He explains that killing a lobster for our own pleasure is not right; it is unethical. Also, he argues that it is definitely unethical to put a lobster in boiling water because we do not know if lobsters feel pain or not. Throughout the article he suggest that lobster might be actually experiencing some kind of pain when put in boiling water. He aims to prove to readers that killing lobster by putting them into boiling water is unethical, and is not right just to fulfill our gustatory pleasure. In middle of his text, he shows many ways lobster is cruelly killed and why this is not right to do.
While Maine Lobsters Promotion Council claims that lobsters has no cerebral cortex, which “in humans is the area of the brain that gives the experience of pain.” Wallace contends that this claim is still either false or fuzzy. Even though the pain of a lobster cannot be scientifically proven, the behavior of a lobster crawling, and scrabbling in a hot kettle showed how it wished not to experience the suffering. Wallace paralyzed a lobster’s reaction of rattling and clanking when being boiled, to human's behavior, “The lobster, in other words, behaves very much as you or I would behave if we were plunged into boiling water” (248). People would feel discomforted when hearing the rattling and clanking that they can sense the lobster died very uncomfortably. Wallace described lobster from different aspects: lobster as food, lobster as a living creature, and lobster as itself.
He quickly establishes his ethos, and logos adding facts and credibility that will make one feel like their genuinely attending the Maine Lobster Festival. He continues helping the reader visualize every detail of the festival. From listing the wide variety of lobster dishes, to citing where to find the winning recipe of the amateur cooking competition, “…the MLF’s Main Eating Tent, where something over 25,000 pounds of fresh-caught Maine lobster is consumed after preparation in the World’s Largest Lobster Cooker near the grounds’
If solely relying on Aristotle’s criteria to qualify the play, none of the aspects ever reach their full potential but it could be argued that Leigh included tragic elements and therefore it should be considered a tragedy, but is hard to distinguish through the comic elements he includes throughout as well. Another aspect that leads the audience further to believe this is a tragedy is that Laurence is the only evident tragic hero throughout. Beverly continually belittles, is rude to and dominates Laurence, while openly flirting with Tony: ‘Laurence, would you please go back in the kitchen and finish making your little sandwich, all right?’ Beverly regularly refers to Laurence and his actions as ‘little’, which undermines his manhood and is patronising infront of their guests. She especially likes to do this infront of Tony. ‘[Tony and Laurence pick it up.
‘’Now they have beaten me, he thought. I am too old to club sharks to death. But I will try it as long as I have the oars and the short club and the tiller.’’ Even though the old man admits his defeat, he is still set on not giving up. The sharks could also represent those who would tear apart anyone's successes. These repulsive, scavengers find delight in bringing torment, defeat or
Like the turtle, whose shell can offer protection as well as be the cause of its demise, the surgeon is also “rendered impotent by his own empathy and compassion” (4). This implies that the surgeon has the ability to be omnipotent, as he has the power to give and take life, but is not because through compassion the surgeon knows that “[the patient] is afraid” (12). The surgeon involuntarily feels the pressure of his work when “in the very act of lying down, [the patient] [has] made a declaration of surrender” (23-24). He knows that “it would be easier to weep or mourn” for the loss of the sick patient without undergoing surgery, but the surgeon’s empathy instead forces him to deal with the chaotic disorder of the body and the pressure of the risk that “the patient dies…of complication” (10-11). In this paragraph of the passage, there is a steady rise in suspense or discomfort.
Like all animals, sharks are an important part of the ecosystem, without them the entire ecosystem will collapse. “Each year, up to 73 million sharks are killed for their fins, despite the fact that 30% of shark species are threatened or nearly threatened with extinction” (Krista Mahr). With fewer sharks existing in the ecosystem, their prey would multiply and become over populated and eventually wipe out other species. This occurrence will have an immense impact on many communities that rely on healthy fisheries. Shark poaching is a big concern because it affects the future of sharks and their place of living.
20,000 Leagues Under the Sea by Jules Verne 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea takes place in 1866. Professor Aronnax, who is an expert in marine life, learns of a creature that has been sinking ships all over the world. Many eye witnesses say it is a Narwhal, or large whale, The United States Government wanted to investigate the creature and asked Professor Aronnax to go on the ship to find the Narwhal. The professor was joined by his assistant Conseil and an expert harpooner named Ned Land. The ship left the US dock to search for the Narwhal.
He must recount the story in which he is left with the final option of killing the savage cook. After his account, Mr. Chiba confesses “What a horrible story” (99). Nevertheless, it is credible, which gives it an advantage over his original story with the animals. With the original story, the actions of the chef are shocking and even incredible. Yet, since they are fellow humans, Pi’s survival is more likely.
Brutus compares Caesar, whom was soon to be crowned, to "a serpent’s egg which hatched, would as his kind grow mischievous" who must be killed while still in its shell. The fallacy in this comparison is that a serpent is life-threatening, and Caesar only threatens Brutus’ social position. On balance, the preservation of human life should outweigh political status. In view of this, it is manifest that while Brutus may have been "an honorable man," his logic was inherently unrigorous. Another example of his imperfect syllogization is when he opposes the conspirators taking an oath on their resolution to assassinate Caesar.