his writing style. One particular area was when he mentioned the word “speciesism” this word was written in the context with the text “ I had encountered before only jokes asa form of discrimination as indefensible as racism or antisemitism” I find this very interesting for the fact that he compares speciesism as a very high issue to be dealt with. Personally I feel as though there are other issues that can be dealt with that are of more importance and that yes, the animals in the article, “ An animals place” this is an issue that needs to be dealt with for the fact that they are treated badly. But personally I feel as though we can put it off for awhile and that we need to deal with the bigger issues such as; hunger, water deprivation.
    Another part that had surprised me was when he said, “ The eye contact always slightly uncanny, had provided a vivid daily reminder that animals were at once crucially like and unlike us…” I find this statement to be very interesting for the fact that its true. There was a time where we all used to be semi the same and that we had the same ideas and we were all at the same level, but as we evolved faster and better than most we had become the higher/better more dependent species.

  9. Rj Jenkins
    Journal 6

    Pollan used many different sources but the source he used that surprised me the most was Aristotle. On page 11 of the packet he quotes Aristotle when he writes “for domesticated species, the good life, if we can call it that, cannot be achieved apart from humans-apart from our farms and our meat eating.” I would like to emulate how he did this because I would pull from many different sources

  10. Where did Pollan engage with sources in ways that surprised you?
    Towards the end on page 14 and 15, Pollan sources Singer when talking about the bad principle of animal agriculture. This surprised me because Pollan is responding to Singer article about why not to support animal agriculture, but he used it very well. When I first saw Singer’s name I thought that Pollan was making a mistake, possibly contradicting himself, but he used a quote by Singer in his own favour.

    Where did he use sources in ways that you’d like to emulate?
    I would like to try to use a quote from an opposing side that helps my side, like Pollan did with Singer. I really like how he used the opposite side and use it as my own. It is unexpecting to do, and I feel like it is a good tool to use.

    What different kinds of conversations did Pollan engage in with his sources?
    He engages in a conversation about whether to do things the nature way or the moral way. He also engages in a conversation of how to treat animals that are smarter than infants or disabled people, by asking if we eat pigs for being dumber than us do we do the same to infants? He exposes much of some opposing views, but by doing so opened up a lot of other conversations.

    What have you learned from these exercises?
    I have learned that when introducing sources to the conversation, you should do some research to you know all the aspects of the situation. I also learned that when involved in endless conversation you have to be ready and open for new viewpoints and ideas. Being able to adjust to new concepts is important when trying to convey your point without sounding contradicting.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

css.php